- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
First, let me say I don’t think the church did anything wrong in this lawsuit. So this thread is notan attempt throw negative light on the church. But it shows that if someone pays tithing from money generated through fraudulent means, the church can be sued for the donation. In this case, it led to the church settling to pay back tithing. The claimant was the receiver of a fund that was fraudulently managed.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/ffd8c374-4373-332c-a4a0-e360b572a622/ss_lds-church-agrees-to-repay.html Can’t pay tithing on gambled winnings, can’t pay tithing from criminal activity… How on earth is a guy like me supposed to pay? :problem: Very interesting. Think of the mind set in this example. Someone organizes fraud. On the basis of that illegal act pays tithing on it. I would like to understand the rationale of the person who thought this was a good idea.
By law, the church (or anyone who receives the proceeds) has to pay the money back.
What’s an IRA when it’s not the Irish Republican Army? And APS? Individual Retirement Account – a way to squirrel away money for retirement that can provide tax advantages. American Pension Services – just some company.
Okay… thanks Nibbler, am a bit puzzled at the whole thing. So they’ve embezzled funds and the church has returned the money? To be fair to the church here, I don’t see why the burden is on them to repay the money since they don’t know the source of all their tithing.
The church is well off – so they can absorb this but I do think these laws are dangerous.
SamBee wrote:
Okay… thanks Nibbler, am a bit puzzled at the whole thing. So they’ve embezzled funds and the church has returned the money?To be fair to the church here, I don’t see why the burden is on them to repay the money since they don’t know the source of all their tithing.
The church is well off – so they can absorb this but I do think these laws are dangerous.
I don’t think the church is at fault at all, but I think you might want that money returned if it were a case that you were the one that it was swindled from (or maybe if it was your grandmother’s retirement account). And returning the money will not hurt the church financially. Maybe just one less high-rise condo will be purchased/built next to a temple at some point.I believe it’s a law. Money that is obtained illegally has to be returned to the people from whom it was obtained illegally. In this case a portion couldn’t be recovered because it had been paid to the church in the form of tithing contributions. The people bringing the case to court asked for the maximum amount, as if all the transactions by that guy were fraudulent. The church wanted proof that each and every transaction performed by that guy was fraudulent. Rather than go to court and argue every transaction the parties settled out of court.
This is actually an incredibly unfair law. If they had funneled it into a shell company I could get understand it. It could bankrupt a small business through no fault of its own.
Typical US of A – laws to protect the rich…
I compare this to a valuable painting that is stolen and then sold on the black market to a collector. It may be bought and sold many times. Eventually the police discover the current location. The current owner must return it to the original owner despite the fact that it was paid for.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.