Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 232 posts

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

#71

Post by drsnow »

sclarisse wrote: post #62
sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Better to just get rid of the tax exempt status for religious organizations altogether. They can operate like any other non-profit and be subject to that set of rules, or they can be a regular corporation and be subject to a different set of rules. The religious exemption is a big regulatory gap that doesn't need to exist.

1. The power to tax is the power to destroy, and, 2. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. If you want to amend the Constitution that’s another matter.

It is neither respecting an establishment of religion, nor prohibiting the free exercise thereof, to require that they pay taxes to support the society which allows them, as of now absurdly for free, to function and exist in the very first place.

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

#72

Post by tptacek »

enraged_camel wrote: post #68
tptacek wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would the fine be higher? Presumably it's proportionate to the harm caused, not by the size of the fund.

It should be proportionate to the size of the fund, because one of the reasons fines exist is for the deterrence effect. Ideally you want other potential perpetrators to think twice. Do you think this small fine has that effect?

Can you support with evidence the idea that Ensign Peak is just going to blow off the fine and pay 5MM every few years instead of filing 13Fs? Because if they start reliably filing 13Fs, they've refuted this argument.

If there's a distinctive harm that we can draw out from the LDS Church failure to file 13Fs, I'm all ears about scaling up the penalties accordingly. But otherwise, the logic we're using applies to literally any offense Ensign Peak could have committed, no matter how marginal. I guess I'd like to start by working out whether this particular offense was marginal, or material.

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

#74

Post by yellow_lead »

shartshooter wrote: post #55

One question I had while reading this: - Should non-profits be allowed to "invest" their tax-exempt donations? It seems that non-profits should obtain their funding through grants or donations. Investing, on the other hand, seems like the opposite of "non-profit" As a personal aside, I've recently been introduced to a few folks who seem to be doing extraordinarily well financially. It turns out that they all run "non…

A church where I grew up has a large endowment from a previous family in the area. If they didn't invest their money, the endowment wouldn't last. Just an example. Not to say I'm in favor of church's non profit status or this particular point, but inflation could hurt for them if investing weren't allowed

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

#75

Post by codeulike »

CosmicShadow wrote: post #44
ramesh31 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The SEC is, largely, a powerless bogeyman due to chronic underfunding and lack of staff. Another wonderful feature of corporate regulatory capture in the US.

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.

Its a settlement, so its based on the church's assessment of the strength and resources of the SEC

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

#76

Post by [deleted] »

nsxwolf wrote: post #33
ramesh31 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The SEC is, largely, a powerless bogeyman due to chronic underfunding and lack of staff. Another wonderful feature of corporate regulatory capture in the US.

So you need more staff to write down a larger fine on a piece of paper?

[deleted]

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

#78

Post by nekasrbenda »

tptacek wrote: post #70
shadowgovt wrote: post #60

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…

Not in Sweden tho, traffic tickets are proportional to income.

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

#79

Post by tptacek »

nekasrbenda wrote: post #78
tptacek wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Not in Sweden tho, traffic tickets are proportional to income.

If you keep getting tickets in the US, you'll eventually get your license suspended.

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

#80

Post by loeg »

mulmen wrote: post #36
boeingUH60 wrote: post #20

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:…

I’m confused. Does this mean my retirement savings somehow benefits or is related to the LDS?

GP is talking about Fidelity Charitable, a somewhat distinct organization from Fidelity (which administers your 401(k)).

https://www.fidelity.com/building-savings/charitable-giving#....

Post reply on HN