In the case of 'Hillsong' maybe that should read, "Help The Greedy"! Andrew Wilkie the independent MP from Tasmania has tabled documents in the Federal Parliament that accuses Hillsong of massive fraud, money laundering and tax evasion. The allegations of misuse of donated monies by Wilkie are extensive, running into the millions, you can read about them in the link below.

Churches and charities, Hillsong is actually a registered charity and not technically a church, although they are given to much Bible bashing and happy clapping in a circus like atmosphere, these organisations are given special exemptions when it comes to things like taxation, but in return there is an expectation from the community, government and most of all those donating, that the money raised will be used for the intended purpose in the sprite it was given, and not for an exorbitant lifestyle for those running the show. In most cases that is a legal requirement. One great loophole in operating a money making business is setting it up as a church and/or charity and then lining ones pockets with the proceeds. If half of what Wilkie claimed in parliament is true, then some within Hillsong would be guilty, and that may well apply to many other churches and charities Australians donate to.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/09/hillsong-accused-of-money-laundering-and-tax-evasion-by-mp-under-parliamentary-privilege

This matter is before the Court, and Wilkie misrepresented the facts. So, for a fair trial we cannot comment in a public place.

"So, for a fair trial we cannot comment in a public place."

What do you mean denied?

You mean where not allowed to exercise free speech?
Stuff that, and stuff Hillsong.

All these people need to be locked up.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/05/hillsong-founder-pastor-brian-houston-sydney-court-trial

"Hillsong church founder Pastor Brian Houston allegedly told a man who had been repeatedly raped as a child by Houston’s father “you know this is all your fault, you tempted my father,” Sydney’s Downing Centre local court heard on Monday."

I'm sure robbing money from the church plate is no problem for peedo protectors.

Any religion that asks for donation is divorced from decency !

Most Churches I know are involved in overseas aid for health - hospitals and education - schools, so, Hillsong would not be any different.

I have mentioned this before on the Forum. I bring up this 'Hillsong' as I hope they get all they deserve. We have a beautiful grand niece now in her late 20's and living in Sydney. Some years back when we also lived there, GN unexpectedly become involved with this very "church". This involvement, she was right into it, caused a rift in her immediate family. The only family she would communicate with was us, "Aunty" and myself, she wuld ring or we'd meet at the shopping centre for a coffee, Aunty would ring her to see how she was getting on. GN would tell us about the wonderful church, it didn't impress me, they seemed to be manipulators with a lot of phoney Christianity involved. Well, as quickly as it started the church business stopped, why because I believe there were those within the "church" who wanted a bit more than Bible readings and happy clapping. The GN would not say a great deal about what happened, still won't say, although she's told Aunty about personal things that happened, she says its in the past, but did say once; "There are some real "dogs" in that church, you can't trust no one!".

p/s If her father knew about those personal things, being a "motorcyclists", the "dogs" might be in trouble.

Proud Boy Jose' are you a Hillsonnger? They sound right up your alley.

AC, is that the same Brian Houston who was a good mate of Scott Morrison, and Morrison was always singing his praises.

There's just no denying it, bureaudroids protecting hypocrites !

Indy,
>Any religion that asks for donation is divorced from decency !

So how do you suggest they cover their costs?
Or do you imagine they somehow don't incur costs?

_____________________________________________________________________

Paul,
>Hillsong is actually a registered charity and not technically a church
Have you any actual evidence it's not technically a church?

_____________________________________________________________________

Armchair,
Hasn't Brian Houston already lost his job because of that?

Aidan,
There are no costs to cover in having faith !

Hi Aidan,

It's my understanding that all monies connected with 'Hillsong' are channelled through 'The Hillsong Foundation' a registered charity. And we're not talking small beer it runs into many, many, millions.

The message Hillsong would like everyone to believe is "Hillsong is a church that believes in Jesus, a church that loves God and people."

Before Jesus and again after people they should insert the word "money". There is also Hillsong International Ltd, not only do their tentacles wrap around locals, particularity youth and children, they have international reach as well. Make no mistake Hillsong is a well oiled financial money making machine. All in the name of God and Jesus of course, the "Saviour" wouldn't want it any other way.

Wilkie made his claims under parliamentary privilege ie he knows that the evidence just isn't there. If he was convinced of the accuracy of the accusations he'd walk outside parliament and make his claims.

Still, he didn't make the claims because he thought they were proven. He made them as fodder for his flying monkeys.

Jose,

"for a fair trial we cannot comment in a public place"...BUT I had no problem commenting here during the Lehrmann/Higgins trial, did you not. Sounds rather hypocritical.

mhaze,

A member should he/she use parliamentary privilege to attack a person or organisation without offering substantial evidence or foundation of wrong doing, then the house can censure that member for their actions. There is no possibility of censure in this case, as Wilkie tabled a mountain of documentary evidence at the time.

Who are these 'flying monkeys' you are referring to?

"the house can censure that member for their actions. "

They CAN but in practice they don't.

"Wilkie tabled a mountain of documentary evidence at the time."

Which he is so confident about </sarc> that he won't talk about them outside the parliament.

Josephus,

"Most Churches I know are involved in overseas aid for health - hospitals and education - schools, so, Hillsong would not be any different."

Or ... you could set up a "church" and use the tax free proceeds to fund your greedy and luxurious lifestyle.

"Mr Wilkie said in 2021, four members of the Houston family spent three days at a luxury retreat in Cancun Mexico using $150,000 of Church money."

"For example, $6500 Cartier watch for Bobbie Houston, $2500 for Louis Vuitton luggage, a $2500 watch for Phil Dooley, two watches worth $15,000 for Joel and Julia A’Bell, shopping sprees for designer clothes at Saks Fifth Avenue and even $16,000 for custom skateboards."

What a joke! - (not to mention that Pentecostal dogma is the antithesis of anything Christ preached)

http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2023/03/09/andrew-wilkie-hillsong/

God sure is showering the blessings on the church leaders.
Who gives a stuff about the poor and needy right?

I can only come up with one thing.

- Accountability -

Maybe they should have to prove they spent the money on the poor and needy, and they are only given tax free status on that money alone.

But the bigger problem is this

- If regular people are chucking cash on the plate or in a bag that's being passed around, what is to stop the leaders taking a 50% chunk of that cash straight off the top without anyone even knowing?

- May as well be a loop-hole to steal without oversight.

I think they should ban any kind of cash contributions, or something that would foolproof the system.
- To ensure there is no possibility of them grifting money given with purely good intentions, with the purpose of helping those in a greater need.

Hi Poirot,

This is the most outrageous misuse of donated money in a millennia, not since Nero spent Catholic dosh to feed Christians to the lions in the year dot has something as bad as this transpired, yet a couple of apologist in mhaze and Josephus, want to claim foul. Imagine if the Greens, or worse still, those upperty black fella had bough themselves a lollipop without the knowledge of that pair, they'd be all over it with the appropriate indigent outrage.

Jose', time for one of those little gems of yours, an anecdotal story about black fellas doing the wrong thing. Come on Jose' surely the bloke in the next pew to you on this bright and breezy Sunday morning has a "juicy" one you can relate.

NO.... I got one just for you; The misses was pegging the washing out, when the old duck from next door stuck her beak over the fence to say; "The black fellas down the street had a noisy barbecue last night, and you wont believe it, they used 100 dollar bills of government money to fire the bloody thing up! You can pass that one on. If not Indy's always got a negative to tell us about those pesky black fellas.

Anyway, back to the God fearing Hillsongers.

Indy's always got a negative to tell us about those pesky black fellas.
Paul1405,
Quoting actual incidents is not an "always negative" to tell, it's to tell what you et al conveniently as per your agenda "always" fail to mention !
You don't burr up when positive incidents get mentioned ! or is it a case of "Never let the facts get in the way of soliciting tears and money?"

Hey mhaze,
"Wilkie made his claims under parliamentary privilege ie he knows that the evidence just isn't there. If he was convinced of the accuracy of the accusations he'd walk outside parliament and make his claims.

Still, he didn't make the claims because he thought they were proven. He made them as fodder for his flying monkeys."

I don't give a stuff about accusations of one instance of wrongdoing.
All it does is emphasise a need for the system to be fool-proofed.
- I care about a badly designed system that will allow endless wrongdoing.

Stuff Hillsong.
Foolproof the system against wrongdoing.
Ban cash donations with huge penalties for accepting cash donations, and rewards for whistleblowers, and have a cash deposit machine that records deposits on an unhackable blockchain, that only non-church affiliated people like Armaguard can access (and only after the data has been uploaded and recorded on that blockchain) after which the funds are then deposited by Armaguard into the church or charities accounts.
- And make them account for every dollar they spent, audited by a non church affiliated government assigned accountant, of which they only get a tax exemption on monies proven to be spent for the purpose it was given.
Any money unaccounted for is taxed, and repeated instances of unaccounted money incurs fines.

- Don't follow the rules, then you don't get to have a church or charity.
Build a fool-proof system or expect further wrongdoing, simple.

Paul,

I'm not seeking to defend Hillsong. But that's your schtick isn't it. If I don't fully agree with your ravings then I must fully disagree. Its black and white in Paul-land, no grey allowed. No grey even recognised let alone understood.

There may be facts to support the Wilkie claims and if there are then let them stand. But clearly Wilkie himself isn't convinced of that or else he wouldn't hide behind parliamentary privilege.

These accusations have been made known to the ATO as well as the documentation. And they've not acted on them. Either they are incompetent -well it is the public service so that's always a likelihood - or they've looked at the information and decided there's no there there. Ditto ASIC.

So unlike Paul et al, I'll wait to see the actual evidence and then make my own judgements rather than rely on a partisan who hasn't even got the courage of his 'convictions'.

OTOH, the most disturbing part of this whole thing is the way the Hillsong followers were forced to hand over all these donations at gun point

Paul,
I asked:
: Have you any actual evidence it's not technically a church?
I take the lack of an answer in your response to be a NO.

'Tis common for churches to run registered charities. There's nothing wrong with that. It is not evidence of misspending money, let alone doing anything illegal. But see below:

______________________________________________________________________

mhaze,
There's a hug difference between compliance with current legal requirements and not wasting money. I don't know whether Hillsong has been misspending money or not, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if it had: 'Tis easy for the rich to lose sight of the need to spend money efficiently, accountably and fairly.
______________________________________________________________________

Indy,
> There are no costs to cover in having faith !

Having faith has never been the only thing churches do.
And genuine faith compels people to action, which can be very costly.

"I don't know whether Hillsong has been misspending money or not,"

Nor do I. But given that Wilkie isn't convinced enough of the evidence to release it outside parliamentary privilege and given that the ATO and ASIC have had the same 'evidence' for some time and not acted, one wonders how good the evidence is.

I know in certain circles any accusation against any group even vaguely Christian is immediately accepted as fact. But that rarely leads to the truth. It does however lead to innocent people spending 404 days in prison.

Hi Aden,

I gave you an answer, what do you want? Their financial records online, a copy of their ASIC registration. Checking with ACNC you will find all of Hillsong operations, even the Hillsong Church, along with 9 other Hillsong entities are ALL registered charities. There is no "Church" other than by name only. The other mob who operate the same way is 'Scientology'.

My wife's local Church (Anglican) also has a registered charity, but it operates independently from the church stricture. What's involved in operating a charity is strictly controlled by government, there's a whole raft of legislation that must be followed, and consequences if you don't. Our local charity operates with an ABN and has a registered name to conduct business operations under.

BTW There is much in Hansard to read on the subject of Hillsong.

Wilkie looking into Hillsong is like Judas looking into the crucifixion !

OR making Indyvidual the Minister for Aboriginal Affairs.

I find Andrew Wilkie a very good MP, a moderate who considers the issues well, and is NOT prone to running off at the mouth at the drop of a hat. As Hillsong is conservative, a friend of the likes of Scott Morrison there are those on the Forum who will defend their wrong doing.

One might ask, why all the charity business, one could just operate as a "church" and pay no tax and pocket the dosh. The answer is simple GOVERNMENT GRANTS, PRIVATE DONATIONS/GIFTS that receive a tax write off for donating to charities.

Hillsong has received government grants big time. During the Morrison years $43 million in government contracts can be traced back to Leigh Coleman, formerly of Hillsong whilst being a registered charity set up to address Indigenous unemployment and disadvantage. One of Hillsong's charities spent $315,000 from a federal government grant to employ seven people for a microcredit program in Sydney that gave just six Indigenous people a small loan. The total grant for the microcredit program was $965,421. One might ask where is the other $650,000?

Paul1405,
You perfectly fill the role of someone "telling the truth with bad intent beats all the lies you can invent " !