Charity involves voluntarily giving aid and assistance to help someone in need who is not a family member, and in most cultures charitable giving is considered a virtue. In the New Testament of the Christian bible, there are several instances of Jesus Christ teaching his followers that giving to, and caring for, the poor and infirm is an act of love, and indeed, his sacrificial death is the ultimate demonstration of charity by freely sacrificing his life to ransom all mankind. It is curious though, that giving assistance to religious organizations is considered charity when the money does not always go to aiding the poor and infirm as Jesus commanded, and it is a constant source of aggravation and contention that churches are exempted from paying taxes on the charitable contributions they receive. Tithing is a strange concept for many Americans because it represents a commitment to giving a percentage of one’s income that is not unlike paying taxes.
As the American people have pressed Republican candidate for president, Willard Romney, to release more of his income tax returns than one year and an estimate of his most recent one, he and his wife have remarked that besides paying a despicably low tax rate, they also pay 10% to the Mormon church. It is curious that, what is supposed to be a voluntary gift to help those in need, they consider tithing to be analogous to paying income tax, but on some level, it is easy to understand why.
According to the Internal Revenue Service, giving to a religious organization is considered a charitable donation and is an allowable deduction on an income tax return. It is a nice scam for religious people and churches because the giver gets to deduct their donations, and the church is exempt from paying taxes on the gifts from their members. However, for Willard and Ann Romney, their donations are not necessarily charity and more of a tax, or fee, for the privilege of gaining access to Mormon temples. Mormons are commanded to give a “Full and Honest 10%” of their gross income to the church in order to get a “Temple Recommend,” and it is entirely possible that, in the Romney’s minds, they really are paying a tax; albeit to the church, but a tax nonetheless. It is no wonder that Willard and Mrs. Willard were testy when they were questioned about their ultra-low tax rate and never failed to mention their 10% tithes as part of their tax rate. It almost appears that they consider their so-called charitable giving (tithing) as a value-added tax on income to be members-in-good standing with the LDS.
What is questionable, is why the money owed to the Mormon church by its members is considered charitable giving when so much of it is used to invest in for-profit business ventures. In a Bloomberg BusinessWeek article in July, they did a fairly exhaustive report on the cult’s vast business empire that certainly is funded in part by members’ tithes that are supposed to be for charity. The report lists several for-profit enterprises that have nothing to do with providing aid and assistance to the poor and infirm, and it brings into question how members are allowed to deduct their contributions as a charitable donation when the money goes to turn a profit for the church.
A sampling of the cult’s holdings includes AgReserves, a for-profit Mormon company that reportedly owns about 1 million acres in the continental U.S., and the $1 billion, 290,000-acre Deseret Ranches in Florida which keeps 5,700 head of cattle, citrus, sod, and timber operations including operations in Britain, Canada, Australia, Mexico, Argentina, and Brazil. The church’s Australian property, valued at $61 million in 1997, brings in an estimated annual sales of $276 million, and they own several other for-profit real estate firms that own, develop, and manage malls, parking lots, office parks, and residential buildings. The church does fund charities, but it also uses members’ tithes for right wing tax-exempt organizations, conservative think tanks, and prestigious private schools, but the bulk of the money goes into for-profit businesses with the sole purpose of increasing its land holdings, and various investment interests. For the record, the church itself is not a charity, but for tax purposes is a Section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt charitable organization and is not required to reveal its financial records, but there have been repeated calls to have their exemption revoked. Maybe Willard is following the church model in refusing to reveal his financial information.
Recently, Romney’s reason for not releasing his tax returns is that his “church doesn’t publish how much people have given,” and that “one of the downsides of releasing one’s financial information is that this is now all public, but we had never intended our contributions to be known.” However, if that ridiculous argument is true, then Willard would not have released 23 years of returns to the McCain campaign in 2008, or the measly two years he released to run for president if he was serious about concealing how much he pays the Mormons to enter the temple. Willard’s father set a precedent for releasing 12 years of income tax returns because, he argued, releasing “one year of the document, while it might serve a political purpose, would not prove very much. One year could be a fluke, perhaps done for show, and what mattered in personal finance was how a man conducted himself over the long haul.” It is obvious that Willard is concerned that the American people will learn how he has conducted himself over the long haul and based on the recent reports of Bain Capital’s dealings under his leadership, there is conduct he desperately wants to keep out of sight. Some pundits wondered aloud if Romney is refusing to release more returns because he did not meet the 10% church requirement, but without releasing his returns, there is no possible way to ever know.
There are myriad reasons Romney needs to release more than just two years of tax returns other than to see how much he gave to an alleged “charity.” By all accounts, the Romneys do give to charity, but the 10% tithes do not fall into the “charitable” category if the church is using one penny of it to enrich its net worth or to fund for-profit enterprises. Jesus Christ told a follower to “go sell your belongings and give to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven “(Matt 19:21), but he did not designate a certain percentage that is an Old Testament (Genesis 14: 18-20) requirement of 10%. Charity has lost its true meaning if it is not for the sole purpose of aiding someone less fortunate, and regardless of the tax code, to use it as a tax deduction, or reason to conceal tax returns is as despicable as charging 10% to gain entrance to a temple.
Image: businessweek.com






Tim
Sep. 2nd, 2012 at 10:50 am
And a mere forty million tax free dollars spent by the Mormon church to “defend” marriage in California.
loading...
Don Beams
Sep. 2nd, 2012 at 11:49 am
This would be an appropriate time for the IRS to come down on “Mormon Industries Inc.” like a ton of bricks and subject them to the Audit of the Century, which would, in a sane world, result in the “Church” being declared a taxable for-profit entity, subject to some whopping huge tax assessments, penalties and interest charges, not to mention Federal charges for income tax evasion for the statutory “leaders” of the venture.
Their “political” activities are the “wedge” to open up this can of worms. THis is NOT a religion. It is a closed (paid) membership investment club. This would be “justice” in a sane world.
loading...
Inez
Sep. 2nd, 2012 at 10:38 pm
if the democrats don’t bring this info to the public they are missing an oportuniy to unearth reason romney is holding back tax info.., if some of his wealth is attributed to the companies owned by the mormon church………bingo
loading...
Robert Allan Williams
Sep. 2nd, 2012 at 11:53 am
Utah needs a colossal intervention to free the cult addicts from Mormonism.
loading...
SinghX
Sep. 2nd, 2012 at 5:32 pm
Name one soup kitchen, shelter, half-way house, drug intervention program, abused women shelter, etc. any organization or non-profit that has the name of the mormon church tied to it as a community charitable organization where people OTHER THAN members of the mormon church are being clothed, fed or sheltered.
Name one…
loading...
Rmuse
Sep. 2nd, 2012 at 11:41 pm
Believe it or not SinghX, I spent nearly an hour-and-a-half and couldn’t find anything. Doesn’t mean they don’t exist, but ex-Mormons claim that they don’t always take care of their own. Rumor is it’s a socio-economic thing. Those who need it most, don’t always get it. Not the kind of “Jesus Christ” I studied, but he was an original, and not “Latter Day.” Let’s face it, Jesus changed in the last 30 years coinciding with the ascendance of that other Republican man-turned-god, Ronald Reagan.
loading...
SinghX
Sep. 3rd, 2012 at 7:32 am
Rmuse…I also knew that there are Mormons who the Church does not cloth, feed or share. I found this out many years ago doing what used to be called “Family Support” for military families–there were lots of Mormon families with spouses deployed that had very little; as military spouses, we’d step up to the plate as sort of a social service and try to help them; the Mormon’s door was shut in our face (I was always shunned for wearing sleeveless or short dresses). These same women did, however, show up at the annual Christmas Party as each of their children received a present from Santa.
I would estimate that about 1/4 of these women didn’t know their “patriotic men” received a pay checks let alone larger checks while deployed as they were left to basically fend for themselves…
That’s just one example…
loading...
A Walkaway
Sep. 2nd, 2012 at 7:43 pm
It’s groups like the Mormons (and the dominionists) that make giving tax-free status to religious entities such a bad idea.
I thought I’d posted on this thread already… they should require a group to prove that they provide more in service to their community than they get in exemption (and that means not just to members of their church/whatever – the Mormons, the Dominionists, the Scientologists, and other cults especially), and those benefits to society must be weighed by a third impartial observer. All non-profit organizations, including all churches and religious groups should be required to report on their finances, even if they don’t pay taxes. That way the cults would have a much harder time hiding their evil from the rest of the world.
loading...
Nancy Hasenpusch
Sep. 3rd, 2012 at 12:07 am
I completely agree with you all organizations should be required by law no matter what open their books! I don’t care if it’s any type of Religious group does not and should not matter. Secrecy is wrong!Thank You
loading...
MGarr
Sep. 3rd, 2012 at 12:28 am
What is the single issue on which Mr. Romney has never flip-flopped? He stands doggedly firm on never, under any circumstances, releasing his tax returns.
Why?
It is not just liberals who want to see Romney’s tax returns.
It is 63% of American voters who do.
The longer Mr. Romney delays, the more suspicious it appears.
Obama released 8 years of tax returns
GW Bush 10 years
Clinton 12 years
GHW Bush 14 years
George Romney 12 years.
What is there to hide?
Release the tax returns, Mr. Romney.
loading...
Jim Faubel
Sep. 3rd, 2012 at 11:24 am
Personally, I have to say that every Mormon I’ve ever met was a “nice person”. I even liked all the “jack-Mormons” I’ve met. However, Willard appears to me to be a Mormon who worships Mammon, and that really bothers me.
loading...
A Walkaway
Sep. 3rd, 2012 at 5:15 pm
They probably think you’re a potential candidate for conversion. If they learn otherwise, watch out.
Being nice to people they want to “win over” is a known practice for them (especially when they’re in areas where they are in the minority). That changes real fast when they realize someone has no interest in their religion, or when they become dominant in an area.
Other cults do the same.
loading...
Donna C. Smutney
Sep. 3rd, 2012 at 11:45 am
while no one can be assured by what another is giving there is still one thought to it all. god knows all and your conscience should be your guide.
if mr. romney feels he is right, then he should share these records with the people who have the right to know. it is he who chose to run for the president of the united states. that person should keep his own house clean and not be afraid of anything if he is doing the right thing. in this matter,as well as others,i doubt mr. romney can assure anyone that he did the right thing. is this who we want for a president? be honest with yourself!
loading...
Joshua Kricker
Sep. 3rd, 2012 at 4:11 pm
I have a strong belief that if Mittens released their 2010 tax return for financial year 2009, contained therein is incontrovertible evidence that both Willard and Ann committed voter fraud in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in 2010.
loading...
Alan
Sep. 4th, 2012 at 1:48 pm
I think that Milton does not want to release his returns because it will show that he did not tithe the required 10 percent.
Bad Milton. Bad Mormon.
loading...