Christmas Fund

Discuss questions around local unit policies for budgeting, reconciling, etc. This forum should not contain specific financial or membership information.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 34422
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Re: Christmas Fund

#21

Post by russellhltn »

warnick wrote:He also told me that the church prefers that "Christmas Fund" type donations be made to the Fast Offerings category.
As long as the assistance given is consistent with church policies for assistance, that seems like the best way to do it.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 15153
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Draper, Utah

Re: Christmas Fund

#22

Post by aebrown »

warnick wrote:Our stake financial clerk ... told me that the church prefers that "Christmas Fund" type donations be made to the Fast Offerings category. Is this documented anywhere?
I can't imagine that this preference is explicitly documented, but it's easy enough to read two documents and reach that inescapable conclusion.
  • Handbook 1, Section 5.2 explains how we are to help the poor and needy, and although several specifics are mentioned, including the bishops' storehouse and fast offerings, there is no mention of targeted donations from members or the use of the Other account. The guidelines for fast offering assistance probably don't include all the expenditures that some wards have funneled through a "Christmas Fund", but the fact remains that this is the approved way for Church funds to help the poor and needy.
  • The Help Center article The “Other” Category makes it clear that 'contributions to the "Other" category are not donations to the Church; rather they are payments for a tangible benefit.'
So putting those two together, it seems clear to me that bishops help the poor and needy at all times (not just Christmas) using the principles outlined in the Handbook, and that funneling funds through the "Other" category as a quasi-donation is not appropriate. Of course, members are permitted and even encouraged to help their needy neighbors in many ways, but not by funneling funds through the Church.
trjohnson007
New Member
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:00 am

Re: Christmas Fund

#23

Post by trjohnson007 »

aebrown (sorry, I don't know how to embed), Can you expound on why it would be appropriate to have Christmas Fund type donations flow through fast offerings? In reading 5.2.3 & 4, it states what fast offering monies can be used for, which seems to be basic life-sustaining aid; not pop guns, bicycles, roller skates, and drums. Those receiving assistance should work for what they receive, thus negating the 'Christmas Gift'. As I read these sections, it appears completely inappropriate to use fast offering monies as a Christmas Fund.

It seems the best option for the Christmas Fund is the Other:AMFA account. The funds are specified, and per the below link are thus able to be rolled forward to the next year, and thus don't need to be returned to the donors. The money is being "raised or collected to pay for goods or services not covered by budget funds" as specified in the link below on lds.org.

https://www.lds.org/help/support/other- ... y?lang=eng
https://tech.lds.org/wiki/index.php/Other_category
User avatar
aebrown
Community Administrator
Posts: 15153
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:48 pm
Location: Draper, Utah

Re: Christmas Fund

#24

Post by aebrown »

trjohnson007 wrote:aebrown (sorry, I don't know how to embed), Can you expound on why it would be appropriate to have Christmas Fund type donations flow through fast offerings? In reading 5.2.3 & 4, it states what fast offering monies can be used for, which seems to be basic life-sustaining aid; not pop guns, bicycles, roller skates, and drums.
I never said anything about "pop guns, bicycles, roller skates, and drums." I would always strongly preach that the fast offering funds should only be used for those purposes that are appropriate according to the handbooks. My main point was that if members want to help the needy, they should donate a generous fast offering, and the bishop will provide assistance to the needy -- at Christmas and at all times -- according to the guidelines and the direction of the Spirit.
trjohnson007 wrote:Those receiving assistance should work for what they receive, thus negating the 'Christmas Gift'.
I don't believe you can find a blanket statement like that in the handbooks. There will always be many receiving assistance who have no ability to "work for what they receive." Those receiving welfare assistance should certainly work when they are capable of doing so; that is indeed a principle taught in the handbooks. But that is not always possible. And even when they can work, there is no requirement that the work exactly matches the value of the assistance received. In any case, welfare assistance is not a "Christmas Gift" -- it is life-sustaining assistance given to the needy.
trjohnson007 wrote:As I read these sections, it appears completely inappropriate to use fast offering monies as a Christmas Fund.
Some portion of the items that might be purchased through a "Christmas Fund" certainly would be an appropriate use of fast offering, such as food. But I certainly agree that many things that some people would like to funnel through a "Christmas Fund" are not appropriate for fast offering funds. My statements about using fast offering funds apply only to uses that are within the handbook guidelines.
trjohnson007 wrote: It seems the best option for the Christmas Fund is the Other:AMFA account. The funds are specified, and per the below link are thus able to be rolled forward to the next year, and thus don't need to be returned to the donors. The money is being "raised or collected to pay for goods or services not covered by budget funds" as specified in the link below on lds.org.
That's where I have to disagree. Funds collected in the Other:AMFA fund are for a "tangible benefit" -- the Other category is not a way to funnel targeted donations to some set of members. Although I know that some wards have had a tradition of setting up Christmas Funds, I think it is a risky practice for the Church to be in the middle of such things. I know that in our stake, our previous stake president completely shut down any such funds. Members who want to help their neighbors should find ways to help them directly, or in some other way that does not involve funneling funds through Church accounts.
russellhltn
Community Administrator
Posts: 34422
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:53 pm
Location: U.S.

Re: Christmas Fund

#25

Post by russellhltn »

And I don't know as there's much benefit to funneling money though the Other:AMFA account - as in most cases it won't show up in the year-end tax statement.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I always thought the "tangible benefit" referred to what the giver received in return for the payment. Such as popcorn, a magazine subscription or a scout camping trip. It's a test used to show that the donation was really a charitable donation and not payment for goods or services. Gifts to specific individuals falls into a gray area - or at least something that receives greater scrutiny than typical church donations. As such, the old "avoiding the appearance" thing could come into play.
Have you searched the Help Center? Try doing a Google search and adding "site:churchofjesuschrist.org/help" to the search criteria.

So we can better help you, please edit your Profile to include your general location.
Post Reply

Return to “Local Unit Finance”