Exactly. But my point is that he won't have access to that data. As that would be the Church's expense accounts. The whistleblower was in the investment arm.

Exactly. But my point is that he won't have access to that data. As that would be the Church's expense accounts. The whistleblower was in the investment arm. The whole issue boils down to these two statements : >Christopher Waddell: No, because then everyone would be telling us what they wanted us to do with the money. > Last year the church says it spent over a billion dollars on humanitarian aid, including food production. > Christopher Waddell: In any given month you may have an average of nine transfers going from Ensign Peak back to the church to fund all church operations. All humanitarian work-- education work, all the work of the church they fund. > David Nielsen: Money's going in and out of the cash accounts all the time. But Ensign Peak's funds were never used for any charitable purpose, as to my knowledge the whole time I was there. So there's a bit of a distinction here that's important. I just find it funny ( from what I understood of the article ) that they don't have to give any audit the accounts and submit to IRS. Let them not get taxed as a religious organization. But at least the money trail is something the IRS and Government should be made aware of.