Trib’s Second Article on John Dehlin

[Philo Sofee]

A simple question: Jpatterson, why don't you and Rose "the scorned woman" Bud, KK and all your other butt-hurt friends start your own podcast? Just go for it and run Johnny out business.

Brilliant!!!

[Jason Bourne]

I am not a lawyer and not experienced in IRS reports. I have no clue what the so-called whistleblower stands to gain in an IRS complaint. And I do not know why an IRS complaint would be addressed by a non-IRS agent or agency.

There are two things at play here: an IRS whistleblower report and a consumer complaint filed with the Utah Attorney General's office. Those two are separate things which have made their way through the system.

I filed both reports last spring. At the same time, I sent the information I had gathered in support of the complaints to Peggy Fletcher Stack. Her editors brought on Tony Semerad, the Trib's investigative business journalist, to help.

Why it took the Trib almost a year to publish this story is beyond me. I had several (I think three?) interviews with Tony over the course of that time and gave him pages and pages of documentation to back up my complaints.

In terms of the IRS, a whistleblower is entitled to a percentage of the fine collected from the taxpayer or institution who has run afoul of the tax code. However, if that fine is less than $2 million, there is no reward. I told Tony in our interviews that I wasn't expecting any financial reward because I knew John's salary and Open Stories Foundation finances didn't come close the meeting that threshold.

I received a letter from the IRS some time in the fall acknowledging that my complaint had been received, but stating clearly that any outcome would not be communicated to me, unless I were to receive an award. The point is this: John could have been fined tens of thousands of dollars by the IRS and no one but John would know about it.

Do I know he's been fined? I absolutely do not. Is there a good chance he was fined? Every IRS lawyer I talked to said my complaint would absolutely lead to an IRS audit and they wouldn't be surprised at a modest fine levied at both John and Open Stories Foundation.

But again, we will never know.

As it relates to the AG's office, I filed that complaint the same week as the IRS. I stayed in touch with the lead investigator to whom my complaint was assigned several weeks later. He confirmed to me via phone that his office had indeed launched an investigation into Open Stories Foundation (which John confirmed in the story) but reiterated that even though I filed the complaint, I would not be privy to any of the information obtained or even the results of the investigation. But what was detailed in my report absolutely rose to the level of suspicion by the AG's office, so for John to say the accusations are completely "baseless" is an outright lie. Surprise, surprise.

John and his board chair now claim that they received a letter from the AG's office clearing him and Open Stories Foundation but conveniently refuse to produce the letter and won't even give a reason as to why not. How convenient.

So the bottom line is, the IRS received and acknowledged my complaint, the AG's office did an audit of Open Stories Foundation and we'll never know what the outcome of either of those investigations yielded.

As noted elsewhere had Dehlin been fined then you would see changes. His salary would have been changed. Or maybe his NFP status revoked. It seems clear to me that nothing came of your complaint. I am a CPA that does tax law by the way. If one of my clients were fined for running afoul of IRS and they had issues to fix I would make sure it was fixed. Other than that Dehlin does not owe you or anyone else information about this.

[Jason Bourne]

I

The Rosebud Brigade wants to put itself out there as the righteous alternative to John Dehlin, but they focus on tearing John Dehlin down. What are they doing to show that they deserve to take his place as the leading voice of (ex-)Mormon progressivism?

This is where you're completely wrong.

No one you mention is trying to take John's place as the leading voice of ex-Mormonism. To the contrary. Other than steering tax-exempt donations out of John's dirty hands, I don't care a whit about ex-Mormonism. I don't care about Mormonism anymore at all.

Speaking truth to power is the best summation I have heard here. John abuses people, systems and power. And he gets away with it for two reasons: 1) Because people like his content, especially white male ex-Mormons who are highly trained in defending their spiritual leaders and 2) There's no other platform out there that has as big of a reach within ex-Mormonism that John hasn't already dominated, so any negative news about him is going to inevitably be drowned out.

I put in some time and effort last spring to the complaints. Then I forgot about it except for the couple of phone interviews I had with the Trib. It came back up this weekend cause the stories were published. I'll post on the subject for a day or two until the story dies down again and then I'll go back to not giving a hoot about Mormonism in all its forms.

Kate Kelly occasionally tweets about Mormonism/ex-Mormonism but mostly is focused on her work with the ERA. I have no idea what Rosebud is up to but I know she has no desire to do anything public in the ex-Mormon arena.

None of us are trying to run yet another ex-Mormon podcast. Good lord, no one needs another one of those. None of us are trying to get all up in the ex-Mormon space. None of us care that much about it.

Sorry to burst your bubble.

GOOD FOR YOU MAN! Move on! Take a hike. Go on a date, with your partner if you have one. Ride a bike. Especially ride a bike. Pet a dog, Life is to short to worry about John D or anyone else for that matter.

[Jason Bourne]

Non-profit podcasts similar to Open Stories Foundation in terms of annual revenue:

Birds on a Wire podcast, a look at motherhood through the lens of Christianity. Or is it the other way around? Who knows. Annual revenue $240K - president Karen Stubbs makes $68K a year. That's 28% of gross revenue.

The Michael Schermer Show hosted by Skeptic Society leader and NYT best selling author Michael Schermer. The organization that runs the podcast brings in about $400K per year and Michael takes home exactly zero dollars of that revenue. Because he, you know, has a real job.

Java with Juli - a podcast devoted to sex and intimacy in the context of Christianity (barf). The org behind the podcast pulls in, again, around $400k. Juli who also goes by Juliana Slattery, is the Exec Dir of the non-profit and takes home a whopping $80k for her efforts, or about 20% of gross revenue.

John Dehlin, the best most super podcaster that ever lives and is so much smarter and hard working than these dopes obviously deserves to get paid way more because, why? Mormonism is more interesting? He's on TikTok? He's so handsome?

I could go on and on with examples. You can't refute the fact that John is vastly overpaid.

No. It was because this is what his board approved. You seem to really hate Dehlin. Like I said,go pet a dog or ride a bike.

[Jason Bourne]

It absolutely is actionable (the use of the word criminal here is loaded, as you're much more likely to get fined than thrown in jail for these types of offenses) to be WAY over the average in compensation if you're on the board of directors.

This is one of the points that gets overlooked, and speaks to the obsession John has with control.

There are two really really easy avenues for John to conduct himself with some integrity and ethics and still get paid as much as he does.

The first would be to resign from the Board of Directors and act solely as a content producer. Wall himself off from the people who make decisions about compensation and his employment. It's obviously a conflict of interest.

The second option would be to just take Open Stories Foundation or MSP public and, you know, pay your damn taxes. John could make a great living, probably the same or more than he's making now, without the headache of a board of directors or IRS rules getting in his way.

Why doesn't he do either of these things? Because there's no way in hell John would ever give control to anyone else (even though he says Open Stories Foundation's mission is bigger than himself). This is the guy who more than once has locked his entire organization out of the website and podcast and held it hostage until his demands were met. And there's no way in hell John is going to start paying taxes now that he's enjoyed the sweet, sweet nectar of tax-exempt revenue.

He pays taxes on his compensation.

[PseudoPaul]

And there's no way in hell John is going to start paying taxes now that he's enjoyed the sweet, sweet nectar of tax-exempt revenue.

Are you under the impression that John doesn't pay income taxes simply because he gets paid by a not-for-profit organization?

[Binger]

And there's no way in hell John is going to start paying taxes now that he's enjoyed the sweet, sweet nectar of tax-exempt revenue.

Are you under the impression that John doesn't pay income taxes simply because he gets paid by a not-for-profit organization?

This is interesting, PP. I like your question and the direction you are pointing with it. Your question leads one to ask whether jpatterson was trying to punish the donors, or to punish Dehlin.

[Marcus]

...So the bottom line is, the IRS received and acknowledged my complaint, the AG's office did an audit of Open Stories Foundation and we'll never know what the outcome of either of those investigations yielded.

As noted elsewhere had Dehlin been fined then you would see changes. His salary would have been changed. Or maybe his NFP status revoked. It seems clear to me that nothing came of your complaint. I am a CPA that does tax law by the way. If one of my clients were fined for running afoul of IRS and they had issues to fix I would make sure it was fixed. Other than that Dehlin does not owe you or anyone else information about this.

That's a good point, but any changes might not show up for perusal until the next public reporting requirement, I would think. In any case, I agree, if they are not obligated to make public any report, there's really no legitimate reason to insist the information be divulged.

[Jason Bourne]

Are you under the impression that John doesn't pay income taxes simply because he gets paid by a not-for-profit organization?

This is interesting, PP. I like your question and the direction you are pointing with it. Your question leads one to ask whether jpatterson was trying to punish the donors, or to punish Dehlin.

Good point. Because Dehlin pays tax on his salary and the NFP pays payroll tax on it as well.

[Res Ipsa]

As noted elsewhere had Dehlin been fined then you would see changes. His salary would have been changed. Or maybe his NFP status revoked. It seems clear to me that nothing came of your complaint. I am a CPA that does tax law by the way. If one of my clients were fined for running afoul of IRS and they had issues to fix I would make sure it was fixed. Other than that Dehlin does not owe you or anyone else information about this.

That's a good point, but any changes might not show up for perusal until the next public reporting requirement, I would think. In any case, I agree, if they are not obligated to make public any report, there's really no legitimate reason to insist the information be divulged.

If either agency had taken action, I don't see how it could not appear somewhere in the annual filing. The annual report is a publicly available document. If any action were taken, I'd expect a line item for fines and/or a reduction in Dehlin's compensation. Unfortunately, the woefully understaffed IRS is still processing filings for 2019.