Live data from Hacker News

SEC charges the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

sec.gov

151–160 of 232 posts

Re: SEC charges the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

#151

> According to the order, the Church was concerned that disclosure of its portfolio, which by 2018 grew to approximately $32 billion, would lead to negative consequences. If you don't report your trades or positions, you can insider trade all day to your hearts desire, or in this case by the hand of God Almighty

Makes it more difficult to get their members to keep paying a mandatory 10% of their income, to be considered a member in good standing, when you're already sitting on a dragon's horde

Re: SEC charges the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

#152
post #143

Some info about how the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints uses its donations: https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/humanitaria... I suspect most of its investments are targeted towards the same ends.

The fund in question has never in 22 years been tapped for any charitable purpose

[deleted]

Re: SEC charges the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

#153
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would go one step further and say that donations to religious organizations should not be tax deductible. They are not charities in 99% of the cases.

Citation for that 99% figure? If it's anecdotal then I will give you my anecdote as a non Christian that I see 99% of churches doing charitable works.

It was meant to be a hyperbole.

Re: SEC charges the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

#154

Here's a related random fact: Fidelity, the well-known investment firm, runs donor-advised charitable funds for rich clients that in aggregate constitute America's charity [1]. The three largest recipients from those funds? Harvard University, Stanford University, and the Mormon Church...organizations that aren't in any way hurting for money. I guess people fund what they are familiar with and for prestige. 1- https:…

JS-free archive link for the Bloomberg reference:

https://archive.today/sRAox

Re: SEC charges the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

#155
post #143

Some info about how the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints uses its donations: https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/humanitaria... I suspect most of its investments are targeted towards the same ends.

The fund in question has never in 22 years been tapped for any charitable purpose

Due to the extent of Church operations and the ongoing costs, they feel it is wise to save for a rainy day (as they also advise others). More details in my comment elsewhere on this page.

Re: SEC charges the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

#156
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually a settlement, not a fine, which is probably pinned closer to the "This is the amount we think we'd have to pay lawyers to argue the case" value than the "This is how much we would owe if we were found guilty of breaking the law" value.

Right, either way, I'm looking for an intuition about how much an infraction like this should cost. Presumably, the settlement also includes the LDS church's consent to start filing reliable 13F's. I'm not saying I think 5MM is the right number; I'm just saying I have no intuition for what the number should be, and the rationale I see on the thread seems to be "they're big". If I get pulled over in a Bentley with an…

> If I get pulled over in a Bentley with an expired sticker, I pay the same price as someone in a Kia.

Depends entirely on where you live. If you do the equivalent crime in Finland, you will be fined 6-14 "day fines". Each day fine is calculated to be (your_monthly_gross_income - 255€)/60, minimum of 6€ and unbound from above.

I believe that this system is much more just than flat fines. A fine is not payment for a service, it is a punishment. It should hurt as much whether you are poor or rich.

Re: SEC charges the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If I get pulled over in a Bentley with an expired sticker, I pay the same price as someone in a Kia. The fine should scale with the size of the infraction. If you sticker expires on your car, the infraction is the same severity, no matter the car [0]. ~Hiding a few million vs. hiding a few billion in taxes is a whole different level.~ EDIT: They just hid it for information purposes. Not to avoid tax. Therefore, thi…

Right, I agree. But they didn't hide millions from taxes. They availed themselves of more privacy than the SEC allows for fund managers. If we can articulate the manner in which that inflicted more than 5MM in harm, I think we have a strong case for the fine being too low. But I have no intuition for how to work out the harm these bad filings caused. Do you? As for deterrence: it appears as if the SEC successfully de…

You're right, I was missing that they were just hiding the funds for information purposes, not tax purposes. In that case the fine is probably more appropriate.

Re: SEC charges the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

#158
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually a settlement, not a fine, which is probably pinned closer to the "This is the amount we think we'd have to pay lawyers to argue the case" value than the "This is how much we would owe if we were found guilty of breaking the law" value.

Right, either way, I'm looking for an intuition about how much an infraction like this should cost. Presumably, the settlement also includes the LDS church's consent to start filing reliable 13F's. I'm not saying I think 5MM is the right number; I'm just saying I have no intuition for what the number should be, and the rationale I see on the thread seems to be "they're big". If I get pulled over in a Bentley with an…

An expired sticker is not an SEC violation. SEC violations scale based on a number of factors.

https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2016/01/24/calculating-sec-c...

Re: SEC charges the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what kind of staff or funding does it take to say literally different words out of your mouth like, you are fined $5B instead of $5MM? I can do that for free, especially if they are already at the point where they are making the charge. Every fine should be devastating so that they either barely survive or die, and every other company shits themselves for life and we solve the problem.

>But what kind of staff or funding does it take to say literally different words out of your mouth like, you are fined $5B instead of $5MM? Because we don't live in an autocracy, and government fines can (and are) successfully challenged in court. It takes an immensely greater effort, and immensely greater resources, to enforce a $5B fine vs a $5M fine.

How do you get away with defending tax fraud to the point where the fine is pointless? Does the SEC not get to keep the winnings to use for their future cases so they can hire a ton of lawyers? I guess the real problem is why are judges (presumably everywhere?) lettings companies and organizations get away with this or is there a specific set of judges that only handle SEC cases? Perhaps the first step to getting bigger fines is to just keep increasing fines across the board? Do they need to campaign to judges to remind them that financial crime is bad? How hard is it for anyone to understand that a fine is meaningless unless it hurts, no matter how big the number is? Do you really need more lawyers to prove that basic point? I guess you guys are stuck in a pretty crappy system, but then again I'm sure most places are :/
Post reply on HN