![]() The church's New Zealand operations are audited by its General Conference Auditing Service, which Standish says "operates independently".Īsked for his opinion on the church's overseas investments, Revenue Minister Peter Dunne said the Government had committed to reviewing the Charities Act by the end of 2015. "We prefer to keep the individual's name and specifics of their holdings private unless they decide to make them public, but the holder is not among our church's most senior officers." ![]() "That small stake was purchased before the church decided to invest in the firm and was fully disclosed to the relevant board before the church decided to invest," he says. Standish confirmed that a church administrator owned a personal stake in one of the three US ventures before the church made its investments into them. "This is not a strategy we have talked about publicly but we have over the past few years been quietly and deliberately moving in this direction." ![]() "We see a convergence occurring globally between pharmaceuticals and food," Standish says. He wouldn't provide any further details on the food products. Standish says all three of the church's US investments have technology that will benefit its core businesses and Asklepion, which is developing "world first food products", is no exception. It's developing treatments for liver diseases, according to its website, which lists the chief executive of Sanitarium's Australian arm, Kevin Jackson, as its chairman.Ĭourtney, the general manager of Sanitarium's international operations, is also a director, the website says. While a business that appears to have something to do with seeds seems a logical investment for an organisation involved in the cereal trade, Asklepion Pharmaceuticals doesn't appear to be carrying out activities that would benefit food companies. Standish says the church had to make "a provision" on its investment in Primordia because of the dispute, which resulted in an adjustment to the investment's carrying value. We now fully own the key technology from this venture." "Now the dispute is settled the company will shortly emerge from Chapter 11 and continue functioning. "This was action we initiated in order to bring the dispute to resolution," he says. "The food industry constantly invests in new innovation and our company's no different to that," van Heerden says. He says he doesn't see any difference between a firm like Nestle or Kellogg's and a charity-owned, company tax-exempt enterprise like Sanitarium. Sanitarium general manager Pierre van Heerden also defended the investments, saying Nestle has adopted a similar strategy in order to "ensure its future". "We would have a very bleak future if we didn't access similarly cutting edge technology for the sectors we're involved in." "Investing offshore is like buying a capital asset such as machinery internationally and then using it to generate revenue," he says, adding that Sanitarium's multi-national competitors are making similar investments to gain access to technology. ![]() Standish says the US investments will benefit the church's food businesses in this country and returns gained from them will be used in New Zealand for charitable activities, which include the Adventist Development & Relief Agency, schools and aged care facilities. ![]() Wallace says that rationale harks back to archaic British law and is "way past its use-by date, especially in New Zealand, where religious belief is on the verge of dropping below 50 per cent of the population". The IRD considers the "advancement of religion" a charitable purpose that qualifies for a tax break. "It's certainly in the economic interest of governments now, with stretched budgets, to reconsider because the cost to the state is very significant," says Wallace. Max Wallace, an Australian author and vocal critic of the tax exemptions enjoyed by religious organisations, says the investments support the idea that churches have become "corporations trading on their tax-exempt status". "If they've got so much money that they can afford to invest in other countries rather than apply the funds for charitable purposes, then you'd have to question that," Gousmett says. "I'm advised the Group One entities were not required, under New Zealand law, to pay tax on business income they reinvested and continue to retain ownership of," he says.Ĭanterbury-based charities researcher Michael Gousmett questioned why the church's businesses had invested such a large sum of cash outside New Zealand that could go towards charitable work in this country. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |