Scratch, DCP, and the IRS

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I love Dan

!!!!!!!

CFR!

The Spirit tells me so.

I've never, ever, caught so much as a distant glimpse of even the slightest flickering trace of a scintilla of a hint of a suggestion of even a weak bit of inconclusive evidence that would make that claim even remotely plausible.

I love the sinner, hate the sin. You know, like how the Church views homosexuals.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I'm referring to Part VIII on Schedule A attached to FARMS's 1998 Form 990 (on page 6 of Schedule A); sorry for any confusion. This Part VIII is entitled "Information Regarding Transfers to and Transactions and Relationships with Noncharitable Exempt Organizations.

I am sorry. I am just looking at a blank form on the IRS's web page. I do not see any requirement for an attachment called Schedule A. Do you still have the link to the actual 990 for the FARMS 990 so I can look it over again. I have misplaced it.

Here is the link to the 1998 Form 990 (with Schedule A) filed by FARMS (the Part VIII I'm referring to is on page 12 of the 20-page document):

http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/1 ... 60-1-9.pdf

[_Jason Bourne]

Here is the link to the 1998 Form 990 (with Schedule A) filed by FARMS (the Part VIII I'm referring to is on page 12 of the 20-page document):

http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/1 ... 60-1-9.pdf

Ok I see the question that is answered no. I think you are referrring to Sch A Pt VII line 51 b iv. However, that question is not specific to payment for a persons time and could refer to a variety of reimbursement arrangements. But it could include payment for Dr Peterson's time.

But here is the rub. It is clear that a NFP can pay another entity for a chairmans time and then is supposed to show it as paid the the chairman. Does the fact that this quesiton referred to above is answered no mean this did not happen? No it does not.

Of course the only proof I have that the $20,400 was paid to BYU and not the Dr. Peterson is his word here. I think that is good enough. If it is not for you or Scratch that is fine. But I think it important to note that it is a plausible explanation and that 990 is not grossly in error and in fact even correct. Tax forms are complex and often if not regulalry contain errors and sometimes questions can be answered incorrectly.

So, if one want to malign Dr Peterson over this all of the above at least should be disclosed. I think it rather silly to pounce on him over this.

[_Mister Scratch]

If the $20,000 was paid to DCP in lieu of his "salary," so that he could function as "Chair of FARMS"

I was never paid $20K so that I could function as chairman of the FARMS board. My department never received $20K so that I could serve as chairman of the FARMS board.

What??? This totally contradicts what you've been saying! You have told us multiple times that BYU received the $20,000 as a kind of "buyout." Now you're changing your story?

My successor as chairman of the FARMS board was the dean of engineering. No money was ever transferred to his department or college so that he could be released to serve as chairman of the FARMS board. He continued to serve as dean of engineering while he was chairman of the FARMS board.

Again, you seem to be contradicting yourself.

What was then FARMS and is now the Maxwell Institute made an arrangement with my home department -- as is commonly done, at BYU and elsewhere, and as I have explained at least eight or ten different times -- so that I could edit and direct the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative. The Middle Eastern Texts Initiative has absolutely nothing to do with apologetics. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing.

Well, did you also do Mopologetic administrating work, or did you write, or travel with Ed Snow, or otherwise do *anything* which might even remotely be construed as "apologetic" in nature?

I wasn't the one issuing odd statements about "not one dime" of my salary going towards Mopologetics

There's nothing "odd" about the statement, which was and is entirely true.

If you were "Chair" of FARMS, then I'm afraid that's not true, my Dear Professor.

By the way: For how long, and during what years, did you edit and direct METI?

nor was I the one who suggested that an "incompetent" accountant may have handled the 990 forms in question.

I don't know whether the 990 forms were properly filled out or not.

Maybe you should check. After all, as you have suggested elsewhere, if they are wrong, then you, as Chair at that time, might have to answer to the IRS.

What I do know is that I was never paid $20,000.00 to serve as the chairman of the FARMS board, and that my department never received $20,000.00 for my service as chairman of the FARMS board. So if that's what the IRS form says, it's wrong. But Jason gives me reason to suspect that that isn't what the IRS form says.

I would advise you to read the form for yourself. You seem to have a very poor knowledge of the relevant literature.

Do you think that, during his tenure on the board of FARMS, that DCP had nothing whatsoever to do with Mopologetics? I.e., that he did not edit FARMS Review, and that he did not contribute his usual quota of editorials and articles?

Scartch's allusion to my "usual quota of editorials and articles" points to the error in his reasoning here: I edited the FARMS Review and wrote editorials and articles prior to my service as chairman of the board of FARMS and prior to my membership on the FARMS board and have continued to do so since stepping down as chairman of the board of FARMS and since the dissolution of the FARMS board. Most members of the FARMS board never edited anything for FARMS; some never even wrote anything for FARMS. Which plainly shows that my editing of the FARMS Review and my authoring of FARMS editorials and articles were and are quite distinct from my service as chairman of the FARMS board and from my service as a member of that board.

There is nothing wrong with my reasoning. During those other years, as you yourself have stated, you received a small amount of money for editing and writing in the FROB. However, during your years as Chair, a significant chunk of your salary went towards this.

[_Jason Bourne]

What??? This totally contradicts what you've been saying! You have told us multiple times that BYU received the $20,000 as a kind of "buyout." Now you're changing your story

He said that his department did nor receive it not that BYU did not.

[_Rollo Tomasi]

Ok I see the question that is answered no. I think you are referrring to Sch A Pt VII line 51 b iv. However, that question is not specific to payment for a persons time and could refer to a variety of reimbursement arrangements. But it could include payment for Dr Peterson's time.

If that were the case, then wouldn't line 51 a(i) or (ii) for "cash" and "other assets" transferred by FARMS to a noncharitable exempt organization be checked "Yes"? If there was a sharing arrangement between FARMS and BYU with respect to DCP (to explain away the $20,400), it seems the categories in line 51 would cover it, but every line therein is checked "No."

But here is the rub. It is clear that a NFP can pay another entity for a chairmans time and then is supposed to show it as paid the the chairman. Does the fact that this quesiton referred to above is answered no mean this did not happen? No it does not.

I'm no expert, but my understanding of plain English tells me that line 51 would absolutely cover such a situation.

Of course the only proof I have that the $20,400 was paid to BYU and not the Dr. Peterson is his word here.

We also have the 1998 Form 990, which says otherwise.

I think that is good enough.

I don't, particularly given a pulbic document filed by FARMS under oath and penalties of perjury.

But I think it important to note that it is a plausible explanation and that 990 is not grossly in error and in fact even correct. Tax forms are complex and often if not regulalry contain errors and sometimes questions can be answered incorrectly.

The 1998 Form 990 says what it says. The particular part we are talking about doesn't seem complex at all.

So, if one want to malign Dr Peterson over this all of the above at least should be disclosed. I think it rather silly to pounce on him over this.

I'm not maligning him. I think he's just wrong on this one, that's all.

[_Mister Scratch]

What??? This totally contradicts what you've been saying! You have told us multiple times that BYU received the $20,000 as a kind of "buyout." Now you're changing your story

He said that his department did nor receive it not that BYU did not.

Actually, he did:

Anyway, you're wrong. If the $20K is what I think it was, it was "funneled back into BYU" -- which is to say, it was transferred in a very routine manner from one BYU entity to another -- in order to help the Department of Asian and Near Eastern Languages "be kept alive." My time was purchased from my department so that I could devote it to directing and editing the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative. Since my department still had to teach the classes that I taught even though I would not be available to teach them, it was only fair that (what is now) the Maxwell Institute compensate my department for the loss of my services.

(emphasis added; this is from page 1 of this same thread)

You see, Jason: I try to get the straight story, and DCP flips back and forth, changing his tune, and jerking all of us around. I can appreciate you wanting him to get a fair shake, but I think that you will have to admit, in all fairness, that he just hasn't been forthright about all of this.

[_Jersey Girl]

Scratch, it doesn't seem to me that your set up of quotes and later commentary on them is at all accurate. I could be wrong, but I'm willing to give it a try. This is why the ability to build up quote "vortexes" is necessary on a board like this and especially in the case of just such a discussion as this. If I fail to line up the relevant quotes accurately, please feel free to copy them and insert whatever you feel I missed in presenting the accurate chronology of quotes. Doing this the old fashioned way. I'll comment in bold text.

Scratch: If the $20,000 was paid to DCP in lieu of his "salary," so that he could function as "Chair of FARMS"

Your assertion is that he was personally paid 20K to serve as Board Chair of FARMS.

DCP: I was never paid $20K so that I could function as chairman of the FARMS board. My department never received $20K so that I could serve as chairman of the FARMS board.

Daniel denies that his department was paid 20K so he could serve as Board Chair of FARMS.

Scratch: What??? This totally contradicts what you've been saying! You have told us multiple times that BYU received the $20,000 as a kind of "buyout." Now you're changing your story?

Here you mistakenly interpret his denial as denying that BYU was paid anything at all. Here, you've perhaps unintentially moved the goal posts.

DCP: What was then FARMS and is now the Maxwell Institute made an arrangement with my home department -- as is commonly done, at BYU and elsewhere, and as I have explained at least eight or ten different times -- so that I could edit and direct the Middle Eastern Texts Initiative. The Middle Eastern Texts Initiative has absolutely nothing to do with apologetics. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing.

Here, Daniel speaks in terms of specifics, while it seems that you are still dealing in broad descriptions, he clarifies what he stated previously He is telling you that neither he or his department were compensated so that he could serve as Board Chair of FARMS which was his response to your original assertion.

He is telling you that he and/or his department were compensated so that he could edit and direct a specific initiative that has nothing to do with apologetics as your original assertion implied.

In this series of exchanges, he has not contradicted himself or changed his story. If you feel jerked around, it is because you aren't carefully reading what he's telling you.

You are talking past eachother.

[_Jersey Girl]

Let me lay it out again, once more for clarity. If Scratch or Daniel think I have it wrong, by all means tell me to take a hike.

Scratch is saying that Daniel or his department were compensated for Daniel to serve as Board Chair of FARMS.

Daniel isn't denying that either he or his department were compensated however, he is saying it wasn't for him to serve as Board Chair of FARMS. The compensation was for him to direct a specific project.

Being compensated for directing a specific project doesn't = being compensated for serving as Board Chair of FARMS.

[_Mister Scratch]

Let me lay it out again, once more for clarity. If Scratch or Daniel think I have it wrong, by all means tell me to take a hike.

Scratch is saying that Daniel or his department were compensated for Daniel to serve as Board Chair of FARMS.

Daniel isn't denying that either he or his department were compensated however, he is saying it wasn't for him to serve as Board Chair of FARMS. The compensation was for him to direct a specific project.

Being compensated for directing a specific project doesn't = being compensated for serving as Board Chair of FARMS.

I'm afraid you are going to have a to take a hike, Jersey. The IRS documents say that he was paid for being "Chair of FARMS." DCP may very well have worked on the "specific project," but the official documentation states that he was paid to be "Chair of FARMS."