I-tithe???

[aebrown]

I have sent a message to my contacts in the Donations Department. Hopefully I should have a response in the next few days, which I will share here.

I received the following response from Greg Tarbet, a manager in the Donations Department:

Our stand is that anyone can utilize the billpay process. We still prefer that members pay directly to their ward for contributions, however we allow members to use billpay. We do not encourage ward clerks or ward leaders to promote paying through billpay to headquarters.

I will update the wiki article Electronic donations to reflect this statement.

[russellhltn]

Thanks for the follow-up and updating the Wiki.

[Michael_Newman]

It took the church nearly 10 years after I (and others) proposed the development of an interactive web site such as tech.lds.org/forum/ . In my belief, it was a prudent move to take the necessary time to develop such a technological move, given all that could have happened if the project was rushed.

As long as the church promotes the option of mailing in tithes through the US Post Office system, then I see the next e-tithe as a strong possibility.

All my best,

Michael

[jamiecking76]

Here's what we do...

Our bank has online billpay available. What we do, is we enter our bishop's name and address in care of the church's name and have the bank how much the tithe should be. The bank mails out the check to our Bishop. The bishop in turns fills out the slip and hands our check from the bank to the financial clerk to be processed. It works and you didn't have to go to the bank to take the money out.

Jamie

[mfmohlma]

...The bishop in turn fills out the slip...

Your financial clerk (and bishop) would greatly appreciate you doing this step yourself. Having the bishop (or clerk) do it eliminates one of the points of verification that things were input correctly (and we are human). Simply handing in a tithing envelope with a filled-out slip (and a notation that the check came by billpay) would be sufficient.

[RossEvans]

Your financial clerk (and bishop) would greatly appreciate you doing this step yourself. Having the bishop (or clerk) do it eliminates one of the points of verification that things were input correctly (and we are human). Simply handing in a tithing envelope with a filled-out slip (and a notation that the check came by billpay) would be sufficient.

If that happens once or twice, it can be accommodated. But I would hate to see this become common practice. Matching 50-100 such pieces of paper every week would become extremely burdensome and error-prone.

[mfmohlma]

If that happens once or twice, it can be accommodated. But I would hate to see this become common practice. Matching 50-100 such pieces of paper every week would become extremely burdensome and error-prone.

I agree and would certainly prefer if someone was to insist on using billpay that they use the system currently outlined in the wiki. However, since we're not allowed to "promote" using that system, I'm at a loss at what to tell people. It certainly seems burdensome when processing donations when we have to stop the process of "open, verify, input" to "rip all four edges off of the billpay check 'envelope', rip the check itself off of the backing, search for the name, try to find (and decipher) the comment line, find a blank donation slip, fill in the required info, verify, input (and hope you didn't make a mistake)". The not-so-happy medium would be to request the pre-filled donation slips in advance.

I realize that the church has to pay folks at HQ for their time to set up the electronic donations and having everyone do it would completely swamp them. The truth is, though, at a ward level, we're really not set up to process the billpay generated checks very well. I've been using the billpay through HQ personally for almost a year now and couldn't be happier with it. I certainly don't want to run through the ward telling them "I want to go home sooner after church and to all set up direct billpay now", but I'd like the permission to point the one or two folks that already send the bishop the billpay checks to "finish the electronic loop" and use the HQ process.

[mkmurray]

I agree and would certainly prefer if someone was to insist on using billpay that they use the system currently outlined in the wiki. However, since we're not allowed to "promote" using that system, I'm at a loss at what to tell people. It certainly seems burdensome when processing donations when we have to stop the process of "open, verify, input" to "rip all four edges off of the billpay check 'envelope', rip the check itself off of the backing, search for the name, try to find (and decipher) the comment line, find a blank donation slip, fill in the required info, verify, input (and hope you didn't make a mistake)". The not-so-happy medium would be to request the pre-filled donation slips in advance.

I realize that the church has to pay folks at HQ for their time to set up the electronic donations and having everyone do it would completely swamp them. The truth is, though, at a ward level, we're really not set up to process the billpay generated checks very well. I've been using the billpay through HQ personally for almost a year now and couldn't be happier with it. I certainly don't want to run through the ward telling them "I want to go home sooner after church and to all set up direct billpay now", but I'd like the permission to point the one or two folks that already send the bishop the billpay checks to "finish the electronic loop" and use the HQ process.

You make some good points. A few personal opinions to consider of why said payment method is likely not encouraged (yet).

First, I would hope a bishop wouldn't give a CHQ electronic donor a puzzled look when they declare them self as a full-tithe payer (he shouldn't do that anyway, but I think you catch my drift). Also, if I understand the electronic payment method correctly, fast offering donations done directly to Salt Lake cannot be routed back to your local unit for use as they are intended on a local level. To me, this is an unfortunate side effect and would be a disaster if everyone began flocking to this payment method.

[aebrown]

First, I would hope a bishop wouldn't give a CHQ electronic donor a puzzled look when they declare them self as a full-tithe payer (he shouldn't do that anyway, but I think you catch my drift).

There are several other options for donations (donations in kind, donations by wire, donations by check to CHQ) that are not made at the local level, and have not been discouraged, as far as I know. For all these methods there is the potential that a donor will make zero local tithing donations, yet be a full tithe payer.

if I understand the electronic payment method correctly, fast offering donations done directly to Salt Lake cannot be routed back to your local unit for use as they are intended on a local level. To me, this is an unfortunate side effect and would be a disaster if everyone began flocking to this payment method.

That's not correct. Fast offering expenditures at a local level are not constrained by local donations (there are other policy constraints, but the amount of local donations is not one of them). So no such "disaster" is possible.

[atticusewig]

In my ward, we had someone who donated directly
to CHQ, and their Fast Offering Donation appeared
on the Church Unit Financial Statement.
It requires an extra step when reconciling the bank statement
( I forgot the exact procedure, the donor now donates
directly to the ward), but the Fast Offerings are credited
to the ward. I haven't looked at such a donation for a
while, but I believe the donor is not listed by name.

Originally, I suspected the Donation was a bank error
but my Stake Clerk called CHQ and let me know it was
legit.

- Atticus