Customize

Dutch tax exemption revoked + bonus announcements

Discussion in 'Leaks & Legal' started by Anonymous, Jul 18, 2012.

  1. The Wrong Guy Member

    Our money maverick dives into Scientology’s latest financial house of horrors | The Underground Bunker

    This week, documents became available that had been submitted by Narconon Holland, the Scientology drug rehab center in the Netherlands. At a quick glance, they indicated that the place was in serious trouble. And now, Underground Bunker regular “John P.” — who enjoys telling us about his luxurious life in high finance — has broken down those documents in more detail, as only he can. For our newer readers, you will sense that John P. is having fun with his reports about himself, but when he dives into a financial report like this, he’s all business. We hope you enjoy his analysis.

    Continued here:
    http://tonyortega.org/2016/06/16/ou...ientologys-latest-financial-house-of-horrors/
    • Like Like x 2
  2. RightOn Member

    TODAY IS JUNE 16TH 2016
    WHY ARE THEY STILL OPEN?
  3. TrevAnon Member

    Huh?

    Though I have to agree, as this is correct for ANY Narconon, but AFAIK there is no special reason? Or did I miss something?
  4. AnonLover Member

    I'm assuming the disclaimer that this was serious was a joke as it reads like parody post done just for grins; a for-profit, top-down styled psuedo analysis centering around Net Income and where the revenue goes, and done that way so as to mock the fact that Scientology fronts aren't really non-profits. Rather than a serious, bottom up non-profit style analysis centering around the expected little-to-no change in Net Assets and working backward to vet where the biggest expenditure are that makes them a non-profit.

    But FWIW I thought the hilarious conspiracy-theory type remark about the loans hiding something rather than pointing out that's the normal mechanism for offsetting income (with NI substituted for a proper LOC) was intended to be a dead giveaway that the usual bullet points from chapter 2 intro to non-profits of a typical Accounting 201 college textbook was not in-play here.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. TrevAnon Member

    I guess I should have quoted RightOn's post, as mine was directed to that one.

    I might as well do so now. :p

    • Like Like x 1
  6. AnonLover Member

    Ooops, sorry. I had a misunderstood :rolleyes:
    • Like Like x 1
  7. TrevAnon Member

    It's called an M/U. :D
  8. RightOn Member

    It does apply to ALL Narconons.
    I have been posting that comment for quite a while concerning any Narconon in all threads.
    It's kinda my signature comment :cool:
    • Like Like x 1
  9. I’ve made myself useful by following up on the publication of the financial statements of the Dutch Narconon, which John P dissected this Thursday on Tony's site. Although I usually operate in the background, I have opted to publicize one of my letters in full below.

    It concerns a letter I sent to Narconon itself…

    Dear members of the Board of Directors of Narconon Holland,

    With this letter I would like to put you on notice that your failure to enter Narconon Holland into bankruptcy proceedings constitutes mismanagement as defined in Artikel 2:9 Burgelijk Wetboek. This means you can be hold personally liable for the debts that Narconon Holland has incurred during your tenure as a Board member, in accordance with the ‘Wet Bestuurdersaansprakelijkheid’.

    Your mismanagement and personal liability is evident from Narconon’s own website and financial statements [1]:
    1. In contrast to other rehab facilities, Narconon is not covered by health insurance and thus free of charge. According to its website, the cost of the program is between €10K and €15K. In return, Narconon promises its clients a “unique homely environment” and no waiting list. On the face of it, this is not a very viable business model.
    2. By the end of 2014, the debts of Narconon Holland had ballooned to €675K. Having been founded 39 years ago, this implies an average yearly loss of €17K. In 2012, 2013 and 2014, losses amounted to €53K, €23K and €91K respectively.
    3. Set against a turnover of just €118K in 2014, it is evident that Narconon’s business model is indeed failing dramatically.
    4. Narconon has been able exist for this long due to a very sizeable, perpetual and interest free loan from an unnamed religious organization. By around 2012, Narconon had through this loan and it has since been accumulating debts with the Tax Office and other creditors.
    5. By the end of 2014, its tax debt alone far exceeded remaining assets. Because the tax free ANBI status was revoked in March 2016, tax debts are set to increase further as back taxes are likely to be levied over donations received between January 2014 and March 2016.
    6. Should a bankruptcy happen at this point in time, a curator could only hope to recover money by pursuing a personal liability case against the Board of Directors.
    7. There are only two ways for Narconon to reach a point where it can start paying back on its existing debts: consistently attract enough donations to subsidize a loss making operation or become a profitable operation.
    8. Even if Narconon were to achieve this, the debt level exceeded turnover by a factor of five in 2014. This means it is nigh impossible for Narconon to ever fully recover on its debts.
    9. Even though the Board of Directors claims to focus on fundraising, Narconon achieved a lower level of donations in 2014 compared to 2013. This highlights how fickle the results of fundraising activities by Narconon are and will continue to be. It is extremely unlikely that Narconon will find benefactors willing to subsidize a consistently lossmaking operation, in particular when taking into account the recent revocation of the ANBI status.
    10. The year reports for 2013 and 2014 contain an identical statement that the situation will improve due to unnamed developments in Narconon International, the mother organization of Narconon Holland. By relying on external developments, the Board of Directors demonstrates that it does not intend to initiate an internal reform program to improve profitability. Even worse, the Board fails to explain what these developments entail and how they will suddenly turn the business model of Narconon into a viable one. It is clear that the Board of Directors is merely engaging in wishful thinking.
    11. The Board of Directors failed to publish financial statements until June 2016, a legal requirement since 2014. It has also failed to register its members with the Chamber of Commerce, again a legal requirement. Both situations underscore a sense of incompetence of the Board of Directors.
    12. The work of the current Executive Director is absolutely crucial to the daily operations of Narconon Holland. However, she has been wanting to quit for at least two or three years. No successor could be found during that time frame and the latest year report makes it clear this is not about to change.
    13. The above points make it clear that a future bankruptcy of Narconon Holland is inevitable.
    14. The Board of Directors is legally required to initiate bankruptcy proceedings of Narconon Holland without further delay.
    There are three potential courses of action which you can take with regards to this letter:
    1. If you disagree with my assessment and wish to continue operating Narconon Holland, you have a legal obligation to document my letter and your response in the minutes of your next Board meeting. However, you should realize that a curator or suing creditors may well initiate proceedings against you once they inevitably arrive on the scene. You risk being held accountable for the debts that Narconon incurred in the last number of years and even more so for any further debts that Narconon engages in after today.
    2. Pretend this letter never happened, even though that is another violation of Artikel 2:9 Burgelijk Wetboek. You will risk that this letter becomes even more damning evidence, should a future curator or creditor choose to initiate legal proceedings against you. If I do not receive a confirmation of receipt of this e-mail from a member of the Board of Directors, I will send this letter through registered mail as well. Please note that I will also post this letter on the internet. You can find it in the comments section of today’s article on a website called the Underground Bunker and on a forum called Whyweprotest [2]. Or.
    3. Belatedly and immediately enter Narconon Holland into bankruptcy proceedings.
    I trust you will make the right decision and choose the latter option, as you should have done years and years ago.

    Yours truly,
    Henk de Vries.

    [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20160613152944/http://narconon.nl/over-de-stichting/
    [2] http://tonyortega.org/2016/06/19/sc...e-and-with-the-euro-2016-football-tournament/, https://whyweprotest.net/threads/dutch-tax-exemption-revoked-bonus-announcements.103913/page-9

    (end of letter and don’t worry, that’s not my actual name)

    Hopefully this letter will one day help some of the creditors of Narconon Holland, in particular its staff and the hapless Catholic monastry, getting at least some money back.
    • Like Like x 4
  10. TrevAnon Member

    ^ Nice!

    But would sending them this letter without signing of with your real name have legal implications, or could they just put it aside? Or did you sign with your real name in the actual letter?

    Just asking. I'm not that well versed in the legal field. :)
  11. No, I didn't sign with my real name and that doesn't matter. The main thing is that it is sent, which means that the Board has been put on notice that they can be found personally liable for failing to put Narconon out of business. They are so comically incompetent that I suspect that they haven't realized this before.

    I am not sure whether a curator would persue such a course of action, but I think he would have a very strong case if he would, with or without my letter. Having sent the letter will not hurt though.
    • Like Like x 1
  12. JohnnyRUClear Member

    ASSUMING all in the letter is accurate, that is a terrific letter.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. TrevAnon Member

    Looks like you were right here. ;)

    Report for 2015 is in! SCIENO LINK http://narconon.nl/over-de-stichting/
    If you don't want to go there see attached PDF.
    It's even more of a train wreck now.
    Google translation: Again , we look for new ways to improve the position, and there is a possibility that this can be solved by a large donor.

    TrevAnon translation: we don't know how,we don't know when, but we are going to find some poor schmuck to cough up 700,000 euro.

    The cloister that coughed up 409,000 euro now is an anonymous donor. Thank you Anon! :p

    Attached Files:

  14. TrevAnon Member

    JohnP Capitalist's view on the 2015 report

    http://tonyortega.org/2016/07/08/ou...w-and-grim-scientology-financial-disclosures/
    More at the link
    • Like Like x 1
  15. The Wrong Guy Member

    Our money man takes another look at new (and grim) Scientology financial disclosures | The Underground Bunker

    Once again we’ve turned to our money man, John P, to help us dive into some interesting Scientology documents that have turned up in the Netherlands. Scientology is normally very secretive about its finances, but in a couple of countries, like Ireland and the Netherlands, local laws force them to open up their books. That gives us a rare chance to see how the local organizations are faring. And once again, the outlook is not good. In this case, the Scientology drug rehab center in Holland submitted its financial report for 2015, and we turned it over to John P.

    Continued here:
    http://tonyortega.org/2016/07/08/ou...w-and-grim-scientology-financial-disclosures/
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Quentinanon Member

    “rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.”

    I think an apt description of the current state of scientology in general.
    And this:

    "They’re managing cash flow by stiffing creditors. Accounts payable went from €87,700 last year to €108,800 in 2015. Basically, they owe trade creditors a year’s worth of revenue. We’d typically expect well-run companies to pay their bills within 60 days, so that number should be closer to €20,000. Those poor businesses who made the mistake of doing business with Narconon NL are going to end up getting stiffed for a lot of money when this thing finally implodes."
  17. TrevAnon Member

    Stealing from scamofscientology on the bunker, I hope s/he doesn't mind :D :

    http://tonyortega.org/2016/08/18/ew...e-of-its-chief-drug-rehab/#comment-2843907096

    There is an incremental update in the legal battle between the Tax Office and Scientology in the Netherlands that I wanted to post. Last time round, the Appellate Court denied Scientology tax exemption after the Supreme Court reversed an earlier decision which was favorable for the Church.
    Scientology has appealed this decision once more to the Supreme Court. Today’s update is not the verdict of the Supreme Court itself, but of its advisory body. The advisory body, called the Advocaat-generaal, has reviewed not only the appeal briefs of both sides both also a number of scholarly reviews and critiques that were published about the previous ruling. Because the two Supreme Court decisions about Scientology’s tax exempt status (known as the first and second Scientology arrest) are important case law, several critiques were published in the last year.

    The advice of the Advocaat-generaal to the Supreme Court, published last week, is to uphold the decision to deny tax exemption to Scientology.

    Because it can be difficult to keep track of Scientology’s numerous attempts to obtain tax exemption for itself and its front groups, I’ve added an infographic showing all milestones so far (I hope it comes out OK, imgur has changed).

    http://deeplink.rechtspraak.nl/uitspraak?id=ECLI:NL:PHR:2016:785

    original.jpg
    • Like Like x 3
  18. TrevAnon Member

    • Like Like x 1
  19. It's It's true, most of them were scammed, maybe all. Wonder if Tom Cruise would like out but knows his life would be worthless if he tried to leave. One thing I know for sure, I'd like to see their tax exempt status revoked everywhere, especially in US. I am appalled at their tax exemption status but will give the courts the benefit of doubt as I tax exemption was given in its infancy of trying to not discriminate toward freedom of speech regardless if they were devil worshippers, but where is the line drawn? Murder? Aren't there enough cases to say, wait a minute there are too many coincidences? Even the high number of suicides amongst Scientoligists whether ex-members or not, go far and above any group of statistics. Scientology is like the Mob getting tax exemption- without any tax cheating!
  20. Scientology denied charity status in the Netherlands.

    http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/36383/Sci...e-rechter-Scientology-is-geen-goed-doel.dhtml

    Google translation below.

    * * * * * BEGIN EXCERPT * * * * *

    Highest Dutch court: Scientology is not a charity

    © Afp. The Church of Scientology remains absent on the list of charities. The Supreme Court ruled Friday that the Dutch branch of the Church rightly last year has not been marked as "public welfare institution (anbi).

    The ruling follows the Court the mindset of the court in The Hague, which ruled over a year ago that the sale of courses and therapy - one of the main activities of Scientology - was clearly aimed at making profit. That was the main reason to distinguish the Church of Scientology of other denominations in the Netherlands, who are on the charity list. The Tax and sees religion in principle as 'charitable'.

    The Supreme Court now holds in cassation, the argument is maintained that the Church of Scientology 'consciously seeks to achieve surpluses' and fill her greenhouse. The ruling had implications both for the organization and for the fans, Faith wrote last year. Scientologists can no longer deduct their donations from income tax. The church itself is not exempt from inheritance tax and gift tax.

    The church can still make their way to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. The denomination was there once before: when the European Court ruled that the Russian branch of Scientology could be banned.

    Editors 29-11-16 - 11:59

    * * * * * END EXCERPT * * * * *
    • Like Like x 3
  21. TrevAnon Member

    http://tonyortega.org/2016/11/29/as...ed-by-scientology-in-mind/#comment-3026236030

    copying this so it won't get buried

    scamofscientology Dice ✓ 2 minutes ago
    Lol, journalists are weird creatures. I told Tony over the weekend that this would be too small an update to be picked up by Dutch media, but evidently they did.
    I had planned to announce this development in one of my rambling posts, but I wanted to call the Tax Office first. I would like to get a better understanding on the size of the back taxes they are going to have to pay. These are signifciant and likely to exceed a million dollar, but I need more confirmation before posting this.

    Anyways, since Dutch media did pick it up, I would like to take the opportunity to add some commentary about the verdict itself.
    Basically, the Supreme Court said two things:
    1) An organisation that charges commercial prices and succeeds in consistently making a profit, can by definition not pass a public benefit test and
    2) The fact that you happen to be a religion is completely irrelevant.

    They stated the latter in a very smart way: by omission. They simply refused to even make the argument in their verdict. And that's a brilliant move in my view. So far, all previous courts allowed the Church to draw the religion card. This inevitably lead them to refer to the only legislation on this matter: a very poorly written bylaw that arguably discriminates against Scientology and other minority religions. Scientology already announced in their latest brief that they will take the discrimination angle to the European Court of Justice and they might have found a sympathetic ear there.
    I think that the Surpreme Court effectively neutralized this scenario by ignoring the religion angle. As a result, Scientology can only take argument number 1 to the European Court of Justice, who won't find any fault in this plain and simple truth.
    Anyways, that's it for now. I hope to write a bit more on my calculation of the back taxes once I have had a change to call the tax office.
    • Like Like x 5
    • Like Like x 2
  22. TrevAnon Member

    LOL! No. Wish I was though :p
    • Like Like x 1
  23. Quentinanon Member

    "An organisation that charges commercial prices and succeeds in consistently making a profit, can by definition not pass a public benefit test."
    • Like Like x 3
  24. jensting Member

    I think they mean that the ECHR found that the Russian ban was inappropriate.

    Another thing the ECHR did, was to refuse to hear an appeal against the French ruling that criminal organisation known as the "church" of $cientology was guilty of organised fraud. Yay.
    • Like Like x 1
  25. TrevAnon Member

    Dutch foundation Way to happiness published 2016 balance and p&l

    If you must go there SCIENO LINK remove spaces htt p://www.dew egnaargeluk.nl/of ficiele-documenten/

    In short: the board (all current scilons) gives WTH money and WTH then spends it on what they call PR and advertising. Total about 7,600 euro.

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 1
  26. TrevAnon Member

    Wow. NCRM (Dutch CCHR) also published a balance. No P&L though.

    Again only if you must SCIENO LINK remove spaces ht tp:// www. ncrm.nl/ned erlands-comite-voor-de-rechten-van-de-mens-gegevens-van-de-stichting/

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 1
  27. Quentinanon Member

    I guess the French Court has simply proclaimed the obvious. The scientology organization operates solely on organized fraud.
    If it isn't fraud, it isn't scientology.
    • Like Like x 1
  28. Incredulicide Member

    Waybacked PDFs: 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016
    Waybacked PDFs: 2015, 2016
    • Like Like x 1
  29. Intelligence Member

    • Like Like x 1
  30. TrevAnon Member

  31. I have some fun updates and tidbits from Holland today (report from my comment at TO).

    First off, Narconon: As people may remember, they are deeply, deeply in debt. Apparently Davey won't bail them out because fundraisers begging for money continue to appear online every once in a while. In the last one (http://whydonate.nl/joanna-gaat-ver...en-met-een-gift-aan-narconon-verrassen/event/) they announce that their director is leaving and that they are no longer able to maintain the building. They have to publish the 2016 financial statements in two months time, so that should be fun.

    The next topic are legal documents which are a few years old but which I didn't find until recently. They are the appeals of the Dutch IRS and Scientology in the supreme court decisions of the past few years, in which Scientology was denied tax exemption. So far, I had only seen the verdicts themselves, but not the appeals by both parties.

    The IRS one is here: https://www.navigator.nl/document/i...nchor=id-cb396878-7ce4-4b75-9051-bae5ba88c2af
    and the Scientology one is here: https://www.navigator.nl/document/i...nchor=id-b5e1a5c2-a230-45a8-ab74-401b27e8f5a9.

    The one from the IRS includes this quote from the Holysmoke website:
    ‘In all my years in $cientology, including the time I was on staff at a ‘Class IV Org’, the almost eight years on staff in the Sea Org, and during the many years I was a ‘public’ member, I never once saw any service given for free by any $cientology ‘non-profit’ corporation calling itself a <church>.’

    So, the Dutch IRS actually spelled Scientology as $cientology in their legal appeal. Now tell me again that tax people do not have a sense of humor and do not know the art of trolling?

    The Scientology version is mostly interesting because it contains financial data that has not been published before. I'm gonna show you two graphs. The first is the cumulative debt between 1997 and 2008, which has grown to €1.25M by 2008:
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/image...513a072e6f0998cdf5eed31177e1119a5596d57bb.png

    This self-reported debt is due to a total of pre-paid courses of €1.4M. I say self-reported because the courts did not recognize this post as a valid liability and treated the income from pre-paid courses as profit. Scientology included a graph according to this calculation as well for the years 1997-2010. The title reads total assets without the debt from pre-paid courses and books in stock which should pretty much equal money on account:
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/image...a7b1d00d0f5886fe5a22f5c49e845da84d773d586.png

    These numbers confirm what we have seen from other financial statements such as in Ireland and New Zealand: local orgs are loss-making loses even when they are spending the income from prepaid courses instead of putting those in an escrow account. The Dutch numbers evidence this is not only the case in smaller orgs with dozens of victims, but also in larger orgs (the Dutch one has 200-300 paying customers, some 75 of whom are hard core).

    And for good measure (I noticed PKR posted about this yesterday as well) let me just repost the map of Amsterdam with the location of their shitty new org:
    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/image...5ded6b373e99c32a8a976906feff7ff8fbc39a3d3.png.

    They moved out of their building in the city centre because this is being redeveloped into a shop, 10 apartments and 2 penthouses by the owners. They haven't been able to timely renovate the Ideal Org building which they bought in 2013, so now they have to move to a shitty temporary location without any foot traffic.
    • Like Like x 3
  32. TrevAnon Member

    I just reported NCRM (Dutch CCHR) for not fully publishing P&L, and Narconon for not at all publishing their financial report 2016 to the Dutch IRS.

    Why?

    Just because I can.

    I'll keep an eye on them.
    • Like Like x 3
  33. Excellent. I'll do the same in a fel weeks time when it is clear they won't be coming at all.
  34. TrevAnon Member

    Of course I also sent e-mails to Narconon and NCRM themselves to get them to oblige. :p
  35. TrevAnon Member

    While surfing around I just found Dutch foundation Vecht terug (fight back).

    According to the Belastingdienst search tool they also have anbi status, but their web page only has published records from 2013.

    SCIENO LINK REMOVE SPACES http:// www.v echtterug.nl/wie-zijn-wij/informatie-over-de-stichting/

    Whopping balance total for 2013 of minus 70 euro. :p

    Of course I ratted them out :p
  36. TrevAnon Member

    LOL! Got confirmation from NCRM they got my message.

    When I also pointed out that Vecht terug is behind on its obligations they friendly asked why I am busy with this.

    I just told the truth; an interested Dutch citizen thinking COS is bad (I used far friendlier words) and put links to the big list and the disconnection list with it.

    Now let's see what happens. :D
  37. Quentinanon Member

    Vecht terug is downstat.
    I hope they eat rice and beans.
  38. TrevAnon Member

    These people are so predictable. I saw that they always use a page "over de stichting" for the legal stuff. So I googled "over de stichting" and l ron hubbard together.

    Found another one: Stichting Geen drugs Wel leven. (Foundation No to drugs, yes to life)

    SCIENO LINK http://geendrugs-welleven.blogspot.nl/

    Actually these people have done their homework! :)

    All relevant and mandatory documents are there. And they look nice, with photographs of activities they organised, and simple but good financial overviews. Again it's nothing big in financial terms: a couple hundred euro per year as turnover. But it looks they do good things and comply with the Dutch legal system. Can't say that for the other legal entities with anbi-status.

    BRB signing up for communication course :D

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors

Close

Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins