Scratch, DCP, and the IRS

[_Mister Scratch]

"Guilty"? Why does being paid 20K for being "Board Chair" of FARMS constitute guilt in your eyes?

You know as well as I do, Scartch, that you're trying to portray me as a mercenary and a liar.

What are you talking about? How is it "mercenary" to receive money for "services rendered"?
Do you worry that TBMs who find out about the payments you've gotten will view you as a "mercenary"? Or, are you more worried that he various critics you've slandered over the years will see this as evidence of yours' and the "l-skinny crew'"s hypocrisy?

So, in the late 1990s, when you were "Board Chair," FARMS paid up an additional 20 grand.

My service as board chairman had nothing to do with that, despite the fact that they were concurrent.

The Maxwell Institute continues, so far as I'm aware, to transfer money to my department in order to cover the time that I spend directing and editing METI.

I've told you this several times. Do you have short-term memory problems?

No, not I, Professor P. It's clear that the 20 grand is separate and distinct from your METI work. Just like it says on the 990 form.

Why not just admit that you get paid when you do apologetics? Why do you feel this would make you look like a "mercenary"? Is this a tacit admission on your part that you are aware of the fundamental viciousness behind much apologetic writing---including a lot of your own? Is that why you are so nervous about people knowing that you've been paid to do apologetics?

I'm happy to have the entire LDS and ex-Mormon world make their decisions based on the tax document.

Which, being interpreted, means that your desire to defame me isn't getting much traction here, so you've decided to take your road show to a more receptive place where I won't be permitted to respond.

It makes no difference to me. I'd just like people to know the truth: which is that, according to tax form 990, you were paid $20,400 to function as "Board Chair"---a role which has apologetic overtones.

I'm sorry this bothers you, but then again, this is your own fault. If you and your FARMS cronies had not spent so much time trying to portray yourselves as noble "God's Warriors," who are doing this stuff purely for the "love of it," and if you hadn't been attacking critics and ministries from collecting funds for their operations, then you wouldn't be stuck in this position. If you had written fair-minded, well-balanced apologetics, instead of endless attack pieces, you wouldn't be in this position.

Instead, you find yourself in the apparently embarrassing position of now having to explain why there is an official tax document which says that you were paid 20 big ones to act as "Board Chair" of FARMS. You have thrown every counter in the book: claiming that acting as "Chair" is not apologetic, and that it's purely administrative; claiming that the 20 g's never went to you, and instead went to your home department; claiming that your *department* never got the money; claiming that the money was actually for METI, and not for acting as Board Chair; etc., etc. Your story has changed an astonishing number of times.

Why not just admit the truth? Why not say, in plain English, "I get paid to do apologetics?"

If FARMS paid out 20 grand in order to buy out your teaching time so that you could be Board Chair, then it is true.

FARMS didn't pay out 20 grand in order to buy out my teaching time so that I could be Board Chair, and it isn't true.

(I think I've said this before.)

How much did FARMS pay out in order for you to act as Board Chair?

Yep: thanks for clearing that up. It means that the 20K referred to on the tax document has nothing to do with METI.

You're an obsessively malevolent loon, Scartch.

Such a charming mouth you have.

Well, the IRS believes that you were paid $20,000 to function as "Board Chair."

Then you need to disabuse them of that misconception, Scartch.

http://www.irs.gov/

No, I'm not going to do that. It makes sense that you'd think that, though. I know about how you wish ill upon those you disagree with---how you'd like to see my life destroyed, for example. I recall reading your extraordinarily disquieting threats against Rollo Tomasi, where you expressed your "belief" that he would be made to suffer in the afterlife. That's not very nice, Professor P.! Anyways, just because you want to hurt others, doesn't mean that those others feel that way towards you.

Besides, if and when I ever do decide to write or contact somebody, it will be the Brethren, to complain about the "dark feeling" I get when I read apologetic materials. I'll be sure to refer the Lord's Anointed to the many people who've had their faith destroyed by the bellicosity of the apologists.

Again, how/why is it "defamation" to reveal that you were paid $20,000 to be "Board Chair" of FARMS?

You know as well as I do that you're trying to portray me as a mercenary and a liar.

Boo hoo! Poor Daniel Peterson got $20,000 for being FARMS Board Chair! Whatever will he do?!?

If you can explain how it's "mercenary" to get paid to do apologetics (as a number of people clearly have), then I'd be interested to hear it.

[_Jason Bourne]

Jason,

Please forgive me if I have missed something, but where in the text you posted does it say that 501(c)(3) organizations aren't required to disclose payments? (Further, how does this square with the fact that the actual 990 form *does*, in fact, disclose a number of "grants" "honoraria," and the like?)

Try to keep up to speed on the rules I provided Scratch.

I copied instructions that stated if the NFP pays another organization for a chairman or directors time the 990 show it as if paid to the director of the or chairman of the NFP.

Rollo noted that a question on Part VII of Schedule A was answered no about payments to other exempt entities.

I then deciphered complex instructions for Schedule A and showed that BYU falls outside the instructions for answering yes to such payments.

You question above is totally irrelevant to the points. I never said that NFPs were not required to disclose payments. Read the instructions. It seems that the 990 was prepared correctly and that the payment in DCPs name could have been paid to but still listed him as recipient.

[_Jason Bourne]

You don't need to prove it. The official IRS document proves it quite nicely.

No it does not prove the Dr Peterson directly received $20,400. For you to continue to state this after what I provided by way of the instructions for the form is really dishonest.

[_Jason Bourne]

Why don't we post all this material on the Recovery Board? They get many thousands more viewers over there. Surely there is a tax-person who frequents the site. Maybe s/he will be able to get to the bottom of this. At the very least, I'm sure that many there would be interested to know that the "Board Chair" of FARMS was paid over twenty grand.

I have experience with tax law. I have explained this to you over and over. I have clarified Rollo's valid question and shown that the question he brought up was answered appropriately assuming the payments were actually paid to BYU. If Dr Peterson is telling the truth the confusing Form 990 is correct and the fact that it list Peterson as receiving the money does not mean he got it and PER THE FORMS INSTRUCTIONS THIS IS THE CORRECT PRESENTATION!! Also answer of NO to the questions on Part VII of Schedule A is correct because BYU is not the type of entity that is one which is required to disclose payment made too in that section.

CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU???????????????????

[_Yoda]

Why don't we post all this material on the Recovery Board? They get many thousands more viewers over there. Surely there is a tax-person who frequents the site. Maybe s/he will be able to get to the bottom of this. At the very least, I'm sure that many there would be interested to know that the "Board Chair" of FARMS was paid over twenty grand.

I have experience with tax law. I have explained this to you over and over. I have clarified Rollo's valid question and shown that the question he brought up was answered appropriately assuming the payments were actually paid to BYU. If Dr Peterson is telling the truth the confusing Form 990 is correct and the fact that it list Peterson as receiving the money does not mean he got it and PER THE FORMS INSTRUCTIONS THIS IS THE CORRECT PRESENTATION!! Also answer of NO to the questions on Part VII of Schedule A is correct because BYU is not the type of entity that is one which is required to disclose payment made too in that section.

CLEAR ENOUGH FOR YOU???????????????????

THANK YOU, JASON!!! *HUGS*

[_Jason Bourne]

Well, the IRS believes that you were paid $20,000 to function as "Board Chair."

No they don't. And you are a hack. And it is clear you no nothing about tax filings and little about business in general. You are looking very foolish on this one. More so than usual.

[_Daniel Peterson]

I don't think I can continue to spend as much time per day denying the Scartchmeister's incessant false accusations as I have been, so I've decided to post a simple statement along the following lines:

Scartch's accusations against me are typically false, and this one is no exception to the general rule. -dcp

I hope that this statement will be sufficient for most purposes, and that, though brief, it will still provide sufficient psychological gratification for Scartch and even, perhaps, for the other members of this board's Scartcholeptic colony.

[_Mister Scratch]

Jason,

Please forgive me if I have missed something, but where in the text you posted does it say that 501(c)(3) organizations aren't required to disclose payments? (Further, how does this square with the fact that the actual 990 form *does*, in fact, disclose a number of "grants" "honoraria," and the like?)

Try to keep up to speed on the rules I provided Scratch.

Well, hey---you yourself stated that the tax instructions were "complex."

Rollo noted that a question on Part VII of Schedule A was answered no about payments to other exempt entities.

Yes, I'm following you so far.

I then deciphered complex instructions for Schedule A and showed that BYU falls outside the instructions for answering yes to such payments.

But, that doesn't make sense, Jason. For one thing, this is *FARMS's* tax form, not BYU's. BYU, as you showed in your bolded portions of the instructions, is an exempt NFP, right? Thus, the box ought to have been checked "Yes," right?

You question above is totally irrelevant to the points. I never said that NFPs were not required to disclose payments. Read the instructions.

Based on the instructions, it seems that the box ought to have been checked "Yes," right? What about the instructions have I misread, Jason?

It seems that the 990 was prepared correctly and that the payment in DCPs name could have been paid to but still listed him as recipient.

It seems that the big problem is that the 990 form does not clearly reveal just what, exactly, he was paid *for*. He claims that the money was paid for his teaching time, but actually it was for his METI work, and yet the tax form says that it was for being "Board Chair."

Does that really make sense to you, Jason? Because it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Further, how and why do you think all of this somehow "defames" or "maligns" DCP?

[_Mister Scratch]

THANK YOU, JASON!!! *HUGS*

Hi there, Liz. May I ask: what is your problem with me and/or this thread?

[_Mister Scratch]

I don't think I can continue to spend as much time per day denying the Scartchmeister's incessant false accusations as I have been, so I've decided to post a simple statement along the following lines:

Scartch's accusations against me are typically false, and this one is no exception to the general rule. -dcp

I hope that this statement will be sufficient for most purposes, and that, though brief, it will still provide sufficient psychological gratification for Scartch and even, perhaps, for the other members of this board's Scartcholeptic colony.

Right. You are checking out in order to avoid answering this question (among others):

How much were you paid to act as Board Chair of FARMS?