My late Mormon father was a tax cheat. He hid money and underpaid his taxes. He was a devout Mormon, and he told me that he shouldn't have to pay taxes, because he paid tithing to the church. He attended seminars that taught tax evasion. I remember us arguing about this to the point that I said, paying taxes is a moral imperative if you use the services funded by taxation. He disagreed.

I wonder how many will read this and agree with my father's position. I will say this, I won't vote for a tax cheat. No more than I will lie about my father's legacy, which is that of a child abuser and a deadbeat citizen.

OPie pays taxes ~



his dad would be disappoint ~



tax man is happy ~

Some time back, there was a message left on our phone stating that they were calling from the Internal Revenue Service, that we owed back taxes, and could be arrested immediately if not sooner. You get the picture.

As a retired Federal employee, I knew that IRS, like other Federal agencies, sends LETTERS about tax issues - not phone messages. And I had no reason to believe that there was any problem with our taxes.

I think we made a simple math error in one of our returns (not bad for 25+ years). IRS pointed it out, we corrected it and re-filed, solving the problem. I think we owed maybe eight dollars.

Don, your father was an amoral jerk. Your stories over the years have made that clear. After about 30 years, I've more or less gotten over my mother's innumerable cruelties during my childhood. Despite many threats to leave her money to somebody else, or a charity or something, she left us a sizeable estate that allowed us to buy a house and a vehicle that our combined 4 children could fit into.

The pain does fade with time. Trust me on this.

You have a good track record Catnip! I had to take the taxes over a while back and made a big boo boo. I accidently checked the Can someone else claim you on their taxes? box. At first I had a heart attack but it was easy to correct and they were helpful and nice about it. Go figure?

This is EXACTLY why there should be no "head of the family" crap. BOTH need to understand the finances, how to do taxes and the basic business of running a family/household. Life happens. Shit happens. You have to be prepared to step in.

I was going to report you for saying shit. But lately a lot of people been saying all kinda shit and getting away with it.

Bunch of shit, if ask me...

Shit happens is like life's a bitch. They are so cliché that they aren't swearing.

You two are so funny :)

+catnip:
"As a retired Federal employee, I knew that IRS, like other Federal agencies, sends LETTERS about tax issues - not phone messages. And I had no reason to believe that there was any problem with our taxes."

==Yes, I watch those shows on Youtube such as kitboga, JayBeeTV, Jim Browning, Trilogy Media, Scammer Payback, IRLrosie, JoJoBandit.


For example:
Trolling Indian Scammers and They Get Angry! #18 (Microsoft, IRS and Government Grant)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3qooG7t2EU
By JayBeeTV
Length = 12:40


IRS Scam Exposed (EXTENDED) - Ownage Pranks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSIO2z3qrwA
By Ownage Pranks
Length = 28:00

Let your friends, family, neighbors, strangers know that some Indians are scammers. Some are Pakistan, Nigeria, USA, Indonesia.

~~~~iceman9090

Probably the best example of mormon views on taxes is the stipend Mission Presidents receive and the clear tax guidance given to them.

Getting housing, transportation, medical, utilities, food, education and spending cash all tax free is an afront to the families paying for missionaries who starve and go without proper medical care or housing.

I agree. The tax-free "stipend" may be legal, but it is not moral.

So...the benefits (housing, transportation, medical, utilities, food, education, etc.) a Mission President receives for accepting a three-year unpaid non-salaried babysitting position is "not moral"? How so?

Since they've been allowed to proceed in their practices, it must be okay with the involved taxation authorities...

How come missionaries have to provide for themselves? Isn't it an admission by the church that babysitters perform valuable service?

If you babysit kids while their parents are at work, you're gonna get taxed. If you pay the babysitters in cash and don't tell the IRS, and they don't tell the IRS, I don't think the IRS would approve. They want to tax earned income because you're benefitting from your citizenship and the services they provide, like police/fire/paramedic/county hospital.

I wonder if when it comes time for US citizens who babysat for three years to figure out their Social Security retirement income, if they regret those lost three years, or try to scam the system somehow?

Mostly, though, I don't care, since tax avoidance has an honorably tarnished record in pretty much every country.

They are, in effect, receiving a salary and benefits via other means.

As a comparison, I'll use the Peace Corps. Peace Corps workers are also volunteers. They do not live in fancy homes, but instead in housing that is typical for the area in which they serve (much like the missionaries.)

According to the IRS, the following are allowable non-taxable expenses for Peace Corps workers: Travel allowances and living allowances for housing, utilities, food, clothing, and household supplies.

The following items are taxable:

*Allowances paid to your spouse and minor children while you are training in the United States,

*Living allowances designated by the Director of the Peace Corps as basic compensation. This is the part for personal items such as domestic help, laundry and clothing maintenance, entertainment and recreation, transportation, and other miscellaneous expenses,

*Leave allowances,

*Readjustment allowances or "termination payments."

Note the living allowances, IIRC all of which are routinely taken tax-free by Mormon mission presidents.

I could go along with a modest living allowance for the MP and his family, but IMO their "stipend" far exceeds a modest living allowance.

Meh. IMO since they don't receive any salary (unlike a G.A.) and are reimbursed for cash they lay out first, it is a break even at best situation for them. My two uncles who served as M.P.'s certainly did not get rich from the experience.

They are reimbursed for *everything* including gifts, house cleaners, and the cost of their children's education.

Considering the church is the landlord for most of the M.P."s residences, why wouldn't it pay for maintenance, cleaning, gardners, etc.? As far as children's education, usually at the age a member is made a M.P., their children are done with their schooling. Even so, that education is limited to BYU, a place the church owns. That would be like me giving volunteer helpers at my restaurant a free meal.

The key word here is "reimbursed". The LDS MPs are reimbursed for a great many things, but it is reimbursement - money that already came out of their pocket. AFAIK, they receive no money beyond that, which is to say they have zero income that ends up in their bank account that they get to keep. They are basically treading water financially, while on a mission. They have virtually no expenses, but no income either.

That said, in most cases if your employer supplied you a house and paid living expenses, that would be considered taxable income. According to IRS rules, even health insurance would normally be taxable income, except that employer supplied health insurance, even in the corporate world, is specifically exempted from being considered income.

The rules are different for churches. It is common for churches to supply housing for their ministers ("parsonages") and that practice is specifically exempted from being considered taxable income to the minister, in the same way your health insurance is not taxable income to you. I imagine all the perks that MPs get fall under that same umbrella. They are probably pushing that law to its limits, which is why LDS Inc repeatedly cautions MPs not to brag about how they are getting all this money "tax-free". They don't want the IRS to be re-thinking their rules.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/28/2020 04:12PM by Brother Of Jerry.

Yeah, IMO they are pushing the law to its limits. If the MPs lived more like Peace Corps volunteers, I'd be okay with it. As it is, their reimbursement provides a far more lavish lifestyle than is provided by my own salary (which is taxed to the limit of the law.)

Agreed.

"only the little people pay taxes"

Dave, this writ up of her tax fraud will fascinate you:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/04/17/10-notorious-tax-cheats-queen-of-mean-leona-helmsley-proved-little-people-can-put-you-in-jail/#2de185262d08

Not too long, worth reading to the end, where there's a real kicker.

I was living in NYC during the Helmslsy era. She was one of those larger than life New Yorkers who was always in the gossip columns. She did indeed have a hateful personality. She was known for being a horrible employer. I remember that comment that was attributed to her, "Only the little people pay taxes." It was very satisfying to see her sent to jail.

I see that the article says,

"She actually served only 21 months. She was released from prison in 1994 and was sentenced to community service. It later appeared that some of Mrs. Helmsley's employees performed the community service on her behalf."

Some people just don't know when to quit. They take, and take, and take, and whatever they take is never enough.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/28/2020 01:13PM by summer.

I know my dad faithfully gave his 10% and more..and always paid his taxes faithfully too. He was honest that way. But then again he wasn't wired like many other TBM'S like Don's old man.
Family, business, church.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/28/2020 01:14AM by Lethbridge Reprobate.

Apparently even people in very high public office agree with your father. Such people pay not even one penny towards our military, school lunches for poor children, the CDC, the NIH, or any other major agency fighting the pandemic, the Forest Service or the people fighting the fires, the salaries of Supreme Court Justices, or Secret Service protection for those eligible. They think this makes them "smart."

I think it's really come to a sad state of affairs when a single American school teacher of modest means pays more in Federal taxes than such people.

The WSJ reports how a very prominent career politician ("180 years in the Senate," according to a gaff/"joke"/whatever) shields huge amounts of money with the use of two "S" corporations. He and his wife (who dedicated her book to Edith Wilson, Regent during Woodrow's incapacitation) have their royalties, speech honoraria, and other revenues channeled to the "S" corporations, where they don't have to pay Social Security, workman's comp, Medicare, and other taxes. They then receive "distributions," not salaries or wages, which 1) muddy the revenue stream and 2) are taxed at a lower rate.

It's all legal. These tax policies are usually bipartisan. The businessman you cite may be smart, but the genius is with his tax preparers. I'm sure they earn their money. Mine does.

To get this political turn a bit more on-thread, "Mormon" Harry Reid entered public office from nowheresville, NV, of modest means, and left the Senate worth hundreds of millions.

To paraphrase our Thumbless Wonder, it's the "everybody does it" argument.

Here we go again: into the political fray.

I begrudge neither the Orange nor the Sleepy ones working the figures the best they (or their preparers) can. We need to stop listening to political rhetoric and attending to actual legal and tax legislation. Problem is that lobbyists and congressional staffers write the laws. I wonder how many legislators actually understand what they're voting on?

Two differences:

One helped write and pass the tax laws, the other didn't.
One made (and lost and made again) a fortune, then went into politics (Think Mitt Romney). The other went into politics and made a modest fortune. (Think Harry Reid.)

I'm a stickler for tax prep. My files of receipts is typically 3 inches thick, and the printed-out forms another 1.5 or 2 inches, IRS + state. If I pick up a quart of paint for a rental unit, that gets deducted-- Plus the mileage. My preparer costs are about .75% of my gross and worth it.

Uh, yeah. Summer posted something that had no partisan angle and you reply with:

"'Mormon' Harry Reid entered public office from nowheresville, NV, of modest means, and left the Senate worth hundreds of millions."

It was thus you who turned the discussion partisan. This is another case of someone pretending they are being neutral when they are in fact doing the opposite.

Harry Reid, Mitt Romney, and Joe Biden do not face credible claims of illegality let alone massive tax fraud. They are not the same as Trump and no amount of equivocation can render them equivalent. There are likewise no new tax laws that will fix the problem with someone who is perfectly willing to violate the existing tax laws.

This is not, as you suggest, a problem that the legislature can resolve: it's a criminal matter.

Good try, though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/28/2020 04:53PM by Lot's Wife.

>>This is not, as you suggest, a problem that the legislature can resolve: it's a criminal matter.


Hopefully, in time, it will be treated as such.

The usual pattern is some poster makes a thinly veiled wisecrack about the current POTUS, (e.g "bone spur"). In this case, Summer posted, "They think this makes them 'smart.' I think it's really come to a sad state of affairs when a single American school teacher of modest means pays more in Federal taxes than such people."

This is what the pundits call a dog whistle, to prick up the ears of those who are ideologically attuned. The reference to a school teacher indicates familiarity with a current political ad.We all know whom she was referencing.

Then some conservative will snipe back, and Lot's Wife & Co. roll out the artillery. Then it becomes a firefight: a sniper or two against a rifle company, until the mods shut it down, usually after the progressives got the last shots in.

In the interest of balance, I used two former senators (R & D) plus the two presidential contenders. The issue is bipartisan. I notice no disagreement in that these laws are written by congressional aides and lobbyists (on cocktail napkins, I imagine).

To say that DJT "face(s) credible claims of illegality let alone massive tax fraud" is unfounded at most, premature at least. "Lots" (pun intended) of pundits on the political left are quite convinced, and have convinced their flock. Whether the IRS and/or DOJ (notably, the highly partisan SDNY) does so remains to be seen. However, in the court of public opinion...

The usual solution is for IRS and the tax-prep people to re-do the figures, recompute the tax due, add in interest and penalties. Unless you're some kind of deplorable.

What is undoubtedly criminal is the leaking and publishing of confidential tax data. Attorney Lin Wood may be picking up another high-profile client.

> This is what the pundits call a dog whistle, to
> prick up the ears of those who are ideologically
> attuned.

Crime is not partisan, caffiend, unless you insist that an incumbent is the arbiter of his own actions, and summer is not one to use a dog whistle.


--------------------
> The reference to a school teacher
> indicates familiarity with a current political
> ad.We all know whom she was referencing.

It doesn't matter, but I have never seen that political ad.


--------------
> In the interest of balance, I used two former
> senators (R & D) plus the two presidential
> contenders. The issue is bipartisan. I notice no
> disagreement in that these laws are written by
> congressional aides and lobbyists (on cocktail
> napkins, I imagine).

Bright shiny object. As bad as US tax law is, the question in this instance is criminal misconduct.


----------------------
> To say that DJT "face(s) credible claims of
> illegality let alone massive tax fraud" is
> unfounded at most, premature at least.

It sounds like you don't know the meaning of the word "credible." I did not say he was guilty; I said there is enough evidence--a write-off of $70,000 for haircuts, which are not deductable, and $740,000 for Ivanka's "consulting" to increase his personal deductions--to render the charges "credible" and deserving of investigation.


---------------
> "Lots" (pun
> intended) of pundits on the political left are
> quite convinced, and have convinced their flock.
> Whether the IRS and/or DOJ (notably, the highly
> partisan SDNY) does so remains to be seen.
> However, in the court of public opinion...

The SDNY is "highly partisan?" I guess if the president repeats that claim enough, it becomes true.


-----------------
> The usual solution is for IRS and the tax-prep
> people to re-do the figures, recompute the tax
> due, add in interest and penalties. Unless you're
> some kind of deplorable.

Nonsense. Marginal mistakes by normal people with normal expertise are treated that way, but massive intentional "mistakes" by people with professional accounting staffs are treated as crimes.


---------------
> What is undoubtedly criminal is the leaking and
> publishing of confidential tax data. Attorney Lin
> Wood may be picking up another high-profile
> client.

False. Leaks are criminal if and only if they come from sources that are legally prohibited from such disclosures. You presume, without evidence, that the NYT piece is based on such.

THAT presumption "is unfounded at most, premature at least."

>>The reference to a school teacher indicates familiarity with a current political ad.

No clue what you are talking about. I'm a veteran urban teacher of nearly a quarter century. I pay every penny of Federal income tax that I owe. The only deduction that I am currently allowed is the $250 above the line exemption for teacher expenses. In a typical year, that $250 doesn't even come close to covering my school expenses. So I not only pay what I owe, but them some. In the eyes of certain rich people, I am a "little" person, and therefore of no consequence. If I am cheated via the tax law in relationship to them, they feel better about themselves. They feel, "Smart."

I am considering recommending public school teaching to the current inhabitant of 200 Pennsylvania Avenue, since his line of work for the past 18 years has clearly not provided him with a good enough income to pay more than $750 in Federal income taxes (-- at the most. For most years, he pays nothing.) $750 is about what someone who is earns $18K a year pays in taxes, and I'll bet most of those people pay their taxes as faithfully as I do.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/28/2020 07:16PM by summer.

Excellent reply. We can claim $250 for my wife's expenses which while not The POTUS's hair expenses further show how little valued teachers are in the U.S. from the IRS perspective.

I have never understood the anti-tax sentiment among certain segments of society. Taxes are simply the charges that we incur for public services. Anybody is 100% free to not pay any taxes- as long as that person is 100% willing to forgo any and all public services. No fire department. No police protection. No use of public lands or roadways, at any time for any reason. No fair watching weather reports. You have to buy your own battleship to repel foreign incursions. And pay the crew. And buy the fuel yourself. You certainly cannot utilize GPS unless you buy your very own set of satellites. And no fair charging others to use your satellites, or battleship, or fire engines! That's taxes!

A large part of the antipathy towards taxes is the notion that some of the funds may be used to support the lifestyle of those who do not deserve assistance. By that they mean black people. And that is a very Mormon attitude.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/28/2020 08:08AM by slskipper.

slskipper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I have never understood the anti-tax sentiment
> among certain segments of society. Taxes are
> simply the charges that we incur for public
> services. Anybody is 100% free to not pay any
> taxes- as long as that person is 100% willing to
> forgo any and all public services.

You're free to not pay income tax by just making sure your income is low enough to qualify for every benefit available to you.

It's hard to avoid sales tax, gas tax, utilities, etc. so you pretty much have to pay them.

I don't like income taxes because it's too intrusive ... they don't need to know what I do for a living. I'd rather pay the above taxes based on usage of various services which are adjusted based on how much of the thing you use or consume.

> A large part of the antipathy towards taxes is the
> notion that some of the funds may be used to
> support the lifestyle of those who do not deserve
> assistance. By that they mean black people. And
> that is a very Mormon attitude.

Or the military

You are correct, there are other ways of paying taxes. As a country, we could do a VAT (value added tax) as some other countries do. However that does not change the fact that at present, we have income-based taxes on the Federal, and often, state level.

I agree slskipper. And remember, even your cell phone was developed thanks to taxes:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul/12/phone-state-private-sector-products-investment-innovation

Soft Machine Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree slskipper. And remember, even your cell
> phone was developed thanks to taxes:
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jul
> /12/phone-state-private-sector-products-investment
> -innovation

So Was GPS which a lot of us use weekly or more often...

The internet was also a DOD project. For that matter, so was the Interstate Highway System. And microwave ovens were a DOD spinoff, from radar, which of course was a DOD project.

ETA: The purpose of the Interstate Highways was primarily civilian in nature, but it did have defense aspects. The official title of the system in the 1956 highway act was “National System of Interstate and Defense Highways”.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/28/2020 04:28PM by Brother Of Jerry.

Just like the network of railroads that Germany built in the 1850s and 1850s, which were intended both to facilitate trade and to enable the rapid movement of troops to the borderlands; and the Trans-Siberian railroad, which was constructed to enable the speedy deployment of military power all the way to the Pacific.

Radar was British DOD during WW2...

Oh, come on. There had to be a Texan in there somewhere! ;)

Not a Texan, a Taxen.

Soft Machine Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Radar was British DOD during WW2...

MOD - Ministry of Defence (with a C)

The Americans grabbed a lot of things during the war and just before - English radar and computing, Soviet indoctrination methods and German rocketry.

Radar was not invented by the DOD. The concept was invented in multiple locations, but notably in the UK and English Commonwealth. The Commonwealth Countries had a conference on radar in the thirties, which America sent spies to. Further information was shared with the USA during the war.

The Germans also developed systems which were studied by the allies during the occupation of Germany.

So the DOD probably spent a lot of money on ideas which had already been researched. As usual, the Americans take credit for something.

Shared is an interesting word but hardly applicable in this case. Part of the price for the "free" Lend Lease a desperate Britain needed, along with various military bases around the world, all its gold reserves and numerous other things.

I pay more than $750.00 in taxes and my brand is worth four billion dollars.

If you're going to be a leader, lead. If you are a leader, lead by example. That goes for the President of the United States as well as the President of the Mormons. If you're a Christian and disagree with those sentiments - re-read your Bible.

Financial statements are soooo much more interesting than the Bible. Not hiding those talents...

Taxes are probably the major source for the national government's bill-paying ability.

Here in America, we have just topped 27 TRILLION DOLLARS in debt. As in money we're borrowed, and have to pay back, with interest.

I don't think America has one monthly payment on this $27,000,000,000,000, but if it did, and it was paying 0.015% monthly, like many of us did in the old days (now it's usually more!), that monthly payment would be $405,000,000,000.

https://www.calculator.net/big-number-calculator.html?cx=0.015&cy=27000000000000&cp=20&co=multiple


Big number, huh?

What could possibly go wrong?

Are you suggesting that present generations should pay for what they consume rather than passing the debts on to their progeny?

That's blasphemy, you un-American cultural-Marxist Orwellian libtard!

Look up fractional banking, and you will see how right you are. The name calling is a distraction. The gamble is everything anyone has to lose. We're on a tightrope. One side is fire and the other is hope.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/04/2020 07:39AM by donbagley.

I agree with you. It seems that any time we make progress on paying down what we already owe, it zooms right back up again in short order. IMO as a country, we need to learn to live within our means.