Corruption is Everywhere, But in the LDS Church?

Mormon Church accused of stockpiling billions,

avoiding paying taxes

Cheri Mossburg and Stephanie Becker
CNN

A whistleblower accuses the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints of keeping money for charitable causes.

(George Frey/Getty Images)

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, commonly referred to as the Mormon Church, responded Tuesday to a recently filed whistleblower complaint that accuses the church of stockpiling US$100 billion in accounts intended for charitable works, misleading members and avoiding taxes.

A whistleblower alleges that billions of dollars collected in tithes -- mandatory donations by members -- was invested in an investment arm of the church, Ensign Peak Advisors, but in 22 years, has not been distributed to charitable causes in accordance with IRS rules, according to the complaint filed with the IRS.

"Claims being currently circulated are based on a narrow perspective and limited information," the LDS Church told CNN in a statement. "The Church complies with all applicable law governing our donations, investments, taxes, and reserves. We continue to welcome the opportunity to work with officials to address questions they may have."

The complaint was first reported by the Washington Post. The whistleblower, David Nielsen, is a Mormon who worked for the church until September, his brother, Lars Nielsen, told CNN. David Nielsen is a former senior portfolio manager at Ensign Peak Advisors, his brother said.

The complaint was prepared by the brothers and filed with the IRS in mid-November, according to Lars Nielsen.

Under IRS rules, whistleblowers can be awarded up to 30 percent of any taxes and penalties collected.

"We began this effort before we knew the IRS whistleblower program existed and he asked me to work with him," Lars Nielsen said Wednesday.

David Nielsen wants the IRS to strip the Mormon church of its tax exempt status, according to the complaint.

An IRS spokesman declined to comment citing federal law prohibiting the agency from discussing any specific case. Ensign Peak Advisors declined to comment.

Sam Brunson, a professor of nonprofit tax law at Chicago's Loyola University who is a member of the LDS church, said under Ensign's Articles of Incorporation, "it is both a supporting organization," which means it has to make charitable donations "commensurate in scope" to its funds, and an "integrated auxiliary," which means it might not have to. An integrated auxiliary organization can legally sidestep paying taxes by being a non-profit.

"My guess is that the IRS will probably do nothing" and even if it does, "chances are very small we will find out," he said.

Brunson told CNN that "there is some hurt and questioning" among his friends and church members who worry about those who can't really afford the 10% tithing to a church that allegedly has such a large nest egg.

And he hopes that the whistleblower's complaint will spark some changes. "Members of the church aren't shareholders, but stakeholders, and there's something good about transparency," he said.

The church added in its statement that most of the donated money was used for education, humanitarian work, meeting houses, missionary efforts and temples. Other money was saved.

"Over many years, a portion is methodically safeguarded through wise financial management and the building of a prudent reserve for the future," the church said in the statement.

In the statement the church made no mention of allegedly accumulating $100 billion, but did say, "All Church funds exist for no other reason than to support the Church's divinely appointed mission."

Lars Nielsen told CNN that his brother reveres the people he worked with and said they might have made mistakes. He said the church hierarchy may not have understood what was demanded under the law.

"David and I are very mindful that the money that could be recovered is money that came from the tithe, from people we care about. This is special money," he said.

McConnell Firmly on the Dark Side - Destroying Democracy

Mitch McConnell sneaks provisions into budget bill to further enable ‘dark money’

Mitch McConnell
© Joshua Roberts / Reuters

The Senate’s majority leader buried provisions in the massive US$1.1 trillion end-of-the-year spending bill that will prevent watchdogs from investigating political spending of companies and imposing regulations on ‘dark money’ groups.

The new bill prevents the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) from implementing any “order regarding the disclosure of political contributions, contributions to tax exempt organizations or dues paid to trade associations,” the bill says.

The IRS have also been targeted in the bill, and are now unable to issue a rule in 2016 regarding the level of nonprofit organizations political activity. Advocates for financial reform argue that the current system allows American elections to be bought by ‘dark money’ and ‘anonymous’ donors.

Indeed the current system has gutted democracy in America; it is all smoke and mirrors now. McConnell's unannounced, sneaky provisions will only serve to weaken democracy even further. I think POTUS should have refused to sign the bill and required the Senate to remain in session right through Christmas if necessary to clean this bill up.

I'm amazed at how quick and spirited Americans are in defending their right to bear arms and their right to keep America safe from militant Islam. And yet, they allow their democracy to be gutted, a far worse disaster, with hardly a word. Where are your priorities, people?

‘Dark money’ refers to the funds given to nonprofit organizations that can receive unlimited donations from corporations, individuals and unions, and spend their funds to influence elections, but are not required to disclose their donors.

McConnell has been a continuous advocate of unlimited secret campaign spending in Washington, often citing free speech as the reason.

The senior Kentucky senator’s own campaign has benefited from US$23 million of ‘dark money’ from independent groups like the National Rifle Association and the Nation Federation of Independent Business.

“Spending by organizations that do not disclose their donors has increased from less than US$5.2 million in 2006 to well over US$300 million in the 2012 presidential cycle and more than US$174 million in the 2014 midterms,” according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

For example, the Conservative Solutions Project has run more than 4,882 ads in support of Republican presidential hopeful Marco Rubio, and not a dime of its funding has been made public, reported Mother Jones.

The nonprofit organizations are, in theory, regulated by the IRS, but because of the new legislation McConnell introduced, the IRS can’t investigate the people or corporations who finance campaigns like Rubio’s run for presidency.

Historically, traditional political action committees (PACs) had strict limits on how much businesses, nonprofits and individuals could give. But a landmark 2010 Supreme Court ruling opened the door for unlimited amounts of cash to be donated to influence campaigns, because restricting this behavior would be akin to restricting what people can say, violating the First Amendment.

This isn’t the first move the majority leader has made to push his secret spending agenda. In last year’s budget he pushed through higher limits for campaign contributions to party organizations, making way for wealthy donors to give hundreds of thousands of dollars.

McConnell tried again to remove limits on how party committees spend money during this year’s budget negotiations, but stood down after he received heavy opposition from Democrats, some Republicans and campaign finance reformers, reported The Hill.

"We do feel good about what we did get and would love to have achieved more. And it's going to take a new president of a different party to achieve what we'd like to achieve,” McConnell said to the Associated Press when speaking about the bill.

And what is that, Senator. It seems you just want the richest man in the US to appoint the President. That's basically what you appear to be working toward.

At a 2010 DNC rally, President Obama said that special interest groups that pour money into attack ad campaigns without ever having to disclose their spending are “a threat to our democracy.” In July of this year, it was reported Obama was considering an executive order to require all federal contractors to disclose their dark money spending.

"The president is pleased with the final product, even if it does reflect the kind of compromise that's necessary when you have a Democratic president negotiating with large majorities of Republicans," said press secretary Josh Earnest after Obama signed off of the latest budget bill.

What on earth did they threaten him with? This is very disappointing. The most powerful country in the world will be run by a handful of unelected oligarchs whose only goal will be to get even more filthy rich regardless of the cost in lives and suffering.