Jump to content

Mormon Church fined $1 million for hiding $32 BILLION in investments over 20 years


Recommended Posts

The Mormon church actually encourages you to replace the phrase “the church” with “Jesus Christ” when you feel you’re about to criticize it. So the headline should read “Jesus Christ fined $1 million…”

 

Anyways this never would have come to light unless a whistleblower said something in 2019. After the whistleblower did so, Jesus Christ moved his assets out of various shell companies into the parent company. 
 

The SEC is toothless. This is literally the equivalent of fining a penny on $100. 

  • True 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that income is only a portion of money that makes up only one aspect of their dealings.

 

And it's not that all the other stuff isn't dirty, it's just that this is the only stuff we know about because it's the only stuff they have to report because Christian's don't really have to obey the law anymore.

 

But yeah, not to worry. If they are cheating with the financials that are actually reviewable I am sure the stuff that they know will never be scrutinized is on the up and up.

 

So if you thought the fine itself was an insult just keep in mind it's even way worse than that.

 

 

  • Halal 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why are U.S. government institutions so toothless? I always hear about how the IRS is oh-so tough on tax evasion and yet this doesn't even qualify as a slap on the wrist. Is there some deeper reason, like how they wouldn't fuck with Scientology after those domestic terrorists started attacking the judicial system with a myriad bogus lawsuits and shit? When it comes to the States I basically never hear about the likes of the billion dollar fines that are regularly handed down in the EU. This can't all just be "rich people have more electoral influence".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Demut said:

Why are U.S. government institutions so toothless? I always hear about how the IRS is oh-so tough on tax evasion and yet this doesn't even qualify as a slap on the wrist. Is there some deeper reason, like how they wouldn't fuck with Scientology after those domestic terrorists started attacking the judicial system with a myriad bogus lawsuits and shit? When it comes to the States I basically never hear about the likes of the billion dollar fines that are regularly handed down in the EU. This can't all just be "rich people have more electoral influence".

 

This hasn't been the case for like... 30 years.

  • True 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think this is a big deal and the fine is pretty well in line with what they did wrong. The underlying activity wasn’t an issue, it was just the way they reported their holdings obfuscated the fact that it was really one entity holding all of those investments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t see a Caesar around, do you?

 

We’re dealing with people who invented fanfic about a fake gate in Jerusalem called the eye of a needle to get passed the whole “rich man entering the kingdom of heaven” bit.  It doesn’t matter what the book says, they’ll find a way to make it fit a lifestyle they enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It isn't a tax issue, the reason the SEC is involved is because public disclosure of equity positions for large institutional investors is an important part of functioning markets. By distributing holdings across a bunch of subsidiaries, the scale of the fund's holdings in aggregate were not properly understood by the market, even though the existence of the holdings were all documented in the individual entities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, GeneticBlueprint said:

There is a separate complaint filed with the IRS that does have to do with taxation issues, however. Involving the same entity. 


To my knowledge, the complaint is not that the entity explicitly broke any tax laws in the way it operated, but that it shouldn’t be recognized as tax exempt in the first place because the intention of the sub-entity is not to distribute funds at a level deemed proper for a not-for-profit. The LDS Church takes advantage of quite squishy language on the part of the IRS in previous cases where they allowed such activity.
 

But it’s been a while since I’ve read up on the situation, so I may not be remembering everything correctly or there might have been something newly revealed since the complaints first surfaced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, sblfilms said:


To my knowledge, the complaint is not that the entity explicitly broke any tax laws in the way it operated, but that it shouldn’t be recognized as tax exempt in the first place because the intention of the sub-entity is not to distribute funds at a level deemed proper for a not-for-profit. The LDS Church takes advantage of quite squishy language on the part of the IRS in previous cases where they allowed such activity.
 

But it’s been a while since I’ve read up on the situation, so I may not be remembering everything correctly or there might have been something newly revealed since the complaints first surfaced.


Yup you nailed it. In its 25 year existence its funds have only been used to bail out a for profit insurance company and build a luxury mall. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GeneticBlueprint said:


Yup you nailed it. In its 25 year existence its funds have only been used to bail out a for profit insurance company and build a luxury mall. 


It seems like the IRS needs to tighten up its rules about what must be done with funds in such an entity, the implications would reach far beyond the LDS Church or religious institutions generally though, so I think they would end up with many otherwise unlikely allies challenging the change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, sblfilms said:


It seems like the IRS needs to tighten up its rules about what must be done with funds in such an entity, the implications would reach far beyond the LDS Church or religious institutions generally though, so I think they would end up with many otherwise unlikely allies challenging the change.


Agreed. The person who worked there and reported them to the IRS seems to think there’s a pretty clear violation going on but I’m not a tax attorney. But at a minimum there are some ethical issues with it IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...