Tithing Declaration of Children

[aebrown]

I'm rather new at this too and as I've read the question and guidance provided I was wondering if there is some determination being made that I need additional insight into. The original quote from the wiki guidance was:

"Tithing status is normally the same for husband and wife who donate together. It may be different if they declare separately. Also, "in most cases, children who do not earn income can be declared the same as their parents. However, all declarations should be made under the direction of the bishop."

Based on this, it would seem that the operative words are, "in most cases", "can", and "under the direction of the bishop". So, if a Bishop were to decide that all children were full tithe payers, regardless of their parent's status, except where he knows for sure that the children are not paying tithing on income - then that would be appropriate. Is that correct?

As I said before, I think the most important words are "under the direction of the bishop." That doesn't mean that the bishop should completely ignore the guidance (for example, he can't call someone who paid some tithing a non-tithe payer -- that is very clear cut), but within the guidelines he can be inspired to make the correct choices. I think an earlier post summed it up well:

It's all about their desire/intention to be obedient

I think the policy intentionally gives some latitude to the bishop to judge the intentions of those who have paid no tithing. Although we can give opinions here, no one here is in a position to give any further clarification -- that's the role of the priesthood leaders in each ward and stake.

[ckmcdonald]

As I think about this more... I'm finding myself wondering why the declaration report includes children under 8. They are unaccountable and I don't see the purpose in including them.

Tithing Settlement is a great time for the Bishop to teach the youth about tithing but whether the child is on the report or not wouldn't affect how children under 8 who attend Settlement are treated.

There is likely a good reason but it's not clear to me what it is.

[russellhltn]

A few thoughts:

As pointed out, tithing settlement is a good time to teach children about tithing and allowing them to declare their status.

Until a child reaches working age, I really don't see any downside of a "part" or "none" declaration by the Bishop. The only possibility is I can think of is a temporary temple recommend - and that can be handled at the time of the interview.

So we have a situation where the declaration for children is more for statical consumption outside the ward, and a need to keep from driving the Bishop crazy with additional decision making. Under the current system, "in most cases" the Bishop declares for the family as a whole and moves on.

[ckmcdonald]

Previously (in this thread) I concluded that children who pay no tithing and do not attend Settlement should be declared by the Bishop as Full-tithe or Non-tithe. But, it is clear that the instructions state ("under the direction of the Bishop") that children should be "declared the same as their parents" ("in most cases").

What if the parent(s) is declared Exempt or Part-tithe?

[aebrown]

Previously (in this thread) I concluded that children who pay no tithing and do not attend Settlement should be declared by the Bishop as Full-tithe or Non-tithe. But, it is clear that the instructions state ("under the direction of the Bishop") that children should be "declared the same as their parents" ("in most cases").

What if the parent(s) is declared Exempt or Part-tithe?

It seems clear that they can't be declared as Exempt unless they make the declaration themselves. The definition of "Exempt" is unambiguous on that point, and no exceptions are allowed.

Given the definition for "Part-tithe", it does seem a bit problematic for the bishop to declare someone who has paid no tithing as a part tithe payer, even if that person is a child whose parents are declared as part tithe payers. But it doesn't seem completely impermissible, either, given the policy that non-declaring children should be declared by the bishop the same as their parents in most cases. The good news is that this is under the direction of the bishop -- he gets to make the choices based on his knowledge and inspiration.

[byrongoodrichewg]

Is a disabled or partially disabled person declared exempt? There is no place to declare that. I have a number of adult foster members who are baptized and should have a declaration or exemption depending on their own situation.

[lajackson]

Is a disabled or partially disabled person declared exempt? There is no place to declare that.

Beginning with tithing settlement this year (2016), a member is no longer able to declare exempt status. A member either paid a full tithing, contributed a lesser amount to the tithing funds, or did not contribute. This was in the notice announcing tithing settlement this year.

[bbuyack]

So it implied that children are non-tithe payers now? I don't have a copy of the announcement for tithing settlement.

[lajackson]

So it implied that children are non-tithe payers now? I don't have a copy of the announcement for tithing settlement.

Not at all. Children are usually given the tithing status of their parents, but the bishop has the authority to declare a different status based on any information and inspiration he may have.

[bbuyack]

We checked the handbook and all it says is church headquarters will give direction on tithing settlement. I would think if someone is not paying tithing they are a non-tithe payer. I don't see anything that says give children the same designation as their parents?