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

81–90 of 232 posts

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

#81

Post by komali2 »

tptacek wrote: post #72
enraged_camel wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 lite…

I feel like if BP got deleted by fines after one oil spill this argument would hold.

As it stands it appears companies treat fines the expected way: just cost of doing business.

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

#83

Post by shadowgovt »

mistrial9 wrote: post #48

anti-Church pitchforks come out pretty fast here? it shows that some people simply want to eliminate Church itself, and use bad news to propel that point of view. why not address the actions themselves, specifically; plenty of crooks in the investment game, some of them use Church money it seems.

That's not what the SEC alleged.

The SEC alleged that with the direction of the LDS leadership (i.e. "with the Church’s knowledge and approval"), Ensign Peak shell-companied the Church's funds.

Best-case scenario is that this was an attempt to hide information for the simple sake of hiding information (as nonprofits, churches are pretty heavily scrutinized relative to other institutions). Worse case, it was an attempt to hide the use of the money for political ends, which is a violation of the tax-exempt agreement of the church. And it's not a small amount of money.

This behavior is every bit as sus as any major non-profit with tens of billions of dollars under its control trying to intentionally dodge public scrutiny.

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

#84

Post by mrguyorama »

tarotuser wrote: post #56

A "religion" primarily assumes standard Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Sikhism, etc: all of which have buildings, assets, collections, and such. For those of us who either have a solitary practice or meet with a small group (coven), none of our costs for our practices are tax exempt. If we are large enough, we usually cannot be "acknowledged by the state" to get tax exempt status. When we do get enough peopl…

Providing tax exempt status to only churches you have "proven" to be churches should be seen as legislating religion. The only ACTUAL fair way to handle it is allow any organization to vie for charity style tax exempt status, with a high bar of charity required to succeed, and churches are otherwise no more an organization than your company's softball team.

Alternatively, nobody gets ANY tax exempt status, and we should stop using tax deductions as subsidies, because they are only really available to those with ample money to play with and can afford more experienced tax professionals

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

#85

Post by xyzelement »

boeingUH60 wrote: post #50
lvl102 wrote: 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.

(Not an American)...I don't see any need for donations (religious or non-religious) being tax-deductible. In my country, it's very simple: here's your income and here's your tax rate (no deductions). What you do with the rest is up to you.

(an American) - our tax code encourages behavior society deems virtuous. We "want" people to give money to homeless shelters, outreach programs, overseas disaster relief, etc - so we "push" then to do that by making it relatively less expensive.

I can easily argue that citizenry being directly involved in directing their funds to causes that matter is more democratic than the government doing that on their behalf.

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

#86

Post by gigatexal »

For context every 6 months there’s a report on the first day of what’s called the General Conference where church leaders address the wider Church and the in house auditor says that all things are fine and proper with respect to accepted accounting principles. :shrug:

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

#87

Post by OrvalWintermute »

tombert wrote: post #24

Nearly every Baptist church/preacher I have seen explicitly endorsed Donald Trump in 2020, and calls Joe Biden an election thief (or one of a dozen other conspiracies). My understanding is that this is in direct violation of their tax-free status [1]. Maybe we should actually start enforcing this. [1] https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/charities-churches-and-politics EDIT: I couldn't remember the name of the thing that sta…

I live in a deep blue area much of the local churches, synagogues, and mosques, support Joe Biden. I've got no problem with that, or the reverse - some of these views just reflect their interpretation of their holy faith through their own perception.

I'd rather we not go after religious organizations unless they are actually doing something criminal, sex crimes, financial crimes, etc.

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

#88

Post by burkaman »

lcall wrote: post #31

The Church's statement: https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-issu...

> Q: Did Ensign Peak fail to comply with SEC regulations?

> A: We reached resolution with the SEC. We affirm our commitment to comply with the law, regret mistakes made, and now consider this matter closed.

Why would they ask themselves a question that they refuse to answer? Did they have to negotiate these FAQs with the SEC too?

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

#89

Post by axlee »

Natsu wrote: post #15
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.

That exists so that the government can't just decide to tax one religion out of existence while favoring others.

That makes no sense. The government already decides what is and what is not a religion for tax purposes.

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

#90

Post by loeg »

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:…

The organization running the DAFs is Fidelity Charitable, which is not quite the same organization as the well-known investment firm. They are related, but distinct.
Post reply on HN