It’s fun to spend other people’s money. The scenario most of us are familiar with is eating out on company business. When you and a colleague are wining and dining a client or when you and a couple office mates are taking a contractor or consultant out to lunch — you go to a nice restaurant, order appetizers and dessert as well as overpriced entrees, and get something fancy to drink. Does food taste better when someone else is paying? Sometimes it seems like it. But getting a nice meal paid for by the company pales in comparison to other spending scenarios.
Trump loves to spend other people’s money. Almost daily, he shows off golden photos of the planned ballroom/bunker that he hopes to build before leaving office. Initially, it was supposed to be a couple of hundred million dollars, paid for by donations, a typical Trumpian screwy and frankly corrupt way to run the government (because of course individuals or corporations that donate to Trump’s project get some sort of favorable treatment in return). Now it has morphed into a billion-dollar project paid for by you and me and millions of other taxpayers. For Trump, it’s still other people’s money, so it’s still fun. You, on the other hand, might have strong feelings about the project, as well as Trump’s quick move (before anyone could stop it) to demolish half the White House to make way for his planned ballroom/bunker.
What about LDS finances? When the Big 15 plus the Presiding Bishopric get together to make financial decisions — approving budgets, approving projects, approving investments — they are spending other people’s money. Once upon a time, it was my money and your money. Once it gets washed through various accounts and LDS investments, it feels more like “LDS money.” Many LDS leaders probably think of it as God’s money. But however you describe it, for the leadership it is still other people’s money. Here is the surprising thing: On the whole, they are fairly responsible in spending other people’s money.
Here’s a big difference between the Trumpian way of spending other people’s money and the LDS way of spending other people’s money: Trump is happy to cut taxes (largely benefitting people who don’t need tax breaks) while bloating up spending on his pet projects (ICE thuggery, vanity projects, war with Iran, all of which are unpopular with the electorate) and ramping up the US national debt. He doesn’t care. Dealing with inflation and the national debt will be someone else’s problem, since he only has three years (or less!) left in office. Trump’s financial policy is utterly irresponsible and we (you, me, and every other taxpayer) are going to be left holding the bag and dealing with the financial chaos lurking not that far down the road. I wonder what egg voters (people who voted for Trump because they were unhappy paying a buck or two more for a dozen eggs) think when they fill their gas tank this week.
On the other hand, one can argue that the LDS approach to spending other people’s money is fairly responsible and (to use the word in a non-political sense) conservative. Apart from building temples left, right, and center, LDS spending is fairly restrained. Tithing revenue, plus investment income from invested tithing surplus built up over the years, exceeds LDS spending by a significant margin at this point. Result: the Hundred Billion Dollar Fund. That’s my title, it’s not necessarily an accurate accounting. I think it is in the hundreds of billions by this point.
Big projects? The Conference Center, but that seems like a great venue for General Conference, much better than the Tabernacle where Conference was held for generations. Wooden benches, limited seating, awful circulation. City Creek Shopping? I know a lot of people object to this project, but it’s clear LDS leaders want to keep downtown Salt Lake, particularly near Temple Square, a friendly area for visitors and pedestrians. And let’s keep in mind the difference between an investment and an expenditure. The City Creek billion or two doesn’t really bother me. Temple Square and downtown SLC is still a nice place to visit. You can’t say that about too many other downtowns.
You can actually make the argument that the Church significantly underspends other people’s money (our money, donated through tithing). What else could they do? They could expand chapel design to provide more services to the membership, first childcare but you can think of others. Give missionaries a real office in every chapel maybe. Go visit a megachurch campus or two to get some ideas. Instead, chapels are largely unused during the week. Beef up the capital side of the LDS missionary force: give every team a car, for example. The labor side of the LDS missionary force is largely free (donated) voluntary labor. You could beef up local ward and stake budgets significantly, like very significantly, a move that might support the slowly waning sense of community most people seem to feel in their ward and stake.
[Aside: It’s economic wisdom that underpriced factors get overused. Free missionary labor plus expensive capital would lead you to expect a system that overuses labor and underinvests in capital like cars, offices, computers, and phones. That’s just what you get with the LDS missionary system. If the Church had to pay missionaries, drastic changes would follow! And probably a much more efficient system.]
There is another consequence of too much money and not enough spending. The LDS Church is not a for-profit corporation. Profits don’t get paid out to shareholders, which is why the Hundred Billion Dollar Fund just keeps growing. If you can’t find enough objects of expenditure given the substantial revenue that comes in, a not-for-profit corporation should return some of the money to donors and stop soliciting more donations. Not-for-profits are not supposed to garner huge surpluses. They are supposed to use the money for the charitable objectives that guide the operation of the entity and attract donations from supporting donors.
If the Church can’t spend all the money, the simple solution is to cut tithing to 8% or less. Or let local leaders hand out tithing exemptions to deserving members. Worst case scenario: If the Hundred Billion Dollar Fund turns into the Trillion Dollar Fund, sooner or later the government will step in and do something about it. In case you don’t read much history, know that is something governments do from time to time. “Let us help you spend other people’s money, since you don’t seem able to spend it all yourself.” That’s not what anyone wants. So either spend more money or reduce revenue or return the surplus to the membership. This is not the Church of Scrooge McDuck.
What do you think?
- Do you like spending other people’s money?
- Are you mildly offended or deeply offended by the growing list of Trump vanity projects we (taxpayers) and apparently paying for?
- Do you think the Church should spend more money? On what?
- Do you think the Church should reduce incoming donations? How exactly?
- Thinking clearly and objectively about the Hundred Billion Dollar Fund, what should we do with the money? Just letting it sit and grow in the bank and in investments until the end of the world just doesn’t seem like a responsible financial plan.
Wheat & Tares 
Some time ago, I listened to a podcast on the Widow’s Mite Report, which was an attempt to disentangle the actual amount of charitable giving the church does. It was interesting because the actual amount of giving has gone up by quite a lot. My sense is that after the SEC scandal, the church made a conscious effort to tout more of its humanitarian efforts. But a lot of the PR releases are somewhat deceptive, in my view.
For instance, a lot of the dollar amounts reported include volunteer hours (e.g., the dollar amount represented by members cleaning the church). But from what I understand, the largest amount of direct contributions is simply fast offerings. And if you have ever served in any bishopric, you’ll quickly understand that most of the fast offerings are simply transfer payments to help pay the rent/mortgage of other faithful members. I would estimate that 80–90% of what the church reports as charitable direct giving is mostly just other ward members helping pay the rent/mortgage of other members, or cleaning the temple/church.
The bishop, as the judge in Israel, is simply spending other people’s money. My sister-in-law probably received about $30k in rental assistance because she rented in an affluent ward in Lehi, was a single mom, and had two children who were unbaptized. She was also quite attractive. My working hypothesis is that she worked over her bishop and sort of convinced him to continue subsidizing her lavish, consumption-driven lifestyle (she tries to emulate the version of Secret Lives of Mormon Wives), but without any real income to support that.
I guess what I think is happening in the church is that the church is on a death spiral, mostly due to demographics and tithing. The cost of housing in areas where most U.S. LDS members live creates intense financial pressure. A two-income household is necessary by default, and we have no real paid or subsidized childcare, either as a church or as a country. So adding on 10% (however you calculate that) is probably part of what will keep the number of children of record low and growth slow.
The church will continue to attract single, older converts who don’t seem to be retained, and it might continue growing in South America and Africa, but the Mormon corridor is in a demographic death spiral. That’s how I read the current chapter of LDS demographics. I would say the fundamental drivers are tithing requirements and high housing costs.
Spending other people’s money probably depends a lot on the situation, but there are a lot of situations where if I know the organization whose money I’m spending (my church, my employer, etc) cares about that money, I may actually be more cautious than with my own money. There’s a strong sense of responsibility. I think that attitude pervades the leadership of the LDS church.
You make the case that the church significantly underspends. I would say that they underspend, but only by a little. The massive investment fund is more the result of compound interest over a long period of time than anything else. There are claims that they try to invest 10% of income, which sounds plausible to me. So they could boost spending by not a whole lot and no longer have excess income (from member contributions, that is).
As for what the church should do differently, I would say two things. First of all, increase investment in youth programs. Since dropping the Boy Scouts, they seem not to have replaced it with all that much. I didn’t like the external fundraising what went on during the Boy Scouts era, but the reality is, you get what you pay for in youth programs, and the facilities they had access to for Scout camps were impressive. Let’s replace all of that external fundraising with more church spending on young men and young women. I think their new EFY program is a step in that direction. Let’s do more.
The second thing is I think the reserve fund needs a more defined purpose that’s not just “rainy day”. The size has long surpassed what might be needed for a very rainy day, so it’s time to come up with something else. Many church critics are quick to list all of the world’s ills that the church could be solving, but in fact I do think finding the right cause for a big pile of money is harder than it sounds. One proposal I’ve heard that I quite like is for the church to begin funding more of the church operations off the interest from their investments and suggest that members send half of their tithing to the church and the other half to worthy causes of their own choosing. I believe asking members to go through the exercise of determining what causes they might support would be a source of spiritual growth and greater community engagement, and it would be consistent with our scripture injunction to be “anxiously engaged in a good cause”.
LDS Inc should stop the free member labor for building cleaning. OTOH the Fund is too cheap to buy security cameras so I use the outside trash dumpster occasionally – nothing that is bulky, just trash from 7-11 and Dairy Queen. Also, I don’t understand big projects that supplement the budget for youth camps (happened in my ward last year).
Do I like to spend other people’s money? I have to honestly say it depends on whose it is or how it is spent. If it’s someone else’s money spent on themselves, but they want my advice or help (I was in technology), it’s fun helping them go through all the options. If it’s dues or contributed money from some organization, then it’s a bit different. There I’ll spend it, but I won’t get the best money can buy, but will be discretionary with my choices, as if it were my money.
I’m deeply offended by Trump and his spending. It seems he’s taking from the poor and giving it to the rich. It’s not just the projects but the tax cuts, priorities, and government expenditures he pushes. Cut education funding but double defense spending, or fund ICE at absurd levels. But it’s not just Trump, it’s Republicans in past administrations as well, where the debt has increased under them and then been lowered or at least leveled under Democratic administrations. I must admit Republicans have been masterful in casting the blame and getting their followers to believe it’s the tax-and-spend Democrats who have caused the problem while ignoring the consequences of cutting taxes and increasing spending on defense or corporate subsidies. People don’t seem to understand that tax write-offs for the rich cost us in potential tax revenue more than actual tax spent on “welfare” programs.
As for the church, tying so many things to tithing has both enriched the church and hurt it. You have to pay tithing to go to the temple, but you also have many church callings or work at church-owned facilities or educational institutions where you are required to pay a full tithing. The Church has a lot of money, but it also has a lot of people leaving. They built a lot of temples instead of helping the poor, but they do help the poor in many ways. What used to be more hidden has not become more advertised. The scriptures say not to let the left hand know what the right hand is doing in regard to giving to the poor, but now the church has a subtle campaign to show they haven’t forgotten the poor. The problem is that even there, so many numbers are misrepresented, and it’s hard to tell real money from representations of money because of volunteering or in-kind donations. It’s their money and their problem. My older self is disappointed in what my younger self thought the church represented.
I am not going to disagree with you Dave B. that the Fed is spending our taxpayer dollars on items that do not necessarily benefit the taxpayer or public at large. But the Fed has done so forever. If you really want to see your taxes wasted, come west to the “Golden State of California!” My main point being, government/bureaucracy will always waste money. I am always amused when neither political side will point out the waste when it’s their side doing it.
As for the church and their billions, “ya know what really grinds my gears?” Coming to the church building on a Saturday morning to clean, gratis, after I’ve already spent hours in callings, assignments, service projects, meetings for service projects, assignments and callings etc. The church has the money, each stake needs to go back to having a paid custodian to do the building upkeep. In my current calling, I am well aware what our little ward brings in monthly,$, and there is more than enough to supplement the paycheck of a custodian and still send Salt Lake plenty to augment church expenses elsewhere. When the church decided to do away with paid custodians, a really nice guy in our ward was out of his second income job, strapping he and his family financially. The next month, the assigned building cleanup person contacted him to let him know when it would be his turn to clean the building, gratis. He was rightly livid and became inactive for a time. I would be as well, and would be raising my “BS Flag” to the top of the mast.
A few years back, we took our youth ice skating to a temporary rink that a LARGE Christian church puts up around the holidays. It is in a very affluent area in the foothills above Sacramento. The cost is minimal to skate there. What amazed me was that they had a permanent outdoor venue where you could buy “ballpark style” food, sodas, beer/wine etc, for the membership to enjoy with an outdoor venue/seating area for socialization, much like a club. While that would be a little over the top for our purposes, I do agree that the church needs to give back in terms of funding for social get togethers etc for the membership to enjoy together.
One can only hope…..much like the Fed and the State blowing our hard earned money, none of us have much control as to where the church spends their funds.
Cheers Friends
I disagree with 17RRider’s statement that people give their own team a “pass” on outlandish spending projects, with the possible exception of Trump’s cult. I’ve seen plenty of Republicans in Utah, for example, triple Trumpers (!), who are up in arms over the data center and the accompanying ecological death spiral the state is projected to experience. I tend to think that when it comes to big spending projects, people are very ideosyncratic about what they oppose, and it starts and ends in their own backyard. For example, there are plenty of CA Democrats who oppose things like ejecting the homeless from encampments–unless it’s in their zip code or along their commute. They want lower cost housing for the rising generation–but they don’t want it in their neighborhood because their values will go down.
I don’t know that the idea of spending other people’s money was in and of itself appealing, but it did enable me to do things that my job required, including a boatload of business class travel and staying in higher end hotels and having a driver. That’s not how I choose to do my personal travel, but when I travel for fun I’m at my leisure. The purpose is to experience other cultures, and friction is part of the goal. When I was on business, the purpose was to host meetings, meet with employees and clients, oversee events, and speak to groups. All of that wasn’t how I would want to spend my free time, but it was the job. Being in business class meant I could sleep on my 15 hour flight and then be ready to go at 8AM for a ten-hour meeting. Having lounge access meant I didn’t have to wander around with my luggage in crowded international airports waiting in line to buy a $9 croissant–I could just relax and listen to soothing music in a comfortable chair. I did often feel like the travel part was made as painless as possible so I would not resent the fact that I was away from my home and family for most of the week.
The gentrification of downtown SLC is nothing unique–most major metropolitan areas have done similar things in the last 20 years. Downtown SLC is really very nice now, and it wasn’t before the church’s investments. I was recently at City Creek Mall, and one thing I noticed was the gigantic Kirton-McConkie building looking down on me as I sat in the sun next to the creek. That’s one part of how the church spends its money that is both responsible and also probably not Christian enough. The goal of just about everything the church does is to reduce liability, and sure, when you have deep pockets (and wow do they have some deep pockets), big payouts are going to only chum the waters for more litigious people you’ve wronged to come to the trough and ask for their piece of the pie. But the church also seems to use the fear of litigation maybe too much just to avoid things they don’t want. For such a wealthy church, they come off as cheap. Being good stewards is one thing. We look like cheapskates, particularly when you consider that the members in good standing have given 10% of their wealth for years to the church. They don’t seem to be giving out much to the members that enhance the experience, or if they are, I didn’t really see it.
Which brings me to my biggest beef with how the church spends those widows’ mites: poiltical causes. It costs money for them to lean on the politics in the state and in the nation, and they do not represent the values of all members in their extremist conservative causes such as opposing LGBTQ rights. Yes, we all know they backed fair housing in downtown SLC. But that doesn’t make up for Prop 8 and other efforts to strip LGBTQ people of rights and dignity. The majority of the members (according to Pew results) don’t even agree with these causes, but they are funding them. As Elisa’s excellent series pointed out, they literally partnered with WCF which is a recognized hate group working with Russian oligarchs and Hungary, to name a few, to literally make homosexuality illegal.
One of my pet peeves is when people refer to something as “the Lord’s money,” as though some things belong to God and other things don’t. By any serious religious definition, everything would belong to God already, so there is no need to belabor the point.
What makes me uncomfortable is the presumption behind the phrase. Saying “God told us how to spend this money” creates a major problem: when leaders make mistakes—as all humans do—it becomes difficult to admit error without indirectly attributing the error to God Himself. I think a more honest and grounded approach would be to say: “These are funds dedicated to purposes we believe are Godly.” That leaves room for sincerity, stewardship, humility, and human fallibility without claiming divine certainty for every financial or institutional decision.
Claiming God directly endorses human administration is a very strong assertion, especially given how often religious leaders throughout history have later been shown to be mistaken. There’s wisdom in acknowledging the difference between seeking God and speaking for God.
It is my curse that I have to quibble a little over definitions, but as a nonprofits person, it’s also my obligation. The Church isn’t spending other people’s money. As soon as I donate to a charitable organization (be it the Church, Hubbard Street Dance, or the Art Institute of Chicago), it’s no longer my money. If I don’t like what the organization does with my money, I can stop my future giving, but I can’t get my past giving back. That’s what James Huntsman tried to do, and the courts rightly shut him down. That’s what Elon Musk is trying to. But it doesn’t work that way.
It’s also worth pointing out that the Church doesn’t include members’ volunteer hours in its report on its aid spending. It definitely does count fast offering aid to members. But categorically, that’s the right thing to do.
I frankly think the Church underspends its money, both on the religious side (agreed that we should be paying janitors, for instance–not only would that help keep our buildings cleaner, but it would potentially provide remunerative work for members) and on the charitable side.
I so wish our posture as a religious organization would take the shape of Thomas Merton’s prayer.
My Lord God,
I have no idea where I am going.
I do not see the road ahead of me.
I cannot know for certain where it will end. nor do I really know myself,
and the fact that I think I am following your will does not mean that I am actually doing so.
But I believe that the desire to please you does in fact please you.
I think the best that any of us can say is, I’m trying to do as “I think” God would have me do.
We’re trying to use funds to do as God would, but humble enough to know that our desire to act Godly does
not always mean that we do.
This prayer would approach God from a “seeking” instead of a “certainty”.
Ethical humanitarian organizations release an annual financial report that is reviewed by outside auditors. The LDS church has inflated its humanitarian spending with hours, fast offering monies given only to members (which cannot be considered humanitarian because humanitarian donations are given without regard to a person’s religious affiliation), and donations are held for two years and then spent. NO tithing monies are given for humanitarian purposes, yet 1/3 of tithes in the Old Testament (which the LDS quotes routinely regarding tithing) were given to help the poor and needy, the widows and refugees. I choose to now given most of my tithing for ethical humanitarian organizations, which is what–I believe–Jesus wants me to do. “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto the least of these, my brothers and sisters, ye have done it unto me.”
When referring to Trump’s vanity projects please don’t forget to add the $13million for the reflecting pool and god only knows what for his birthday celebration and his arch to the billion for his stupid ballroom. Oh, and there’s that war/skirmish that have left us bereft of weapons.
Are his MAGAts following any of this?
I agree that the church underspends. I disagree with the how they are disinvesting in ward buildings, including the lack of hiring cleaning staff but also just the selling of buildings. They seem to want to put a temple on every corner so no one has to travel very far to get to one while at the same time trying to minimize the number of ward buildings. Outside of the Morridor, why can’t each ward or branch have their own building if it saves them from having to drive 30 minutes to get to church? Why on earth are they trying to eliminate paid seminary teachers? I think they should work on minimizing the unpaid CES and hire more teachers, including part time teachers doing early morning and/or remote teaching outside the Morridor. Dedicated seminary classrooms WITH APPROPRIATE SUPPLIES in ward buildings. Much more curriculum material. I hate that there is only one teaching manual for home and church for all ages, from 3 year olds to adults. It’s totally inadequate for kids and very boring for adults. I love the idea of each ward building having offices for missionaries. I would like to see much more spending on those kind of supports for members of the church.
Thanks Dave for your essay and for giving us a chance to brainstorm how to spend the church’s money. I would simply add to the discussion that of all the years you would have thought we would see a major uptick in humanitarian collaboration spending, it would have been 2025. In the very year that Trump and Musk totally decimate USAID and influence other nations to ratchet down their donations, I was counting on a much greater outflow of charity for the world’s downtrodden by our church.
Back in 2024, the collaborative humanitarian dollars were just over $100 million (highest ever at that point in time). Unfortunately, according to the Widow’s Mite Report, we barely eclipsed $70 million for last year (which is about the equivalent of one fairly large temple and less than seven or eight days of interest on the church’s $60 billion-plus stock portfolio). It is blowing my mind that not only did we not see a huge uptick, but we actually contributed less than previous years. (What the heck!)
So, when I ask myself “what would Jesus do?” I am fairly confident in saying he would be highly supportive of Bishop Waddell’s statement to 60 Minutes that the church would double and double again the humanitarian output. But the data do not seem to support that promise as of yet.
I am totally comfortable concluding that Christ would feed starving children and support refugees in dire straits as top priorities rather than investing more money into Nvidia, Microsoft, Apple, etc.
Does anyone else out there feel that these five or ten million dollars, donated occasionally to a professional and carefully vetted non-profit, seem like just a pittance to what we really could be offering? Why can’t we really step it up to counterbalance the Trump/Musk decimation of international aid?
Richard,
The donations that the church makes to charitable organizations is just one of a number of means by which it blesses the lives of the poor and needy.
I think the church is growing its massive fund in anticipation of future decline. It anticipates scenarios in which fewer members pay tithing or pay as much in tithing. It does not want to admit weakness, however. It wants to show that it is growing somehow. So it is has the fund on hand in case it needs to pay for more operational costs on its own instead of through new tithing receipts.
The church underpays, of course it underpays.
The Church has been pinching pennies for a really long time. I don’t think it spends enough. When it does make charitable donations, it’s usually to fund someone else’s organization. The Church has thrift stores and employment services because those got started decades ago. It could launch a new initiative — it certainly has the funds. Like, create housing complexes for the poor with a ton of bells and whistles like counseling and job training and on site medical clinics. The Church has a life insurance company, a health insurance company, bakeries, farms, a newspaper, a bookstore, and other industries. Rather than just donating to other charities (which is great), I would like to see the Church invest in creating charitable infrastructure on a major scale directly.
I give a second thumbs-up to Instereo’s description of how Trump is wasting tax dollars. Republicans spend more on military and tax cuts than Democrats have ever tried to spend on the social safety net. And I disagree with 17RRider’s characterization of partisan spending. It’s dumb to compare Obama’s basketball court to Trump demolishing the entire wing of the White House and then asking for a billion dollars to build a ballroom. Hawgrrl’s observation about people being selective about what spending they oppose is right on, too. I’m following the proposed data center in Box Elder County too, and it was a pleasant surprise to see a conservative community suddenly realize that they are concerned about the environment.
As far as spending other peoples’ money, I don’t get to do that very often.
In the news today: the church is appealing denial of reimbursement from their insurance company for a $32 million CSA settlement that also cost them $27 million in legal fees (see floodlit.org for details). They certainly aren’t significantly underspending in this area. Maybe they could invest in that gold standard they’re always talking about instead of in paying settlements to victims. Seems worthwhile.