New Financial Arrangements

Joe Grundy

Dear Friends

I never was a dub. I am not a qualified lawyer or accountant. I was a commander of a police fraud squad for ten years and arrested and took to trial many qualified lawyers and accountants, which often required knowing their 'professional' stuff better than they did. Just setting the background here.

I have followed the new-light financial arrangements as disclosed here on JWN as best I can and (as a disinterested party) I have grave concerns. The 'new light' arrangements are NOT beneficient - there are substantial accounting implications and sure as eggs is eggs this has been fully thought through by WTBTS lawyers and accountants.

The vast majority of dubs won't question things, of course, because they're conditioned not to. Regulatory authorities in various countries may, I suggest, look at WTBTS as just another inconsequential wacky religious sect and thus not worthy of a closer look.

'Something is afoot' as they say. I would encourage any and all who come across financial information to continue to post it. Hopefully things may become clearer.

My personal interest is that I have met and know ex-dubs who have suffered at the hands of the organisation. It is, in my opinion, wicked.

james_woods

Thank you, Joe. I seldom post here these days, but your statement is as clear as Beefeaters Gin.

And ISupport it completely.

BTW, nice to see your words again from the old days.

James

JeffT

I'm an accountant. I've had major concerns about this from the get go. Unfortunately the lack of transparency in the Watchtower organization makes financial analysis impossible. Clearly this is a major money grab as both assets (the kingdom halls) and cash are now under the control of the WTBS, where they were not before. This could equal billions of dollars net gain on the Society's books.

Unfortunately, since the local elders seem to be voting to go along with it, its probably legal.

DesirousOfChange

This could equal billions of dollars net gain on the Society's books.

I'm still betting that once most JWs see that they don't have a mortgage that they owe to anyone; and as soon as things get a little tight financially at home; the first thing to get chopped will be the CA$H that goes in the Contribution Box. Because no one will know. It was anonymous.

Everybody cuts back $10 BUCK$ and the donation to WTS drops $200 BUCK$.

The CO will raise hell with the Elders.

The Elders will give kindly reminders at the Local Needs talk.

The Flock will expect that everyone else will pick up the slack and it will still be short by $200 BUCK$.

The little old widow sisters that faithfully but in their $100 checks each month will die off and the funds will dwindle even more.

WTS: You better wisely invest that CA$H COW you just received.

It's gonna dry up.

Doc

Suspicious

Funny you brought this up. We just had our 1st local needs on not contributing enough. Because of this, a resolution was passed to lower the amount we pay from $300 to $200 a month. It's beginning... Reality will set in hard. Either way, I don't believe the WTBTS is strapped for money still.

Joe Grundy

James: Thank you. Appreciated. I feel sometimes that I am not so qualifird to comment here (as a never-was dub) but sometimes needs must.

JeffT: Point taken. One of the differences between 'standard' audits and those undertaken under 'money laundering', RICO. and criminal investigation audits (I have some experience of this in both UK and US federal procedures) is that it is possible to get 'underneath' a lot of standard accounting stuff. I can only speculate but I assume that under current US Homeland Security legislation it is now possible to dig a lot deeper than ever before into accounts, etc.

If, as I understand it, millions of dollars in loans to KHs have been 'forgiven' to be replaced by non-enforceable pledges then that will substantially alter the WTBTS balance sheet.

I bow to your professional view on this. I am perturbed.

Regards

committeechairman

As I understand non-profit accounting SOP and IRS tax regulations, the pledges (if the branch office is notified of them - I'll have to re-read the letter) would consitute "income" and would have to be treated as such at the time the pledge is made. If the congregation fails to live up to the pledge, those amounts must be written off in a manner similar to bad debt. If the pledges are NOT reported officially to the branch office, as I understand it no income would be recorded except for actual contributions being transmitted/sent in.

As for the loans, previously they would have had to be carried on the books as loans receivable assets. If the loans were forgiven, then the receivable balances would have been written off as allowances, contributions (most likely), or bad debts (which they really aren't - this is the result of a policy change). Once these assets are gone off the books, this would relieve the organization of some kinds of jurisdictional property tax reporting requirements (which they probably do not owe taxes on but are required to report nonetheless).

So, just thinking out loud, it kind of looks like the organization just cut down the size of their tax/income/regulatory radar signature to something much less detectable. I wonder if that's the overarching strategy at play here. For sure there must be an angle. What it is will become clear very soon, I think.

CC

Joe Grundy

I bow to superior Knowledge here and recognise that there are differences between jurisdictions.

If WTBTS (and/or its tentacles) had formal loan agreements against KHs, they would have been assets on the WTBTS balance sheet, liabilities on the KH balance sheet. If that loan is ;forgiven' legally it reduces the WTBTS assets, reduces the KH liabilty. Replaced by a future (unenforcable?) donation payment by the KH, so WTBTS 'donation' income goes up.

I am trying to think this through. No doubt WTBTS have already done so.

Most times I am happy that I have retired. But just now I feel frustrated that I don't have the facility to get behind all this because there are shenanigans going on for sure.

LoisLane looking for Superman

Hi Joe Grundy, I want you to know that I value your opinion, especially since you have never been a JW.

I was born in, and surrounded by JDumism my entire life.

I really haven't gotten to know normal people, without witnessing to them, and that is not going to be any kind of a normal interaction between adults.

You and jgnat present logical and sound thinking, without it being filtered through any type of pre-existing WT twisted sayings.

There are a few more that were never JW's that post, and all of your comments are appreciated and listened to.

JW's are, sweet little abused sheep, for the most part. This excludes GB and other high ups that are in for their ego's etc.

Thank you Joe for taking the time to follow what WT/GB is up to, and caring.

LL

JeffT

What I've been trying to get my head around is the idea that they replaced the loans receivable with real estate owned. I THINK (but I'm not sure) that part of the current deal was to transfer ownership of the halls from the xyz congregation to the society itself. Let's say the land and building are worth $200,000 and they had a $100,000 loan. The WTBS writes off the receivable and the congregation writes off the debt. So far we're even. But as part of the deal, the local elders turned the hall over to the Society, which now has a 200,000 building where it used to have the loan. A net gain of $100,000.

I'm working with a non-profit right now, a school which is trying to raise money for a new building. I've learned that banks are leary of donations because they can go away. A pledge, especially one in writing, is much more favorable. The banks regard pledges as much more solid sources of income. In this case the pledge comes from the congregation, not its individual members.

I just had a bad feeling about this, has anybody seen the actual form by which pledges are transmitted up the food chain? I'd sure love to see one.

New Financial Arrangements

Share this