Tithing Declaration of Children

This topic seems to come up between me and the Bishop each year - never with a clear resolution. The documentation I've been able to find isn't very clear on the guidelines for declaring tithing status of children who are not brought in for tithing settlement. I just searched the forum and wasn't able to find anything on this topic (might have miss it - not proficient at searching yet)

How should the Bishop declare for children (primarily between 0 and 12) when their parents don't come in for settlement?

ckmcdonald wrote:This topic seems to come up between me and the Bishop each year - never with a clear resolution. The documentation I've been able to find isn't very clear on the guidelines for declaring tithing status of children who are not brought in for tithing settlement. I just searched the forum and wasn't able to find anything on this topic (might have miss it - not proficient at searching yet)

How should the Bishop declare for children (primarily between 0 and 12) when their parents don't come in for settlement?

The answer can be found on the wiki under Tithing status:

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."

aebrown wrote:The answer can be found on the wiki under Tithing status:

This is a reference to the guidelines we find confusing. The paragraph you quoted states "in most cases". Already it ambiguous. It's difficult to understand why two 1 year-old's (for example) from different families should have differing declarations based on their parents' status.

Not-Declared is not an option for this case as the instructions state it's only for non ward members.

Exempt is clearly not an option for children too young to talk or who aren't present at settlement to self-declare. (Side note... For a child that does attend settlement but has no income, this does seem like an appropriate declaration. However, I've never seen a child be declared Exempt. Comments on this from the forum?)

A careful reading of the descriptions of both Full-Tithe and Non-Tithe suggest that either might apply to a child not attending settlement or too young to speak. This is complicated by the interpretation of the word "tithing". Does this mean "money paid" or "10% of income". In the former case $0 isn't include but $0 is in the latter.

I think another thing that's adding unclarity to this is that Non-Tithe seems to have a negative connotation - which is hard to apply to an innocent infant.

Thanks for the response Bro Brown.
Would appreciate hearing additional comments on this from all.

ckmcdonald wrote:It's difficult to understand why two 1 year-old's (for example) from different families should have differing declarations based on their parents' status.

I understand what you are saying, but it seems clear the system is not set up to "think" that way.

I'd focus on "in most cases". I'm guessing that the reason for giving bishops some latitude in the decision is that there might be cases when he knows the child is acting differently from the parents - such as a primary child that pays tithing on his allowance when the parents do not tithe.

ckmcdonald wrote:This is a reference to the guidelines we find confusing. The paragraph you quoted states "in most cases". Already it ambiguous. It's difficult to understand why two 1 year-old's (for example) from different families should have differing declarations based on their parents' status.

I wonder if this particular guideline is based on statistical analysis. I would guess that children of non-tithe payers tend to become non-tithe payers, and children of full-tithe payers tend to become full-tithe payers. Of course there are plenty of exceptions, but I would think that in the aggregate, that would be the case.

ckmcdonald wrote:Exempt is clearly not an option for children too young to talk or who aren't present at settlement to self-declare. (Side note... For a child that does attend settlement but has no income, this does seem like an appropriate declaration. However, I've never seen a child be declared Exempt. Comments on this from the forum?)

If a child is old enough to make a declaration and fits the definition of Exempt, I see no reason why that couldn't be the declaration. I agree that it's unusual, but in my experience, it's pretty rare for a child who is old enough to understand the concept of Exempt to have absolutely no income for a year. So it wouldn't apply very often.

ckmcdonald wrote:A careful reading of the descriptions of both Full-Tithe and Non-Tithe suggest that either might apply to a child not attending settlement or too young to speak. This is complicated by the interpretation of the word "tithing". Does this mean "money paid" or "10% of income". In the former case $0 isn't include but $0 is in the latter.

I don't think it's reasonable in the context of the whole set of guidelines to assume that full-tithe is appropriate for 10% of nothing. If that were the case, there would be no need for an Exempt status, and there would be no need to say "children who do not earn income can be declared the same as their parents." So except for the specific exceptions of missionaries and non-declaring children of full-tithe payers, it is my opinion that a full-tithe status should not be applied to all non-declaring members with no income.

ckmcdonald wrote:I think another thing that's adding unclarity to this is that Non-Tithe seems to have a negative connotation - which is hard to apply to an innocent infant.

In any case, I wouldn't worry too much about the declarations for children who pay no tithing and whose parents don't make a declaration -- they'll never know what was declared, and it really doesn't matter much for any statistics that are kept. So I don't see how there can be any negative connotations of any significance.


But amidst all this, the most important statement is: "all declarations should be made under the direction of the bishop." The bishop and clerks who assist him should be familiar with the guidelines and follow them. But the bishop is entitled to inspiration to deal with those cases where he has latitude.

i have to say, for me - someone paying 10% of nothing goes down as "full tithe payer". It's all about their desire/intention to be obedient in my opinion.

ckmcdonald wrote:This is complicated by the interpretation of the word "tithing". Does this mean "money paid" or "10% of income".

This part is simple. Tithing is one-tenth of all your interest annually, which the First Presidency understands to mean income. See D&C 119:4.

As for the question at hand, the instructions say the children normally have the same status as their parents. The instructions also say that the bishop determines their status.

It seems to me that an exception is made under the guidelines for children of full tithe-payers. Otherwise they would not be tithe-payers.

The bishop is the common judge in Israel and may determine to make additional exceptions for other children. And while he may use his discernment and authority to do that, they are still exceptions. This is also one of the reasons a record is made with regard to whether the member or the bishop made the declaration.

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?

Thank you.

aebrown wrote:If a child is old enough to make a declaration and fits the definition of Exempt, I see no reason why that couldn't be the declaration. I agree that it's unusual, but in my experience, it's pretty rare for a child who is old enough to understand the concept of Exempt to have absolutely no income for a year. So it wouldn't apply very often.

The more I think about this case the more I believe we are under-using the Exempt status in our ward. In fact, for the 5-12 year-old age range I would argue Exempt should be the common case for those who attend settlement. They understand tithing and would pay if they had income.

ChuckP wrote: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?

I fail to see how this would jive with the "in most cases" part.

But if the Bishop is looking for guidance, I suggest he speaks with the stake president.

If the clerk is looking for guidance, I suggest that he follow the lead of his Bishop and/or speaks with the Stake Clerk who is responsable for his training.

ChuckP wrote: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:

dannykos wrote: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.

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.

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.

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?

ckmcdonald wrote: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.

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.

byrongoodrichewg wrote: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.

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

bbuyack wrote: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.

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?

bbuyack wrote:We checked the handbook and all it says is church headquarters will give direction on tithing settlement.

Direction on tithing settlement is contained in the Notice from the Office of the Presiding Bishopric dated September 15, 2016, and at the Help Center under Conducting Tithing Settlement.

Keep in mind that it's possible to be a full tithe payer without paying any tithing. A person who receives zero income can pay zero tithing and is still considered a full tithe payer. 10% of 0 is 0. Such is the case for children or other dependents who are unable to work, stay-at-home parents, retired members living on their retirement savings, etc.

sbradshaw wrote:Keep in mind that it's possible to be a full tithe payer without paying any tithing. A person who receives zero income can pay zero tithing and is still considered a full tithe payer. 10% of 0 is 0.

I would change "is" to "may". Although it's true that 10% of 0 is 0, it's also true that 0% of 0 is 0. A person with zero income is neither automatically a full-tithe payer nor automatically a non-tithe payer. Judgment and inspiration are required to determine the correct tithing status for a person with no income, and that is why the bishop makes the final decision.