Washington Post: Mormon Church has misled members on finance

[_Symmachus]

[The Church's] mandate is to not only demonstrate to the IRS that it has been in compliance with the law, but also to reassure believers that it has adhered to the fourfold mission outlined in one of its training slides for new employees — which includes “caring for the poor and needy.”

First, unless there is some kind of open case we don't know about, I don't understand why the Church has any special mandate it needs to demonstrate something to the IRS beyond what every other institution and tax payer has to do—is the Church required to respond to the complaint?

Second, has Mormonism changed that much in the past few years? I ask sincerely, as I haven't attended regularly since the early 2000s. At that time, I don't think any members who paid tithing thought that these were donations to the poor except peripherally and mostly to deserving Mormons. "Building up the Kingdom" was the point of tithing, and it was up to the Church, as God's instrument on earth, to decide what that was. If the Church had decided to start an airline, I would have heard about what an inspired decision that was, because now missionaries would have free flights and all that travel of General Authorities to the many millions of members around the world would be one less expense—and we could make a profit of all those non-Mormons fliers, who might in fact see just how wonderful Mormonism was on the flight. Yes, of course! It would be a missionary tool!

Maybe Jana Riess thinks otherwise, but alleviating poverty was just not a central part of the Mormonism that I experienced. Building temples was, and hell, so was preparing for the Second Coming. Mormons don't do food storage in order to donate it. I would wager $100 billion dollars that more than 50% of tithe-paying Mormons would think that amassing a $100 billion rainy day fund falls within the purview of building the kingdom of god.

Last, I again think this is just pure emoting from Riess. How much money should the Church be allowed to have? What percentage should it give to the charitable purposes, and what specifically constitutes charitable purposes? Etc. etc. etc.

The only ethical mandate, in my view, that the Church has is to the sense of its tithe-paying members that their tithes are being used properly. Riess is one who apparently doesn't think so, but I just don't think she is all the representative.

[_I have a question]

I don’t understand tax law, but it seems (from doing a little googling) that disbursements from the invested funds to for-profit entities like City Creek and Beneficial Life run contrary to the rules governing tax exempt entities.

[_Analytics]

First, unless there is some kind of open case we don't know about, I don't understand why the Church has any special mandate it needs to demonstrate something to the IRS beyond what every other institution and tax payer has to do—is the Church required to respond to the complaint?

The IRS actually has a "whistleblower's office" (yes, that is what it is called). It actively encourages people to rat on corporations that don't pay their fair share of taxes, and it will seriously investigate this. If the whistleblower wins this one all-out, the Church will be required to pay something on the order of $18 billion in back-taxes, plus interest and penalties. Further, the whistleblower gets something between 15% and 30% of what they collect.

Lars Nielsen has an MBA and a Ph.D. from Harvard. He and his brother David have hired tax professionals and attorneys and are jumping through all the hoops required to push this through and collect the bounty from the IRS.

The numbers are too big and the allegations too serious and credible for the IRS to ignore. If the Church somehow argues that its various legal entities are all entirely fungible and that its compliance with tax laws should be judged in aggregate, then it might get out of this. But it set up these entities for a reason, and the letter of the law says each organization has to comply with the law in its own right. That being the case, how could Ensign Peaks Advisors possibly be taxed as a tax-exempt charity when it never spends a single cent, ever, on any religious or charitable activities whatsoever? Ever?

[_I have a question]

Not for the faint of heart...
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf

[_Shulem]

The IRS actually has a "whistleblower's office" (yes, that is what it is called). It actively encourages people to rat on corporations that don't pay their fair share of taxes, and it will seriously investigate this. If the whistleblower wins this one all-out, the Church will be required to pay something on the order of $18 billion in back-taxes, plus interest and penalties. Further, the whistleblower gets something between 15% and 30% of what they collect.

It's like money falling from the sky at a ticker tape parade!

Money is falling from the sky and the IRS is going to get it.

Calling Radio Free Mormon -- come in RFM! Get that interview going and make sure you negotiate a fee for your services should they get their IRS cut. Your podcast in this could help generate the cause and win you a lot of money. You're gonna be rich! Don't forget my cut for giving you the idea. hahaahaha!

[_Shulem]

Not for the faint of heart...
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf

The church has a long history of hiding things and lying.

The church is no doubt guilty!!!

I'm convinced.

[_Analytics]

Not for the faint of heart...
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf

From that document...

Unrelated Business Income Tax (UBIT)
Net Income Subject to the UBIT
Churches and religious organizations, like other tax-exempt organizations, may engage in income-producing activities unrelated to their tax-exempt purposes, as long as the unrelated activities aren’t a substantial part of the organization’s activities. However, the net income from these activities will be subject to the UBIT if the following three conditions are met:

1 the activity constitutes a trade or business,
2 the trade or business is regularly carried on, and
3 the trade or business is not substantially related to the organization’s exempt purpose. (The fact that the organization uses the income to further its charitable or religious purposes does not make the activity substantially related to its exempt purposes.)

Exceptions to UBIT Even if an activity meets the above criteria, the income may not be subject to tax if it meets one of the following exceptions: (a) substantially all the work in operating the trade or business is performed by volunteers, (b) the activity is conducted by the organization primarily for the convenience of its members or (c) the trade or business involves the selling of merchandise substantially all of which was donated.

In general, rents from real property, royalties, capital gains, and interest and dividends aren’t subject to the unrelated business income tax unless financed with borrowed money.


If the EPA is evaluated on its own merits as its own stand-alone entity, it might be toast (how could it not? It doesn't do any charitable work at all!). If it is argued that it should be evaluated not as its own entity but rather as a part of the church as a whole, then the question of "unrelated business income" comes up. In that case...

The church will argue that the money the EPA makes constitutes passive capital gains and interest that shouldn't be subject to unrelated business income tax as per the bolded section above. The IRS's advocate could counter that the EPA isn't merely passive interest and capital gains, but constitutes the trade of a hedge fund.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I just want to point out $100,000,000,000.00 is a lot of money for a rainy day fund. Like. I get having some down years where you have to dip into savings or sell off some assets, but having a $100B war chest and claiming these are the latter days? That’s incongruent.

- Doc

[_Shulem]

I just want to point out $100,000,000,000.00 is a lot of money for a rainy day fund. Like. I get having some down years where you have to dip into savings or sell off some assets, but having a $100B war chest and claiming these are the latter days? That’s incongruent.

- Doc

The church currently claims to have 30,536 congregations.

If the church was to dole out the 100 billion evenly to all the congregations that would total $3,274,823 each.

[_Mormonicious]

Another FASCINATING tidbit is that the ENEMIES OF THE Mormon CORPORATION ARE THE EMPLOYEES OF THE Mormon CORPORATION.

No outside investigation/investigator even with a Court Subpoena WOULD EVER get the information that this EMPLOYEE of the Mormon Corporation released.

This is far more damaging than the information itself. Because now, who can the Mormon Corporation TRUST? Which EMPLOYEE is going to release damaging evidence against the Great Beast? What janitor, clerk, security guard, accountant, secretary, volunteer, missionary, etc., etc., etc. will turn on them next.

What now, a lie detector Power of Discernment test will be given to all EMPLOYEES, that they will have to go through every day? week? month? year? to ensure loyalty?

A SCIF is the Most Secure facility the US Government has for Secret and Sensitive documents and communications. To get into a SCIF you are almost strip searched before entering. What now, ALL Mormon Corporation offices become SCIFS? Do you search the EMPLOYEES every time they enter or exit a Mormon Corporation Building.

Mormon JEBUS damned CHRIST, WHAT A NIGHTMARE!!!