Conference yukon::christian_v7

I could find you plenty of quotes if that is what you really want
but surely this is just a pure and simple case of dishonesty, or
to put it another way Theft.

To collect unemployment benefit while still working it to take
something from the State under false pretenses is Fraud. The same as 
conning money out of "a little old lady". The only difference is that 
in this case the "little old lady" is somewhat richer. No matter
how well off the person you are taking the money from is, it is still fraud.

Having said all that of course, to your friend it is the difference between 
a job and no job, and if I was him I would certainly try and find any way 
I could to justify it to myself.

Hope this helps,

Scott 

    I'd say your instincts are right - he would be lying to the
    unemployment people, and stealing from them.
    
    you could try Exodus 20 as a starting point, tho I imagine there are
    many others....
    Romans 1 talks about decievers some...

    With regard to earning our keep, God's word says "That ye may walk
    honestly toward them that are without...." (1 Thes. 4:10).  As well, we
    are told to be "Providing for honest things, not only in the sight of
    the Lord, but also in the sight of men." (2 Cor. 8:21)  I am always
    wary whenever there is any sort of "under the table" or cash-only type
    of arrangement for the sake of escaping legal responsibilities.  We are
    to be honest in our dealings.
    
    Mark L.

I believe that Romans 13:1-7 holds the answer here... 

 "Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no
  authority except what God has established.  The authorities that exist 
  have been established by God.  Consequently he who rebels against the
  authorities is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do 
  so will bring judgement on themselves.  For rulers hold no terror for those 
  who do right, but for those who do wrong.  Do you want to be free from fear 
  of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you.  
  For he is God's servant to do you good.  But if you do wrong, be afraid, 
  for he does not bear the sword for nothing.  He is God's servant, an agent 
  of wrath to bring punishment on the wrong-doer.  Therefore it is necessary 
  to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment, but 
  also because of conscience."

This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants who 
give their full time to governing.  Give everyone what you owe him: if you 
owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; 
if honour, then honour.

Also Titus 3:1

 "Remind the people to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, 
  to be ready to do whatever is good....."

ie - live in good faith and conscience as regards the laws of the country, 
not conniving with the ways of the greedy, or selfish, who are money 
lovers.

Obviously there is a different situation when the laws of the country are 
in conflict with God's laws, but this does not arise in the case of .0.

						God bless
							Andrew

    Our friend called me a little while ago, he thought about what we
    told him and he asked if he doesn't collect un-employment then is
    it OK to be paid under the table.  Our reply was still no.
    
    What is your opinion
    

    
    
    I agree with your answer....
    
    			Fonz

    If this person's former boss can still use him, why did he get laid off ?
    The former employer sounds like  a cheap skate. He wants him to work
    for under the table so he doesn't have to pay workmen's comp and
    unemployment. 


    Jim

    Thanks for all of your replies, please pray that our friend finds
    a job soon, he gets depressed very easily and doesn't think very highly
    of himself when he does work and now it is even worse, pray for
    his family as well, they have a very heavy burden to carry, I
    cannot go into details at this time.
    
    Thank you

    understand and praying.....
    
    			Fonz

    Re: Note 428.8 by MRKTNG::BEALAND
    
>   they have a very heavy burden to carry
    
    Hmmm.
    
    If taking money under the table (in darkness?) is the lesser evil to
    some other problem, such as starvation, then take it...
    
    But first prove to yourself that there is no other alternative?
    
    James

The problem is not so much with taking the job and accepting payment,
it is with _also_ going to the unemployment bureau and accepting jobless
benefits, i.e., claiming that you are not working when you are.

/john

A few more thoughts for you:

If accepting money under the table means not paying tax etc on it then
it is still going to be wrong.

Having said that, and everything that has gone before, the consensus
of opinion basically boils down to it is wrong to do this as a Christian
Because he is a Christian he hasn't got a job.

You may find that this becomes a problem for him. 

Will pray,

Scott

    I don't remember where or who these sayings come from, but they make
    sense to  me.

    "If you can't be honest with the little things, what will you do with
     larger things ?" 

    "The lie you tell today will force you to lie tomorrow."


    Jim

 You can include any income you want on your 1040. It usually comes under
 something like "other income" or "misc income" or some such. I have done it
 in the past for odd job work, and one needn't document the source 
 (on the 1040).

 Theoretically, you should receive a form 1099 from the payor, but thats not 
 your responsibility.

 One could  1) not file for unemployement  2) work and accept wages with
 nothing witheld 3) file quarterly estimates and tax payments 4) file at the 
 end of the year using Scedule C and self-employment forms.

 You will have done nothing wrong unless you agreed to "under the table" and
 even though you did all the above you might be guilty of not avoiding "even
 the appearance of evil". 

                  Hank

>    I don't remember where or who these sayings come from, but they make
>    sense to  me.
>
>    "If you can't be honest with the little things, what will you do with
>     larger things ?" 
    
    Now, THAT one I can tell you where it came from:
    
    Luke 16:10 He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also
        in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in
        much.
     11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon,
        who will commit to your trust the true riches?
    
>    "The lie you tell today will force you to lie tomorrow."

    I remember someone once saying, "It's best to always tell the truth. 
    Then you never have to try to remember what you said."
    
    Mark L.

    RE:15
    I think the second one came from a fortune cookie, but what the heck.;)
    
    Jim

See note 286.14 on Ethics
and note 286.33 on Honesty
and note 286.39 on Integrity
and note 286.46 on Lying

Also, (as a reminder) you can see what Proverbs has to say on many subjects
by typing DIR 286.* at the notes prompt.

    Thanks again for all of your replies, we spoke to our friend last
    evening and he was thankful that he did not agree to comform to
    dishonesty.  He seems to be at peace and is eagerly looking for
    employement.  Please continue to keep him and his family in prayer,
    he still has severe bouts of depression that make it difficult
    to deal with everyday issues.
    
    

    The final question would be would you work for someone who suggested
    the collecting unemployment and being paid under the table.
    
    Sparky

    Since we're on the subject...
    
    Here's a question.  I owned an old truck (1984 Dodge Ram).  The Book
    value comes to about $400.00.  Being a nice guy, I sold it to a friend
    of mine in our church for 1 dollar.  There were alot of problems with
    the truck like holes in the floor, bad breaks, bad tires, etc.
    
    It didn't dawn on me until this weekend that I could have donated this
    truck and got a tax deductible receipt for $400.00.  At the same time,
    my friend can really use this as a yard truck.  
    
    One of my primary goals in life is to give the Clinton's as little
    money as possible.  I realize we need to render to Ceasers what is his.
    Having said this, do you think it would be an inpropriety to rip up the
    initial Purchase and sale, donate the truck to the church, then have
    the church sell it to this guy for a dollar?
    
    Thanks,
    
    -Jack

    RE:20

    We should give in the spirit of charity and compassion. If you 
    gave to the church for the purpose of taking the tax deduction,
    there would be little merit in that, even though you would be
    legally right. However, you gave the truck to the friend because
    you thought of him first. That should be anyone's first most
    reason for giving.

    Jim

>One of my primary goals in life is to give the Clinton's as little
>money as possible.

I can certainly identify with wanting to cut tax as much as I can ;-)

>do you think it would be an inpropriety to rip up the
>initial Purchase and sale, donate the truck to the church, then have
>the church sell it to this guy for a dollar?

Recognize that I have a tendency to be a tad black/white legalistic, but
it sounds a little like money laundering thru the church if the purpose of
donating is for the church to do a pass-thru to someone else.

FWIW,

-Steve

�    One of my primary goals in life is to give the Clinton's as little
�    money as possible.  I realize we need to render to Ceasers what is his.

Take away what little they think they have... ?
They've no spiritual hope, and you grudge them the meagre material
substitute they plug their lives with....?  CHtongueEEK of course, but 
not without a little truth.  If we behave as though money were more 
important than goodwill, love, etc, even more important than those who are 
lost [so far] to the kingdom, how are we ever going to convince them, 
either that heaven matters, or that they matter as real people, let alone 
eternal beings.  

It sounds to me like giving treasure on earth more weight than treasure in
heaven.  OK - so the 'recipients-via-tax' will never know, but your mind 
will be conditioned that bit more...

Now if you really wanted the church to receive more money, you could 
	(a) get your friend to donate the real value of the truck to 
	    church (then the gift would really be from him, unless you 
	    had agreed the price with him first, but donated it to the 
	    church on receiving it yourself - too late for that).
	(b) Give the truck to the church, who would then sell it to your 
	    friend.  Your gift, but too late for this too, now.
	(c) Do the fiddle you suggested, when the church would be donated 
	    the sum by the generosity of the government, in which case I'd 
	    feel obliged to be grateful to them, rather than grudging about
	    their rightful portion (even if it's a greedy whack, and even 
	    if it's mis-used).

Our God owns all the world's resources by right of creation (Haggai 2:8). 
He's not constrained to penny-pinch to get His work through.  And as it was
He Himself who said "render to Caesar what is Caesars", we're not going to
leave Him out of pocket.  If we want to be generous to God, the generosity 
has to come from our own pocket.  If we want someone else to be generous to 
God, we should let them also enjoy the blessing which goes with it...

							...Andrew

If you take a tax deduction of $400 knowing in advance that the organization
to which you donate the car is only getting $1, you have committed fraud.

You can only take the fair market value, i.e. what a willing purchaser would
pay a willing seller.

You have not committed fraud if you take a reasonable value (such as the
assessed tax value for a running car in crummy shape, or the blue book
value for a car in reasonable shape) when donating if you don't know in
advance how much the charitable organization is going to get.

/john

    Hi Jack!
    
    How's the new baby? :-)  Thinking about new baby responsibilities, eh? 
    It's understandable how when you have an additional responsibility,
    that fiscal sight becomes so important.  :-)
    
    Knowing you as I know you, I know in your heart, the giving of the
    truck to your friend remains in tact regardless of the venue... and
    also knowing you as well as I do, I believe that your trying to be
    fiscally responsible to your family [not the Government = Clintons].  
    
    If you were in the beginning stages of the transaction and this venue
    was made apparent to you, then I'd use it.  But since it comes after
    the gift, I believe you gave as God laid it on your heart, and let Him
    do the blessing.
    
    What's better, God's blessing or the governments?  In this case, I
    don't think you can have both.
    
    In His Love,
    Nancy
    

    Thanks to all of you for your replies.  I was thinking of the parable
    in Luke about the shrewd businessman. Remember how he was fired for not
    keeping his bosses accounts?  He went to all those in debt and said if
    you pay half the total now, I will forgive the rest.  Although Jesus
    didn't necessarily condone the actions of this person, he seemed
    complimentary in regards to his shrewdness.
    
    On the other hand, the Holy Spirit did give me a slight feeling of
    uneasiness.  I was going to approach the church treasurer (a good
    friend) and ask if this would be possible.  However, I chose not to.
    
    Now I will not even though I still want to.  Admittedly, my intentions
    were strictly business for this idea and it does resemble money
    laundering!  
    
    Thanks very much for all your advice.
    
    In Christ,
    
    -Jack

>If you take a tax deduction of $400 knowing in advance that the organization
>to which you donate the car is only getting $1, you have committed fraud.

That's not quite true.  I know in advance that a significant percentage of
the money that I give to the church will not actually go to the church - in
effect the church only "gets" a portion of the money.  Some of the money that
the church does not keep will go to other charitable organizations, some will
go directly to individuals who need help.  Some portions of the money that I
give, for example to our deacon's fund, I know will all go directly to people
who need help - the church won't "get" any of it.  I may even know who some
of the people who will receive the money are.  Yet none of this is fraud.  A
significant portion of the money I give goes to pay my pastor's salary.  That
isn't fraud either.

The spirit of the charitable deduction rule in income taxes is that you don't
have to pay taxes on money that you give away to help other people.  This has
to go through specific approved charitable organizations to keep people from
claiming deductions on money that they give to friends, or give with other
motives.  But basically the charitable organizations are "trusted" (within
some limits) to distribute the money given to them in a charitable manner,
after paying their own costs.

So I believe that it is perfectly within the spirit of the law, not just the
letter of the law, to donate money and/or possessions to the church with the
intent that they be given to someone else.  So long as you do not receive a
return benefit from the church or from the person to whom the object/money is
donated, this is precisely what the charitable deduction rule is for.  I
don't believe that this is "money laundering," it is in effect no different
than having a mission drive for some cause - for example earthquake relief. 
The money you give to that drive is expressly intended to be given "through"
the church, to other people who are in need, yet you would never consider
that to claim it as a deduction would be fraud.  I don't see this case as any
different in principle.  What would be fraud would be to claim as a deduction
money paid to the church for some services, such as a registration fee for a
retreat.

That said, there are a couple of caveats to that.  First, focusing on this
too much I think detracts from the spirit of giving.  Using a rather extreme
example, I don't think it is wrong in itself to donate money through an
organization to feed hungry people, such as a homeless shelter.  But if you
saw someone who was hungry and needed food, I don't think the Christlike
response would be to say "wait here, I have to go give some food to the
church so the church can bring it to you."  Being too concerned with
deductions can lead us to responses like that.

Second, I don't think it would be right for you to back up now on this
transaction.  You have sold the car to your friend for a dollar.  It is now
his car.  To pretend that you did not sell it, or to have him sell it back to
you for a dollar, with the express purpose of donating it to him through the
church so you can get the deduction, WOULD be fraud.  If you consider it to
now be his car (which it is), then it clearly would not be right for a person
to sell an object to someone else for a low sum, who would then donate it to
a church claiming a higher value for tax deduction purposes, which would then
give it back to the first person.  That IS money laundering.

Paul