by Gorbatchov 32 Replies latest jw friends
My only doubt as to what they did, is dumping everything at once. Considering that their properties are prime real estate I would think that a gradual sale of the properties was a better idea.
360 Furman Street
2004
https://www.jehovahs-witness.com/topic/70082/watchtowers-360-furman-street-bldg-sold
Apparently they've been selling since around 2004....
John Davis
Under the scenario that I was proposing the properties could be fully used until the completion of the sale. No need to have empty buildings or change the use. What this was going to involve was a decelerated lay off of the Bethelites.
At any rate, this is full of ifs and it is only an exercise in "what ifs?". What is done is done.
If you are selling the building where laundry was and you're not closing Brooklyn down totally you're going to bring in the cost to move laundry from one building to another for a short period of time, it can be said for any number of departments, from offices to maintenance shops. You would have to bring in the expense to make another building or floor work for that process, and if it is not for a long enough period of time then they don't get an ROI.
The problem is that with 'renting' out your buildings, you're still cash-poor. You may have the assets to put against eg. a loan or a judgment but I'm pretty sure they don't want to lose the buildings in case one of these multi-million dollar lawsuits goes awry because a fire sale is going to bring up much less cash.
The other 'problem' is that they're a "not for profit" and although they could have a bunch of buildings, if it's outside their primary purpose, there's a slew of taxes and other bureaucracy to make sure you're not a "for-profit" they may be edging against the borders between not-for-profit and for-profit as it is.
In the end, if they were 'investing', they would indeed have kept the old buildings some way or somehow, but they need the cash now for whatever reason which is why they're moving and selling in a buyer's market.
I am pretty sure any unit that is rented out, is taxable income. Whether the company renting /owning the building is a non for profit, or not.
@nonjwspouse: Yes, to a certain extent. There is a certain percentage of income you're allowed to have as a non-profit from what is otherwise taxable income, but if it exceeds that percentage, at some point you must disclose that income and file and pay taxes properly which makes you a much higher priority for "random" audits.
The disclosure changes, the taxes change and figuring it all out is a hellish job which any mistake could end up bringing your not-for-profit status in danger. I've done it once for a club where the previous treasurers failed to submit tax statements and keep proper track of member vs non-member income. The IRS isn't the best agency to cross in the US.
The IRS isn't the best agency to cross in the US.
Anony you said quite a mouthful there!
Honestly some of the people I ( and my father) have dealt with in the IRS should have been sued for harassment and at the very least fired for abusive behavior towards their "customers".
The IRS hassle is almost never ending once something is started.
It depends how much of a cash flow crises they have had,if you go on their own website they tell you that in 2012 they sold 20 branch headquaters around the world off and when that was not enough they had to make lots more cuts as well,They might have 8 million members on paper but how many of those are only still around because thet dont want to be shunned and dont give any money
All of this is a moot point anyway, as Armageddon is coming next year don't you know.!?
Hecce,
Maybe the GB fantasied that when the Twin Towers across the river was hit by terrorist in 9/11,, that Satan was getting ready to hit them so they are high tailing it to a safer distance from NYC and hiding like a bunch of scared rabbits in the woods for protection.
After all they are the ones who teach that their conventions back in the early 1900's were a pouring out of the plagues in Revelation. A sign of a printing corporation's egomania if ever there was one. Everything revolves around them no doubt played a significant factor.
