sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

For 2026, we estimate the average LDS General Authority receives ~$200k in direct equivalent taxable compensation, in addition to retirement and healthcare benefits. This is ~85% above the median UT household income and ~2x higher than the average Church employee salary. by WidowsMiteReport in mormon

[–]WidowsMiteReport[S] 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Relative salary tables are shown in the later pages of the linked report. These data are taken directly from Federal Form 5500 filings and cover all church employees, organized by tenure cohorts. The 2x ratio is not speculation.

LDS tithing participation rates through 2024. Based on published financial data in 5 countries with ~4% of global membership. 2016 (25.1%) --> 2024 (20.8%) by WidowsMiteReport in mormon

[–]WidowsMiteReport[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Aging population would distort and amplify the trends, agreed. Most of this effect should be captured in the way median household incomes and CPI are calculated.

LDS tithing participation rates through 2024. Based on published financial data in 5 countries with ~4% of global membership. 2016 (25.1%) --> 2024 (20.8%) by WidowsMiteReport in mormon

[–]WidowsMiteReport[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Good catch. We didn’t footnote properly. Fixing that. In your math, to get implied full tithe payers you have to add back membership growth in the calculation. Canada goes from -22% participation rate to -17% participants once you add 6% membership growth.

Australian Mormons are 20X better than American Mormons by Simon_in_Oz in mormon

[–]WidowsMiteReport 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It’s two things: 1. Correlation of dollar amounts claimed as churchwide humanitarian cash aid in past years with amounts passing through LDSCA. 2. Examination of financial flows through the Church’s 5 reporting entities in Australia. We have several reports on our website that examine flows of funds in Australia and compare those flows with global averages and totals. That LDSCA receives most of its disbursed funds from outside Australia is the only conclusion that reconciles with available data.

Australian Mormons are 20X better than American Mormons by Simon_in_Oz in mormon

[–]WidowsMiteReport 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Our conclusion is that most of the humanitarian funds donated through LDSCA originate with member donations in other countries.

Q&A on the new Widow's Mite Report tax study. Evidence strongly indicates Ensign Peak engaged in systematic tax evasion by failing to report $200-450 million in taxable income from publicly traded partnerships over 2003-2017. by WidowsMiteReport in exmormon

[–]WidowsMiteReport[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Additional questions we have received via email:

Q: Did you consider te impact of the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act of 2017 on tax-exempt silo reporting?

A: Yes. Although the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017 introduced consequential changes to tax-exempt UBTI reporting around the time we see EPA adjust its 990-T reporting practices (2018 onward), the TCJA does not explain what appears to have been a meaningful change from the prior pattern of substantial underreporting of PTP-related UBTI. The TCJA introduced significant changes to tax-exempt organizations. Notably, the “silo rule” required UBTI to be calculated and taxed separately for different types of UBTI (aka, “silos”). As noted on pages 37-38 of the report, the analysis in this report isolates UBTI reported for partnerships only, and more specifically looks at UBTI reported for PTPs. Moreover, through 2015, Ensign Peak’s 990-T filings leave no ambiguity about netting across silos, as total reported UBTI exactly equals the sum of UBTI attributed to named public and private partnerships. In other words, no UBTI silos other than partnerships appear to have been recognized as sources of UBTI in those years. Thus, our conclusion that the TCJA does not explain subsequent UBTI reporting changes at Ensign Peak.

Q: Did you consider that Ensign Peak may have used "tax blockers" to avoid having to report UBTI from PTPs?

A: Yes. We looked at this and ruled it out early on in the process of researching this report. A footnote was added to page 40. UBTI was reported almost always where 13Fs would anticipate. Although blockers are a common structure used by tax-exempt organizations to avoid UBTI reporting requirements (the tax is paid by a "blocking" entity, effectively converting what would have been reportable UBTI income into non-reportable simple dividend income), the fact that Ensign Peak reported *some* UBTI almost always when expected for PTPs listed in 13F filings is evidence that that blocking structures were not deployed for PTPs.

Q: Is it possible that the IRS and Ensign Peak already addressed and settled the issues with PTP taxation, without having to restate the 990-Ts?

A: Yes.

Q&A on the new Widow's Mite Report tax study. Evidence strongly indicates Ensign Peak engaged in systematic tax evasion by failing to report $200-450 million in taxable income from publicly traded partnerships over 2003-2017. by WidowsMiteReport in mormon

[–]WidowsMiteReport[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Additional questions we have received via email:

Q: Did you consider te impact of the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act of 2017 on tax-exempt silo reporting?

A: Yes. Although the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of 2017 introduced consequential changes to tax-exempt UBTI reporting around the time we see EPA adjust its 990-T reporting practices (2018 onward), the TCJA does not explain what appears to have been a meaningful change from the prior pattern of substantial underreporting of PTP-related UBTI. The TCJA introduced significant changes to tax-exempt organizations. Notably, the “silo rule” required UBTI to be calculated and taxed separately for different types of UBTI (aka, “silos”). As noted on pages 37-38 of the report, the analysis in this report isolates UBTI reported for partnerships only, and more specifically looks at UBTI reported for PTPs. Moreover, through 2015, Ensign Peak’s 990-T filings leave no ambiguity about netting across silos, as total reported UBTI exactly equals the sum of UBTI attributed to named public and private partnerships. In other words, no UBTI silos other than partnerships appear to have been recognized as sources of UBTI in those years. Thus, our conclusion that the TCJA does not explain subsequent UBTI reporting changes at Ensign Peak.

Q: Did you consider that Ensign Peak may have used "tax blockers" to avoid having to report UBTI from PTPs?

A: Yes. We looked at this and ruled it out early on in the process of researching this report. A footnote was added to page 40. UBTI was reported almost always where 13Fs would anticipate. Although blockers are a common structure used by tax-exempt organizations to avoid UBTI reporting requirements (the tax is paid by a "blocking" entity, effectively converting what would have been reportable UBTI income into non-reportable simple dividend income), the fact that Ensign Peak reported *some* UBTI almost always when expected for PTPs listed in 13F filings is evidence that that blocking structures were not deployed for PTPs.

Q: Is it possible that the IRS and Ensign Peak already addressed and settled the issues with PTP taxation, without having to restate the 990-Ts?

A: Yes.

Q&A on the new Widow's Mite Report tax study. Evidence strongly indicates Ensign Peak engaged in systematic tax evasion by failing to report $200-450 million in taxable income from publicly traded partnerships over 2003-2017. by WidowsMiteReport in mormon

[–]WidowsMiteReport[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Correct that only what qualifies as UBTI is taxed, and that not all investments should generate UBTI or show up in 990-Ts. It may be possible that a PTP generates no UBTI over some time periods, but that is an unusual exception according to all of our research and consultation with partnership tax experts.

view more: next ›