#45835--Tithing and Income

[Nanti-SARRMM]

SWICKET'S BACKKKKKKKKKKKKK!!!!! HI SWICKET! I missed your cynicism.

He has also taken his cynicism to new levels by ignoring me because now I almost expect werf to comment on my non-sequitter ways. Bravo.

[Benvolio]

I guess I just figure, do I want net blessings or gross blessings?

Do you think it really works that way?

To actually answer Katya's question, I think the answer may be yes. To the extent that you do your best to comply with God's law, you are blessed. The statement above assumes that net tithing is inferior to gross tithing, so the payment of tithing on gross income is presumed to be the higher conformance with the law. However, if you sincerely believed that paying tithing on net income was the fullest extent of the law and you duly complied, then I think you would be entitled to the same blessings.

As an aside, note that when I talk of blessings, I'm not referring to promises of financial stability, wealth, or other pseudo-Calvinist concepts. The greatest blessing you are likely to receive from paying tithing is learning to sacrifice, humility, and obedience. A lot of people have tithing-related stories worthy of Ensign articles, but even if nothing "good" ever happens as a result of paying tithing, I think there are still blessings.

[Katya]

I guess I just figure, do I want net blessings or gross blessings?

Do you think it really works that way?

To actually answer Katya's question, I think the answer may be yes. To the extent that you do your best to comply with God's law, you are blessed. The statement above assumes that net tithing is inferior to gross tithing, so the payment of tithing on gross income is presumed to be the higher conformance with the law. However, if you sincerely believed that paying tithing on net income was the fullest extent of the law and you duly complied, then I think you would be entitled to the same blessings.

Yeah, that's the part that came up in another conversation, that God's not going to smack you down if you're doing the best you can with what you know.

[Nanti-SARRMM]

Do you think it really works that way?

To actually answer Katya's question, I think the answer may be yes. To the extent that you do your best to comply with God's law, you are blessed. The statement above assumes that net tithing is inferior to gross tithing, so the payment of tithing on gross income is presumed to be the higher conformance with the law. However, if you sincerely believed that paying tithing on net income was the fullest extent of the law and you duly complied, then I think you would be entitled to the same blessings.

Yeah, that's the part that came up in another conversation, that God's not going to smack you down if you're doing the best you can with what you know.

That is probably why the General Authorities haven't officially said which to pay, because God only asks of us our best, and they can only ask that as well.
That is a benefit of living in these days rather than under the law of moses, we are able to live as best we can without being shackled by the law.

[bismark]

everyone here is wrong.

[Nanti-SARRMM]

everyone here is wrong.

He's back! I wonder if he has noticed that SWKT has encroached on his snarkiness territory. This is truly a historic occasion.

[Dragon Lady]

That is a benefit of living in these days rather than under the law of moses, we are able to live as best we can without being shackled by the law.

Hmm... and now a whole new topic. You say that as if we no longer have to live the Law of Moses. (This is said with full realization that there are parts of the LoM that we no longer live, such as animal sacrifice. It is also said with the knowledge that the LoM has been fulfilled with Christ.) I was under the impression that the LoM was the lower law and that the Gospel as we know it was the higher law. It's not that we have a whole new and different law, it's simply that we have more. The Aaronic Priesthood is the lesser priesthood; the Melchizedek Priesthood is the higher priesthood. When we got the Melchizedek Priestood we didn't do away with the Aaronic, simply because it was lesser... we just added onto it.

Look at it this way, when you're a kid, your parents tell you not to play with matches. They hide the matches from you. When you find the matches, they scold you and take them away. When you're older, they tell you to find the matches and will you please light that campfire? The lesser law of no matches is given to you because you don't have the capacity to fully understand and will hurt yourself. (The Israelites didn't have the full capacity to understand and accept the responsibility of the Higher Law. They had lived for centuries surrounded by idol worship and not having the freedom to make their own decisions. They had lived as slaves. They didn't know how to suddenly build up their own nation and live their religion freely. They didn't know how to completely break away from the traditions of their pagan oppressors. God gave them the chance to live the Higher Law because he is good and fair and allows us opportunities to grow. The Israelites rejected that law... they weren't ready for it.) The higher law of using matches is given to you once you have matured enough to recognize the dangers of matches and have the ability to control and use fire for good. (The Israelites [aka us] were given the Higher Law with Joseph Smith because we had thousands of years to perfect the lesser law.)

No, we don't have to live the specifics of the Law of Moses. We don't have to worry about whether the meat we're eating was cooked on a dish that had ever touched dairy. We don't have to feel guilty about eating pork. We don't have to worry about what happens if our ox gores our neighbor. (Well, at least not religiously; I'm sure there would be legal ramifications.) But we do have to still live the principles. We should learn from the dietary law that God really does care about what we eat and how we treat our body. We should thus learn to pay attention to what we eat and learn what is good for us and what is not. We should learn from "what happens if an ox gores your neighbor" that it's important that we treat our neighbors well and to take responsibility for our actions.

How come everyone ignores the Law of Moses, but still lives the 10 Commandments? They fall under the same category. What should we learn from those? That we should love God and love our neighbor. If we did both of those, we wouldn't need 10 specific commandments. Rather, we'd still do all 10 of those, but we'd go further and do kind things for our neighbors, simply because we love them.

We aren't "shackled" by the law... we're freed by it. Yes, even by the Law of Moses.

Bringing it back to tithing... (which really wasn't the point of writing all of the above. Mostly Nanti-SARRMM's comment about the LoM just put me in a soapbox mood. But if I can bring it back to tithing, why not?) Right now we're living the lower law of tithing. Are we satisfied simply living the lower law? Shouldn't we be anxious to live the full law? The higher law? Are we selfish with our money, or are we looking for ways to help other people with it? Are we willing to give up everything we have to help someone else? (No, I'm not saying you should put your entire paycheck into tithing. I'm not even saying you should put more than 10% in.)

I'm not saying that anyone is a sinner for paying on net, nor am I saying that those that pay on gross will get to heaven first. In fact, anyone who tells you that one is more correct than the other is stepping out of line. If the Church doesn't make an official statement on it, it's up to your own personal discretion. The question was, "What do you do?" I was simply stating my motivation for paying on gross. I am not trying to impose my beliefs on anyone. M'dear SWKT Parachuter, I was not trying to be self-righteous. Merely, I was just stating my beliefs. Do with them what you will. Who would have ever guessed that 13 simple words "I guess I just figure, do I want net blessings or gross blessings?" would cause such a stir?

[Nanti-SARRMM]

Yeah. I was meaning being shackled under the rules that the pharisees put in place under the law of Moses, so sorry for being unspecific. So sorry for putting you in a soap boxy mood.

But thanks for the clarification anyways.

[Dragon Lady]

Ehhh... don't worry about it. It's not hard to put me in a soap boxy mood. I tend to talk a lot. And despite the common belief that I am indecisive (which is actually mostly true), I do have many opinions on random topics. Put the two together... soap box! Nothing personal... promise.

[Nanti-SARRMM]

Ehhh... don't worry about it. It's not hard to put me in a soap boxy mood. I tend to talk a lot. And despite the common belief that I am indecisive (which is actually mostly true), I do have many opinions on random topics. Put the two together... soap box! Nothing personal... promise.

No worries. It's what I get for posting stuff between silly outlook calls.

[vorpal blade]

I once knew a man who figured his tithing on his net increase for the year. He would take his salary and deduct all his living expenses. His new car, his education expenses, his food, clothing, travel, and entertainment – all were living expenses. Essentially he ended up paying ten percent on his net increase in his savings account. If he had less money in the bank than the previous year he figured the Church owed him money.

Can we find no fault in him, because it is his decision between him and the Lord? Is it just a personal interpretation of the law of tithing, and one person’s interpretation is as good as another? Does it only depend on what a person sees in his savings account? Since the Church doesn’t give us letter-of-the-law exact specifics does this mean that Lamoni was correct, “they supposed that whatsoever they did was right (Alma 18:5).” Is it all a matter of personal discretion? Does it really not matter, as long as you are consistent and comfortable with how you pay? Are we really free to pay tithing however we want? If you sincerely believed that paying tithing on net income, meaning your increase in your savings account, was the fullest extent of the law and you duly complied, would you really be entitled to the same blessings?

I’m reminded of my days as a missionary. A lot of people told me that it didn’t matter if they joined the Church or stayed in their old church. “God’s not going to smack you down if you’re doing the best you can with what you know.” Why bother to learn if tithing is a true principle? If you don’t know tithing is a true principle, you are doing the best you can with what you know by paying no tithing at all. Why bother learning what it means to live the word of wisdom? Why bother learning anything at all about God; you will be blessed the same in your ignorance as you would in your knowledge. What’s the point of missionary work? Or so they justified themselves.

[vorpal blade]

You know, in a country that allows you to count a charitable contribution as an itemized deduction, there really is a lot to be said for paying on your gross income. Let me give a somewhat oversimplified example. Suppose you actually had to pay 90% of all your taxable income to the government, and you earn $100,000. If you pay tithing on the after-taxes amount you give $90,000 to the government, leaving you $10,000. You then give the Church $1,000, and live on the remaining $9,000.

However, if you first pay $10,000 to the Church as tithing on your gross income of $100,000, you are left with $90,000 as taxable income. You then pay 90% of your taxable income ($90,000) giving $81,000 to the government. You are left with $90,000 - $81,000 = $9,000 to live on. This is exactly the same amount to live on as you would have had if you had paid tithing solely on the net income. The difference is when you pay on the net the Church gets $1,000. When you pay on the gross the Church gets $10,000. Personally, I’d rather the Church got the greater amount.

You get the same result whether the tax rate is 10%, 30%, or 68%. I realize that the example is oversimplified. I suppose that some countries do not allow deductions for contributions to their church. In countries like the United States and Denmark, the marginal tax rate goes up with income, so reducing your income by paying tithing might put you in a lower tax bracket, thus giving you even more money to live on when you pay tithing on the gross income. You could also throw the calculations off if in your situation it was better to take the standard deduction than to itemize deductions. My point is that perceived equality of tithing by paying on the net may be more of an illusion than reality.

[Nanti-SARRMM]

=

However, if you first pay $10,000 to the Church as tithing on your gross income of $100,000, you are left with $90,000 as taxable income. You then pay 90% of your taxable income ($90,000) giving $81,000 to the government. You are left with $90,000 - $81,000 = $9,000 to live on. This is exactly the same amount to live on as you would have had if you had paid tithing solely on the net income. The difference is when you pay on the net the Church gets $1,000. When you pay on the gross the Church gets $10,000. Personally, I’d rather the Church got the greater amount.

Umm, that isn't how that works. If the government takes 90% and you pay tithing on gross, the government takes out their money first, they don't wait for tithing to be taken out, so the gov gets $90,000, and if you pay gross, then you pay $10,000, and get nothing. It was an example made earlier in support of net tithing payment, which isn't nearly so valid because no country has 90% taxes at the moment, at least that I am aware of.

It would be awesome if that were the case, but then people would be donating money all the time to "charities" so they wouldn't have to pay as many taxes, so unfortunately, it is not the case.

[OptimusPrime]

Right now we're living the lower law of tithing. Are we satisfied simply living the lower law? Shouldn't we be anxious to live the full law? The higher law? Are we selfish with our money, or are we looking for ways to help other people with it? Are we willing to give up everything we have to help someone else? (No, I'm not saying you should put your entire paycheck into tithing. I'm not even saying you should put more than 10% in.)

This is kind of what I was getting at with my original post. I saw what looked to me like a lot of people justifying their decision to do as little as possible within the minimum restraints of the law, instead of trying to live the law as fully as possible, which is why I wanted to give an alternative opinion. I fully agree with the Church letting us decide how to pay tithing (teach us just principles and we will guide ourselves) and I agree that there may be tax situations where paying tithing on gross income causes unnecessary hardship, however, I think anyone who thinks the benefits of taxation, such as national defense, safety and health regulations, law enforcement, public education, educational grants, etc., are not part of his increase is fooling himself. Ideally, everyone would pay at some level between net and gross, not necessarily just one or the other, depending on their circumstances. You can keep your wagon wheels as close to that "net" cliff as you want, but seeing as how ridiculously well-off we are in America and how easy it is to do, I prefer to keep my wheels on the "gross" road. If the thought of paying more than net is negative, ask yourself why. If after honest evaluation of yourself it comes down to not wanting to give up "your" money, you may want to reevaluate your priorities. If it is due to the fact that you won't be able to live comfortably, even after cutting costs and living frugally, then more power to you.

[vorpal blade]

=

However, if you first pay $10,000 to the Church as tithing on your gross income of $100,000, you are left with $90,000 as taxable income. You then pay 90% of your taxable income ($90,000) giving $81,000 to the government. You are left with $90,000 - $81,000 = $9,000 to live on. This is exactly the same amount to live on as you would have had if you had paid tithing solely on the net income. The difference is when you pay on the net the Church gets $1,000. When you pay on the gross the Church gets $10,000. Personally, I’d rather the Church got the greater amount.

Umm, that isn't how that works. If the government takes 90% and you pay tithing on gross, the government takes out their money first, they don't wait for tithing to be taken out, so the gov gets $90,000, and if you pay gross, then you pay $10,000, and get nothing. It was an example made earlier in support of net tithing payment, which isn't nearly so valid because no country has 90% taxes at the moment, at least that I am aware of.

It would be awesome if that were the case, but then people would be donating money all the time to "charities" so they wouldn't have to pay as many taxes, so unfortunately, it is not the case.

That IS how it works. At my place of employment I fill out a form listing my dependents and an estimate of tax deductions that I am entitled to take. The amount withheld from my paycheck is calculated to be the amount I will have to pay in taxes at the end of the year after I have filled out my tax form and listed my dependents and tax deductions. I can elect to underestimate my tax deductions, in which case more money will be withheld than is necessary to pay my taxes at the end of the year. The excess I have withheld from me will be given to me as a tax refund after I file my tax return. I could elect to list so many tax deductions that nothing is withheld from my paycheck, but I would be given a big fine when I filed my tax return and it was shown than I had underestimated my taxes. So, knowing I will be giving ten percent of my gross salary to the Church as tithing, my employer deducts less taxes from my salary than he would have.

Don't get hung up on the 90% figure. It was used for illustrative purposes only. As I said, the principle is the same no matter what the tax rate.

People ARE donating money all the time to charities so they won't have to pay as much in taxes. There are rules, of course, about what constitutes a charity, and how much you can contribute, or else some people would be tempted to cheat and list every expense as a charity.

[Nanti-SARRMM]

That IS how it works. At my place of employment I fill out a form listing my dependents and an estimate of tax deductions that I am entitled to take. The amount withheld from my paycheck is calculated to be the amount I will have to pay in taxes at the end of the year after I have filled out my tax form and listed my dependents and tax deductions. I can elect to underestimate my tax deductions, in which case more money will be withheld than is necessary to pay my taxes at the end of the year. The excess I have withheld from me will be given to me as a tax refund after I file my tax return. I could elect to list so many tax deductions that nothing is withheld from my paycheck, but I would be given a big fine when I filed my tax return and it was shown than I had underestimated my taxes. So, knowing I will be giving ten percent of my gross salary to the Church as tithing, my employer deducts less taxes from my salary than he would have.

People ARE donating money all the time to charities so they won't have to pay as much in taxes. There are rules, of course, about what constitutes a charity, and how much you can contribute, or else some people would be tempted to cheat and list every expense as a charity.

Sorry then, my ignorance at the tax code and deductions has gotten the best of me it seems.

As far as the donations, that was what I was meaning to say, that people would cheat because of supposed loopholes or what not, at least to my understanding, but I was referring to that if people could do do their deductions how they please, then there would be more cheating...

So sorry for the tax ignorant statements.

[vorpal blade]

So sorry for the tax ignorant statements.

It's okay. Today is the first time I've posted in this forum. I've joined other discussion groups bfore this one. Usually people just continue to disagree with me when I disagree with them. It's refreshing to hear someone say, Sorry I was mistaken.

[jooniper]

If nothing else, vorpal blade, you introduced yet one more way to think about this, even if it went a bit over my head (don't know if it was the taxes or the mathematics that made my brain turn off;)).

[Nanti-SARRMM]

So sorry for the tax ignorant statements.

It's okay. Today is the first time I've posted in this forum. I've joined other discussion groups bfore this one. Usually people just continue to disagree with me when I disagree with them. It's refreshing to hear someone say, Sorry I was mistaken.

You'll hear that from me a lot. Hence the title of headache inducer, I'm sure so many people have gotten tired of correcting me that they have gotten head aches from it.

[Yarjka]

Great, now I have to understand the tax code to be a good Mormon!