Lolek Ltd, Trading as 'The Iona Institute'

The seems very pro marriage. Best of luck to them.
I just don't like their attitude towards education.

David Quinn makes me more atheist (if that is possible) everytime I hear him.
'marriage is for creating children' HELLO - what about those over reproductive age? is there an ceiling on the age at which a woman can marry? does she need to show her ovulation sticks before the priest can marry her? and the poor infertile people, can they not marry? or those with erectile dysfunction? will the priest be checking for that too? Dope!
Made stuff about Yugoslavia tonight too, and that whole 'society NEEDS religon for morality'
He makes me shout at the radio or tv.

lazygal wrote: »

Does anyone know anything about this organisation? Where it is funded from and by whom? Who runs it? Why it gets such a platform? I've been digging around a bit but its very difficult to find out anything about it.

Plenty of spleen vented in the earlier answers, but not much actual information. Can anyone cast light on how the Iona Institute is funded, and by whom?

lazygal wrote: »

Does I'm also mystified as to why David Quinn appears so often representing a relatively new body which seems to be largly self-appointed and why he is allowed such a platform.

Filler. Journalists are as lazy as the next bloke, and they have column-inches or airspace to fill, and usually tight deadlines within which they must fill it. Quinn provide them with copy, or the broadcast equivalent, and given the choice between generating their own copy and taking what is handed out to them journalists will go for the latter every time.

Plus, “balance”. If you want a discussion, you need two sides represented. Quinn is an always available, and reasonably fluent, advocate for a conservative perspective which doesn’t have too many advocates.

Plus, controversy, which some media outlets like. Quinn gets up people’s noses (as we can see in this thread). In some circles, that’s considered a good thing. At least it gets talked programmes noticed and talked about.

mambo wrote: »

Anyone ever bothered to check out Iona's accounts
http://www.cro.ie/search/ListSubDocs.aspx?id=424940&type=C
Would they have details of where funding comes from?

It's unlikely that they'd identify donors, if that's what your interested in, any more than a commercial company's accounts would identify the customers from whom they get their revenue. The purpose of requiring accounts to be filed under the Companies Acts is so that people can assess the solvency of the company, if they wish. For this purpose you need to know the amount of donations, subscriptions, sales or whatever, but not the identity of the individuals or entities from whom they are sourced.

Sharrow wrote: »

They are also a registered charity and don't pay tax.

Pardon my ignorance and profanity here but what the sweet actual f*ck do they do that could be construed as charitable?

Skrynesaver wrote: »

Looking up Lolek in the CRO indicates that they are head-quartered in 23 Merrion Sq. which appears to be the office of St. Joseph's young Priest Society, (I vaguely remember collections for this org. when I was a young fella, they nominally assist young lads who think they have a vocation in going to Maynooth and Rome for mind setting.) . . .

23 Merrion Square is also the address of the Iona Institute itself, so I don't think we need to assume a link between Lolek and the St. Joseph Young Priests Society to account for Lolek's presence on the premises.

MrPudding wrote: »

On my phone at the moment, so can't provided links, but there is some interesting goings on in the UK about this right now.

Some religious group has been refused charitable status by the charity commission. I haven't looked at this is detail but I think it goes something like this: to gain charitable status in the UK you need to show a public benefit that your charity provides. Previously this was assumed for a religious group. In this case it has not been assumed and the commissioners can't see the public benefit of this particular group, so no charitable status.

MrP

The religious group concerned is the Exclusive Brethren who - as the name suggests - keep themselves to themselves, withdrawing so far as they can into self-contained and self-sufficient communities, and avoiding contamination by the world. They don’t have a problem doing routine business with outsiders but they don’t, for example, eat and drink with them. Their services are not open to non-members. If you transgress the rules of the community you may be “disfellowshipped”, in which case other Exclusive Brethren - including your family - are expected not to associate with you. You get the picture.

A while back, an EB-linked entity known as the “Preston Down Trust” applied for charitable status, and was refused. The Trust, as far as I can make out from newspaper reports, is analogous to a parish in other denominations; it owns a gospel hall in which regular Exclusive Brethren services are held. It seems they were refused on the basis that all their activities were open to members only, so the activities of the Trust couldn’t be said to confer any “public benefit”. The Trust has appealed the Charity Commissioners’ initial decision, and the hearing of that appeal is awaited.

This isn’t a completely novel position in England. Way back in 1949 the Court of Appeal held that a bequest to an convent of Carmelite nuns was not charitable because the convent was strictly enclosed, and the nuns made rather a point of not engaging with the public.

I don’t know if there is any Irish precedent on this, but the legal background is subtly different. In the UK, a purpose is charitable if it is

- (a) “for the advancement of religion” [or for a wide variety of other purposes - relief of poverty, advancement of education, advancement of arts, promotion of efficiency of the armed services(!), etc, etc] and

- (b) it is “for the public benefit”.

I.e. these are two separate requirements. They are separate requirements in Ireland too, except that there is a presumption (in s. 3(4) of the Charities Act 2009) that the advancement of religion is of public benefit “unless the contrary is proved”. So, if this matter ever comes before an Irish court, it will be up to those denying charitable status (almost certainly, the Revenue Commissioners, a Local Authority or the Charities Regulatory Authority) to establish that the religious purpose of the body concerned is not for public benefit.

FWIW, I couldn't see this causing a problem for the Iona Institute. Far from "withdrawing from the world", they engage actively with it, seeking to inform public debate and influence public opinion - which, if you're a republican, is very much for the public benefit. They're about as far from the Exclusive Brethren as you could hope to get.

I would imagine the Department of Finance are probably getting more anf more strict about what is and is not a charity in the search for more tax moneys. I'd guess a lot of charities that recieved 'charity status' te years ago would not have gotten it if hey applied today.

I doubt anyone here is looking to have their charitable status removed to save the economy. It should be removed because they aren't a charity from what I've observed. There are plenty of religious charities in this country St. V de P etc. and while I won't donate to them personally I agree they should have charity status because they do charity work. IONA doesn't.

The idea that the Iona Institute is a registered charity is stomach-churning. They are a propaganda group, with a very clear theocratic agenda.

If they are a charity, Atheist Ireland should apply for charitable status. And if they are refused, the law on qualifying for charitable status should be added to the list of things that need to be changed for a secular Ireland. The key thing here is the assumption that promoting religion is "of benefit to society", which of course is patent nonsense.

recedite wrote: »

Revenue don't actually define what "a charity" is in that document. They just say the body should use its money for charitable purposes.

In other words, its not clear whether there is a "public good" requirement involved, or not.

There is. “Charitable purpose” is defined in the Charities Act 2009. There’s two parts to the definition:

First, to be charitable a purpose must be
- the prevention or relief of poverty or economic hardship
- the advancement of education
- the advancement of religion
- “any other purpose that is of benefit to the community”.

The last category is a bit of a catchall; it can include, e.g., animal welfare, care of the elderly or disabled (who may not be poor, and so don’t come in under the first head), cultural activities and the arts, community development, medical charities, etc.

Secondly, the purpose must be “of public benefit”. (This is what prevents, e.g., a trust established by me to pay my own daughter’s school fees from being charitable. It’s for the advancement of education, all right, but my daughter is not “the public”. Whereas a trust to provide scholarships for children from (say) Leitrim, or for the children of soldiers and sailors, would be charitable).

Simply having a charitable purpose, though, is not enough to qualify you for charitable tax reliefs. Before the revenue will approve you, there’s a further layer of tests applied. You must be legally established in Ireland, and have your central managements and control here. Your constitutional documents must require all your income and assets to be used for charitable purposes - i.e. it’s not enough that your activities include charitable purposes; they must be exclusively charitable. You must be non-profit - paying no dividends or the like to shareholders or investors, and on winding up transferring any remaining assets you have to another charity, not to the founders/investors/shareholders.

mambo wrote: »

But charity status also means donations (say from a few wealthy Opus Dei-type backers) qualify for tax relief.

Not quite. Recedite has it in post #45. If you contribute to an eligible charity you get no relief or refund, but the charity can reclaim from the Revenue the income tax that you paid on your donation.

(The usual allegation, or at least suspicion, in relation to the Iona Institute is that they are funded by US-based socially conservative groups. To the extent that this is true, charitable status in Ireland would be of limited use. You can’t reclaim tax on donations from donors who don’t themselves pay tax in Ireland.)

lazygal wrote: »

Is Youth Defence classed as a charity?

They’re not on the Revenue list. I don’t know if they have ever applied for charitable status.

fisgon wrote: »

The idea that the Iona Institute is a registered charity is stomach-churning. They are a propaganda group, with a very clear theocratic agenda.

If they are a charity, Atheist Ireland should apply for charitable status.

Atheist Ireland aren’t on the Revenue list of eligible charities. That may simply be because they haven’t applied, and that could easily be because they already have a minimal or no tax liability, and Revenue approval would be of no advantage, or of so little advantage that it’s not worth seeking it.

FWIW, the Humanist Association of Ireland is on the list.

Banbh wrote: »

I've heard that the Revenue have applied the USC to priests, although they are usually exempt from income tax. Does anyone know the regulation in this area?

Priests are not exempt from income tax.

Priests who are employed (e.g. as teachers, social workers, etc) pay PRSI (including levies and charges) like other employees (and their employers pay employer PRSI, even if they are charities). They qualify for the same social insurance benefits as other employees. Diocesan clergy are not employees; they pay PRSI (inc. levies/charges) as self-employed, and qualify for the same social insurance benefits as the rest of the self employed. There is a special PRSI contribution rate for Anglican clergymen, which I think reflects the fact that the Church of Ireland has lifetime housing arrangements for them, and so there are certain housing benefits for which they do not qualify. Or something like that.

The Charities Act 2009 provides that the advancement of religion is a charitable purpose (and it merely confirmed existing law in that regard). As long as that remains the case the Revenue Commissioners will treat the advancement of religion as charitable; you won't get them to justify that, since there job is to implement the law enacted by the Oireachtas, not to justify or comment on the policy which underlies it.

You could check the parliamentary debates when the Charities Act was under discussion to see what justification the government advanced for this treatment, and what observations the opposition made. And it would be interesting to know what the independent senators had to say about it.

Nothing will change in this regard unless and until the Oireachtas amends or replaces the Charities Act.