Letter to an IRS Director

[Bought Yahoo]

Thank you, Bought. I'm pretty sure you've hit on the uncomfortable truth. This is a wee essay on "The Banal Evil of Religious Exemptions in the US Tax Code."

The exemptions completely rip off taxpayers. Why should I be subsidizing someone else's religion.

[Dr Moore]

...the Church's use of the interest on its mega-endowment is in fact being used to construct temples and meeting houses, run missions and yes, support further investments in the endowment such as City Creek and bailouts.

Bought Yahoo has not actually read the IRS Letter. He is making up the underlined parts of this above statement without evidence, and as such is showing an awful ignorance about the financial aspects discussed at length in the IRS Letter.

In fact, the church pays for all temples, meeting houses and mission expenses out of annual tithing receipts, every year. The church then saves a surplus to the tune of 10-20% of tithes ($1 to $1.5 billion) every year, and has done so for multiple decades, at least. Money goes into EPA from the church; it has never come back out of EPA to support the church financially.

Bought may believe that someday the church will begin to take money from EPA to support ecclesiastical expenditures, but that belief is not supported by any backward-looking facts, and is directly contradicted by repeated statements by church presidents and presiding bishops. Those statements make clear that the church will always spend less than it expects in revenue from donations.

[Morley]

Bought Yahoo has not actually read the IRS Letter. He is making up the underlined parts of this above statement without evidence, and as such is showing an awful ignorance about the financial aspects discussed at length in the IRS Letter.

In fact, the church pays for all temples, meeting houses and mission expenses out of annual tithing receipts, every year. The church then saves a surplus to the tune of 10-20% of tithes ($1 to $1.5 billion) every year, and has done so for multiple decades, at least. Money goes into EPA from the church; it has never come back out of EPA to support the church financially.

Bought may believe that someday the church will begin to take money from EPA to support ecclesiastical expenditures, but that belief is not supported by any backward-looking facts, and is directly contradicted by repeated statements by church presidents and presiding bishops. Those statements make clear that the church will always spend less than it expects in revenue from donations.

Oh, I agree, the Church will never change its tune. And I agree that it's worse than deplorable.

What I was taking from Bought was the point that the US Government will never call them on it. The present way the law is being interpreted is going to let the Church do whatever the hell they want.

[Dr Moore]

Bought Yahoo has not actually read the IRS Letter. He is making up the underlined parts of this above statement without evidence, and as such is showing an awful ignorance about the financial aspects discussed at length in the IRS Letter.

In fact, the church pays for all temples, meeting houses and mission expenses out of annual tithing receipts, every year. The church then saves a surplus to the tune of 10-20% of tithes ($1 to $1.5 billion) every year, and has done so for multiple decades, at least. Money goes into EPA from the church; it has never come back out of EPA to support the church financially.

Bought may believe that someday the church will begin to take money from EPA to support ecclesiastical expenditures, but that belief is not supported by any backward-looking facts, and is directly contradicted by repeated statements by church presidents and presiding bishops. Those statements make clear that the church will always spend less than it expects in revenue from donations.

Oh, I agree, the Church will never change its tune. And I agree that it's worse than deplorable.

What I was taking from Bought was the point that the US Government will never call them on it. The present way the law is being interpreted is going to let the Church do whatever the hell they want.

I agree with that. The IRS Letter may have been structured as a tax “whistleblower” document, but I believe that was only done to gain whistleblower protection for leaking massive amounts of church financial data. I don’t believe for a minute that Lars or David thinks the church’s tax exempt status is in jeopardy. That doesn’t mean the document isn’t hugely transformational for the church and it’s finances. Significant changes have already occurred. (1) full quarterly disclosure of stock holdings under a single “EPA” fund, and (2) GAs have admitted in interviews that the leak and subsequent press has had a negative impact on tithing receipts. The latter is a self fulfilling prophecy resulting from their rationalization for such extreme secrecy, I think.

[Morley]

I agree with that. The IRS Letter may have been structured as a tax “whistleblower” document, but I believe that was only done to gain whistleblower protection for leaking massive amounts of church financial data. I don’t believe for a minute that Lars or David thinks the church’s tax exempt status is in jeopardy.

Moore, I love this theory. I hope it's the case.

That doesn’t mean the document isn’t hugely transformational for the church and its finances. Significant changes have already occurred. (1) full quarterly disclosure of stock holdings under a single “EPA” fund, and (2) GAs have admitted in interviews that the leak and subsequent press has had a negative impact on tithing receipts. The latter is a self fulfilling prophecy resulting from their rationalization for such extreme secrecy, I think.

Agree. The long term impact on Church credibility is enormous. They deserve every bit of the loss they have to endure.