Ensign Peak Advisors

[Mormon Red Death]

Do you contribute to a charity, say Oxfam or UNICEF? Do you insist they tell you what exactly they are doing with your donation?

I don't donate to UNICEF but if I did my first stop would be to check how its spends $
https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/131760110

My favorite charity is Charity Water

I like them because the money I donate actually goes to providing water to the world

Here is their Charity rating

In short people are entrusting the Church with their money. They should be open about what they are doing with it.

[Green Monstah]

People grinding the same old axes. Yawn...

I sort of agree with you. If the church isn't going to change after getting fined by the SEC for pretty obviously unethical behavior, a bunch of yahoos arguing about it on the internet definitely isn't going to change anything.

[Green Monstah]

Do you contribute to a charity, say Oxfam or UNICEF? Do you insist they tell you what exactly they are doing with your donation?

Good point. I stopped contributing to United Way because so much money was going toward their inflated costs.

I don't even think the critics are asking for a line-by-line accounting. But we'd like to know how much is there and how much of it is being utilized for charitable purposes. I don't think that's a huge ask. But the fact that the church continues to dodge the question at bare minimum gives rise to innuendo, if not outright assumptions that the church has less-than-noble reason to hide the wealth.

And maybe that strikes at the real root of the issue: I don't necessarily believe the church is what it claims (i.e. God's true church). The church does so much good. But I do believe it could do a lot more.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I sort of agree with you. If the church isn't going to change after getting fined by the SEC for pretty obviously unethical behavior, a bunch of yahoos arguing about it on the internet definitely isn't going to change anything.

Very minor fine. And what makes you think they didn't change anything?

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-sta...e-of-portfolio

In a statement, church officials said over the time period investigated, none of their holdings had gone unreported and all had been disclosed through the separate companies. They said they had “relied upon legal counsel regarding how to comply with its reporting obligations while attempting to maintain the privacy of the portfolio" and noted that Ensign Peak had changed its reporting approach after learning of the SEC's concerns in 2019.

“We affirm our commitment to comply with the law, regret mistakes made, and now consider this matter closed,” they said.

[Green Monstah]

Very minor fine. And what makes you think they didn't change anything?

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-sta...e-of-portfolio

I'll be more precise: it didn't change their view on being transparent to the donors. You're right, the Church took the gargantuan step of complying with the plain language of the law.

So, I deal with SEC investigations fairly frequently (Moliere probably has an inkling as to why). I wouldn't call 5mm minor, but it certainly isn't throwing the book at the church, for sure. So far, I've been able to demonstrate good-faith compliance and have the matters closed in short order. So the fact that they issued a fine at all certainly represents a signal that the church didn't inadvertently fall into noncompliance.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I'll be more precise: it didn't change their view on being transparent to the donors. You're right, the Church took the gargantuan step of complying with the plain language of the law.

So, I deal with SEC investigations fairly frequently (Moliere probably has an inkling as to why). I wouldn't call 5mm minor, but it certainly isn't throwing the book at the church, for sure. So far, I've been able to demonstrate good-faith compliance and have the matters closed in short order. So the fact that they issued a fine at all certainly represents a signal that the church didn't inadvertently fall into noncompliance.

So, in summary: "pretty obviously unethical behavior" = not doing things the way you personally prefer.

[Green Monstah]

So, in summary: "pretty obviously unethical behavior" = not doing things the way you personally prefer.

Sorry, not at all. I think what the church did was unequivocally unethical and clearly illegal. I mean, you have google. Read the regs. They're in plain English. The church wanted a loophole that allowed them to get around the law, and as any first-year law student could tell you, no loophole existed (in fact, most advisement firms do the exact opposite of the Church...they report all of the holdings fo their funds and subsidiaries on a consolidated report).

.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Sorry, not at all. I think what the church did was unequivocally unethical and clearly illegal. I mean, you have google. Read the regs. They're in plain English. The church wanted a loophole that allowed them to get around the law, and as any first-year law student could tell you, no loophole existed (in fact, most advisement firms do the exact opposite of the Church...they report all of the holdings fo their funds and subsidiaries on a consolidated report).

.

You keep moving the goalposts.

I'll be more precise: it didn't change their view on being transparent to the donors.

[Green Monstah]

You keep moving the goalposts.

We're definitely not communicating well.

In the end, I think more (not less) transparency would put this all to bed. The church complied with its reporting requirements two years before the fine was announced, and the sky didn't fall. I think the same would be true if they were more transparent with their donors.

[MartyFunkhouser]

People grinding the same old axes. Yawn...

I'm not sure if this is same old axe grinding or not, but it is definitely worth a yawn. This whole topic is boring. I bet the 60 minutes story was boring.

[MartyFunkhouser]

As a bishop, I had great experiences with LDS social services. I wish I had used them more.

As a family law practitioner, I have had horrible experiences with them. They are absolutely not equipped to handle any court involved therapy.

[Jeff Lebowski]

We're definitely not communicating well.

In the end, I think more (not less) transparency would put this all to bed. The church complied with its reporting requirements two years before the fine was announced, and the sky didn't fall. I think the same would be true if they were more transparent with their donors.

Yeah, I am sure you and everyone else would be perfectly happy with transparency and never question how the church spends/invests its money.

[Northwestcoug]

Yeah, I am sure you and everyone else would be perfectly happy with transparency and never question how the church spends/invests its money.

Kinda coming in hot here!

Are you 'perfectly happy' with how the church spends its money? I thought you were on record expressing displeasure at the SEC affair.

[Green Monstah]

Yeah, I am sure you and everyone else would be perfectly happy with transparency and never question how the church spends/invests its money.

Sure, I'm sure there'd be a ton of pricks second-guessing the church. But why should the church care? They don't give AF about what the nay sayers think on a plethora of topics.

And as I said before, I'd simply like to know how much it has and where it's going. I'm sure other people would want something more granular than that, but I'm not one of those people.

[All-American]

Sure, I'm sure there'd be a ton of pricks second-guessing the church. But why should the church care? They don't give AF about what the nay sayers think on a plethora of topics.

And as I said before, I'd simply like to know how much it has and where it's going. I'm sure other people would want something more granular than that, but I'm not one of those people.

So would I, but I understand the decision not to.

Case in point. Under President Nelson there has been an explosion of temple-building activity. The growth in the building program far outpaces the growth in membership. Is this a matter of the church spending down reserves, using new construction techniques (like modular pre-fab) to lower costs, or something else altogether? It would be fascinating to know more about the reasoning, but it is unlikely that information will be publicly available anytime soon.