Scratch, DCP, and the IRS

[_Mister Scratch]

Why is it nonsense? Do you mean to say that you have never "donated" the money you made back into FARMS/apologetics?

I've made small donations, or failed to claim expenses, on numerous occasions. But I've never directed an accountant to pour my money back into FARMS. Not $20K. Not anything.

What does that mean? You never "directed" an accountant? What, you suggested it with a well-timed raise of the eyebrow?

How much money---in total---would you say that you have...."given" to FARMS? And by "given," I mean every last red cent, whether via direct donation, "siphoning" off of your salary, failure to claim expenses, and so forth? In other words: *everything*?

Then you should never have brought it up. As I recall, you mentioned it (on another thread) in an effort to divert attention away from yourself.

I mentioned it to suggest that the IRS form may not be inerrant.

And how in the hell would you know that, if you never looked at the forms? Once again, you are suggesting that the "$20,000" figure is somehow in error. It seems clear that you are doing this in order to try and prevent people from thinking that you were paid for your Mopologetic endeavors.

Beyond that, the accountant's employment history and our grounds for dismissing him are absolutely none of your concern.

Well, you have suggested that he was "incompetent" and that he wasn't performing his duties. And, you have suggested this in connection with the $20,000. Thus, I'm sure you can understand why I would think the two things were related.

[_Jason Bourne]

Hi Mister Scratch,

Dr. Peterson has stated that the $20,000.00 figure was paid to BYU's Department of Near Eastern Languages in order for the Maxwell Institite (or its equivalent back then) to "borrow his time," if that makes any sense. In other words, the same BYU department kept paying him, but the MI was essentially renting his labor from BYU and compensating them for his absence.

Ergo, money changed hands between his bosses, but his own paycheck never changed.

Someone else--The Nehor, if I recall correctly--said that in Academia this sort of thing happens all the time.

What do you think of that situation/state of affairs? I have to admit that it sounds legitimate enough to me; am I mistaken, and if so, how?

It is totally legit. This happens all the times. It also happens in businesses that may be related somehow when say a manager or CEO works for one company but also puts time in another. He may draw all his salary out of one but the other pays say a management fee to the company that is paying the manager/CEO paycheck.

Scratch is making hay out of nothing at all. Course this should not surprise anyone. Smear is Scratch's middle name.

[_Jason Bourne]

Yes, it would. As Liz points out, it is not terribly uncommon for money to "change hands," as it were, within a University. However, at the time of the 990 form in question, FARMS was not a part of BYU. And, just because Liz---or whomever---did not put the right information on the form does not make it kosher.

This can happen between unrelated entities if they agree to it. At times CPAs can take some "creative" liberty in how they classigy and expense. There was nothing sneaky here, nothing at all.

[_Mister Scratch]

Yes, it would. As Liz points out, it is not terribly uncommon for money to "change hands," as it were, within a University. However, at the time of the 990 form in question, FARMS was not a part of BYU. And, just because Liz---or whomever---did not put the right information on the form does not make it kosher.

This can happen between unrelated entities if they agree to it. At times CPAs can take some "creative" liberty in how they classigy and expense. There was nothing sneaky here, nothing at all.

I appreciate what you are saying, Jason. Have you read the IRS instructions for filling out the 990 form? Because I actually took the time to do so. The instructions say, unequivocally, that these kinds of relationships need to be disclosed. So, while it may very well be accurate to say that CPAs take "'creative' liberty" with the facts, the truth is that this doesn't really fall into line with what the IRS expects. What CPAs do and what the IRS expects aren't necessarily the same thing.

Anyways, as I'm sure you read, DCP stated that FARMS had to fire the CPA who filled out the 990 forms in question.

[_LifeOnaPlate]

DCP never said the accountant person was released for reasons of fraudulent behavior. That may have been involved, but DCP never said such a thing. Also, should FARMS keep an accountant on who makes mistakes like this, if that is in fact what happened? Come on, Mister Scratch.

[_harmony]

Scratch, I think you're moving into the realm of legal action. If you think Daniel is guilty of tax fraud, you're duty bound to report that to the IRS. Let the experts take care of it. And if and when they clear him, we'll all expect a sincere apology from you.

Until then... you aren't accomplishing anything here, except to alienate those who previously might actually have agreed with you occasionally. You're becoming a caricature of yourself. You're becoming pathetic.

Think, man. ... slip...

[_Mister Scratch]

Scratch, I think you're moving into the realm of legal action. If you think Daniel is guilty of tax fraud, you're duty bound to report that to the IRS. Let the experts take care of it. And if and when they clear him, we'll all expect a sincere apology from you.

I don't think he is guilty of "tax fraud," which is a deliberate attempt to cheat Uncle Sam out of taxes. Frankly, I'm not sure DCP or FARMS are guilty of anything beyond what DCP has suggested himself---which is that the fired accountant may have "erred" on the 990 forms.

[_Mister Scratch]

DCP never said the accountant person was released for reasons of fraudulent behavior.

Yes, you're right. DCP stated that he was fired for "incompetence" and "non-performance of duties" (or something like that). But what does this mean, exactly? And why would DCP have said this in connection with the 990 forms?

That may have been involved, but DCP never said such a thing. Also, should FARMS keep an accountant on who makes mistakes like this, if that is in fact what happened? Come on, Mister Scratch.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here, LoaP. What "mistake" do you think the accountant might have made?

[_harmony]

Scratch, I think you're moving into the realm of legal action. If you think Daniel is guilty of tax fraud, you're duty bound to report that to the IRS. Let the experts take care of it. And if and when they clear him, we'll all expect a sincere apology from you.

I don't think he is guilty of "tax fraud," which is a deliberate attempt to cheat Uncle Sam out of taxes. Frankly, I'm not sure DCP or FARMS are guilty of anything beyond what DCP has suggested himself---which is that the fired accountant may have "erred" on the 990 forms.

You're the one who looks foolish for pursuing this. You keep bringing in this dead horse, and it's stinking up the place. Find something else to focus on; I'm sure Daniel has a picture somewhere that shows him with his slip showing. Right now, yours is dragging on the ground behind you, and you're tripping on it.

Good grief, man. Give it a rest.

[_Daniel Peterson]

Scartch's Song

To dream the implacable dream,
To fight the unbearable foe,
To brim with insatiable malice.
To run where the good would not go.

To do the unrightable wrong,
To loathe pure and cold from afar,
To twist when the facts are against me,
To forge the anonymous slur.

This is my quest:
To fasten that slur
(No matter how hopeless)
On that loathsome cur.

To combat the right
Without question or pause.
To be willing to draw deep from Hell
For a slanderous cause.

And I know, if I'll only be true
To this inglorious quest,
That my heart will be proud and serene
When I’ve laid him to rest.

And Scartchworld will be better for this:
That one man, scorned and scarred and accursed,
Went down, as my blows rained upon him,
Beneath my unethical slurs.

What does that mean? You never "directed" an accountant? What, you suggested it with a well-timed raise of the eyebrow?

I'm really tired of this nonsense.

Here's what it means: I deny your insinuation. Completely. There is no truth in it.

How much money---in total---would you say that you have...."given" to FARMS? And by "given," I mean every last red cent, whether via direct donation, "siphoning" off of your salary, failure to claim expenses, and so forth? In other words: *everything*?

I haven't the faintest idea -- I've never kept records of how much I "gave" when I failed to charge the organization for taking someone to lunch on its behalf, or failed to turn in the receipt for something I mailed on behalf of the organization when I wasn't near the office and couldn't simply leave it there, and etc.

This is trivial stuff, and it's none of your business. I don't have to account to you for "every last red cent" of my personal finances.

You're a loon.

I mentioned it to suggest that the IRS form may not be inerrant.

And how in the hell would you know that, if you never looked at the forms?

I don't need to inspect an IRS document in order to entertain the possibility that it's not inerrant. I've never believed in the inerrancy of scripture, let alone in the inerrancy of tax papers.

Once again, you are suggesting that the "$20,000" figure is somehow in error.

I don't know whether it's in error or you're in error or what.

But I do know that I was never paid $20,000.00, nor anything like thereunto, for serving as chairman of the FARMS board. I don't need to study an IRS document to know that.

It seems clear that you are doing this in order to try and prevent people from thinking that you were paid for your Mopologetic endeavors.

I'm denying that I was ever paid $20,000.00 (or anything close to that) for serving as chairman of the FARMS board because I was never paid $20,000.00 (or anything close to that) for serving as chairman of the FARMS board.