Who are they dealin with for the $2billion?

[_Some Schmo]

Well, yes, the cost is high, but here's the problem I'm having with this...

Given that the church's financials are closed in the first place, what need have they to launder money? If it's all hidden and tax free anyway, what is there to gain?

It seems to me that church is a huge financial racket as it is. This isn't really newsworthy (well, not new, anyway). What's the accusation here? Nepotism? Funneling money to relatives? You think that there are some church authorities trying to hide something from other church authorities?

It seems to me that you're looking into a septic tank and saying, "Hey, look at that over there in the corner! It's a great big turd!" like it's a big surprise or something.

[_Scottie]

Well, yes, the cost is high, but here's the problem I'm having with this...

Given that the church's financials are closed in the first place, what need have they to launder money? If it's all hidden and tax free anyway, what is there to gain?

It seems to me that church is a huge financial racket as it is. This isn't really newsworthy (well, not new, anyway). What's the accusation here? Nepotism? Funneling money to relatives? You think that there are some church authorities trying to hide something from other church authorities?

It seems to me that you're looking into a septic tank and saying, "Hey, look at that over there in the corner! It's a great big turd!" like it's a big surprise or something.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the church still needs to account to the IRS, right? I mean, someone is looking at what they are spending money on, just not the members?

Or does being tax exempt mean they don't have to divulge to anyone, even the IRS?

[Maureen]

Oh they are subject to IRS audit..
that's where the Mormon senators come in..

[_TAK]

Which is why change will occur when the outside become vocal about a billion dollar corporation hiding behind a tax exempt status. I hope the Prop8 people continue the fight.

I do not think Prop 8 opponents will be at all successful in challenging the tax exempt status of the LDS Church. Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3) will only threaten tax exemption if a tax exempts activities to influence legislation is "Substantial." It seems the term substantial has reference to the other activities the tax exempt performs. So, the question on prop 8 is was the LDS Church's efforts a substantial part of its overall activities. You don't think there are plethora of lawyers making sure LDS Inc. does not fly fowl of these rules?

Prop 8 alone will not change things but a steady stream of public criticisms across the country can.

[_cinepro]

The whole "closed books" thing mystifies me.

The Church isn't a private corporation, owned by a few individuals. It isn't a enterprise that needs to maintain trade secrets for a competitive advantage.

It is a religion, wholly supported by the donations of its members (and supplemented by the past investment of those donations). We trumpet to the world as loudly as we can that the 15 men leading the Church are hand-picked by God, and are acting according to His will.

This being the case, there is a great reason for the books to be open: if the GA's are inspired by God, then the finances of the Church could be considered scripture. I'm not suggesting that the finances are handled infallibly, or demanding that no mistakes be made. Past financial blunders have already proven the ability of GA's to screw up the Church's finances while maintaining the faith of the members.

I don't blame them for keeping the books secret. But I don't think it is a good thing for anyone except those who don't want to get caught if they inadvertently screw up the Church's finances.

[_Scottie]

Are the books open for Catholics? Can they see where Rome spends their money?

Where does the Vatican get their money anyways? The Catholics don't have a tithing system, do they?

[_SatanWasSetUp]

The whole "closed books" thing mystifies me.

The Church isn't a private corporation, owned by a few individuals. It isn't a enterprise that needs to maintain trade secrets for a competitive advantage.

It is a religion, wholly supported by the donations of its members (and supplemented by the past investment of those donations). We trumpet to the world as loudly as we can that the 15 men leading the Church are hand-picked by God, and are acting according to His will.

This being the case, there is a great reason for the books to be open: if the GA's are inspired by God, then the finances of the Church could be considered scripture. I'm not suggesting that the finances are handled infallibly, or demanding that no mistakes be made. Past financial blunders have already proven the ability of GA's to screw up the Church's finances while maintaining the faith of the members.

I don't blame them for keeping the books secret. But I don't think it is a good thing for anyone except those who don't want to get caught if they inadvertently screw up the Church's finances.

Great post, Cinepro. It reminds me of a time a few years back when I taught the deacons. One of the kids was horsing around and he tipped over his chair and fell to the ground. Another deacon, a very devout deacon, chastised the kid and said, "That is the Lord's chair." I remember in my youth being told that the church is the lord's house and the items in it belonged to him and we should treat them with respect. I think this deacon needs to have a talk with the people who are running this Mall project. "That is the Lord's money you are wasting."

[_Some Schmo]

Oh they are subject to IRS audit..
that's where the Mormon senators come in..

Really? Are you sure about that? How do you know?

I mean, I could understand them being audited (or, at least, having to report taxes) on their business ventures (of which, I guess this mall would be one, so maybe I'm starting to get some of the picture here), but I was always under the impression that the money they take in as contributions from members was all theirs and didn't have to be reported.

But you know, I've never really given it much thought until right now, and I freely admit that I don't have much of a mind for business scams, so I'm sure there could be many financial advantages to what they're doing that I just never dreamed of.

One thing is for certain; it should be a law that all churches' financials are open to scrutiny. Pleading "god's church" shouldn't cut it for any thinking individual. And this doesn't just affect members; it affects society at large, as was mentioned earlier.

[_antishock8]

Follow the money. Who runs the Mormon corporation? Who gets the contracts? How much do they charge for their services?

Let's say you're a charitable foundation. You take donations to find a cure for cancer. Within your foundation almost all paid administrative positions are staffed by family and friends of family. That's nepotism. Let's say you want to build and office building. You open it up to bids, and choose a family member and friends of the family member to build it. Nepotism. What happens with the surplus money? It ends up in your pockets tax free. Kickbacks.

A 2 billion dollar mall? C'mon, now.

[_Some Schmo]

Follow the money. Who runs the Mormon corporation? Who gets the contracts? How much do they charge for their services?

Let's say you're a charitable foundation. You take donations to find a cure for cancer. Within your foundation almost all paid administrative positions are staffed by family and friends of family. That's nepotism. Let's say you want to build and office building. You open it up to bids, and choose a family member and friends of the family member to build it. Nepotism. What happens with the surplus money? It ends up in your pockets tax free. Kickbacks.

A 2 billion dollar mall? C'mon, now.

I'm with you on all of that, but it all assumes that the books are open to scrutiny. What's to prevent the interested folks from just handing it over? I suppose it's tax sheltering for the recipients... but that's all I can think of.

I could never run a scam even if I were so inclined. I wonder if there's a "Fraud for Dummies" I could read.