Abramoff, Agriprocessors, Boesky...
I join in the dismay and outrage and embarrassed על חטא- klopping every time a Jew is indicted for improper business practices and immoral activity. Yesterday I heard about another case, and again went through the recriminations.
That said, I must add two caveats from personal experience:
1) The rationalizations for financial impropriety are often very tempting, and
2) Rabbis are sometimes involved in it, without even knowing they are doing anything illicit.
One particular case, from my own experience, comes to mind:
A while back I officiated at a funeral for an unaffiliated family. They made all of their arrangements with a local funeral home, and the funeral director was to pay me for my services.
(Disclaimer: As a general rule I don’t charge for funerals, or other services; people want to do things right, they need a rabbi, so how could I make that difficult for them? Bar Mitzvah training, weddings, funerals, I decline payment. But if people offer payment anyway, then I accept it.)
So the funeral director came to write me a check. He pointed out that this check, in tandem with other checks he might write to me for other funerals during the year, could trigger a 1099 form, so that I would have to pay taxes. Being a nice guy, he asked if he could write the check to my Benevolent Fund, so that I could take the money through the Fund, and avoid having to pay taxes on it.
I’m no tax lawyer, but I believe there is a term for this sort of activity: It’s called money-laundering, sending money from A to B via a third party to avoid paying taxes on it. As I understand the law, it’s just as illegal as claiming a charitable deduction for paying yeshiva tuition.
The offer was tempting:
1) I shouldn’t really have a 1099, since I am not really a contractor of the funeral home. I’m the family’s contractor. The funeral home is only cutting the check because the family gave them the money as a third party. The problem is that the payment is on the funeral director's books, which triggers the 1099.
2) It’s not clear how to classify an honorarium given for funeral services, in the first place.
3) I already pay a ridiculous amount in taxes, because clergy have to pay self-employment tax.
4) I give a lot to help others, financially and otherwise (see a good Orthonomics post on this point, here).
5) And, as, the funeral director took pains to tell me: Everybody does it.
As I said above, the justifications and rationalizations for unethical activity are tempting... but I declined.
My point is not to say, "Torczyner is wonderful." I'm not wonderful; I'm just someone who was raised to be honest.
Rather, my points are these:
1) If we expect our community to act ethically, we - and especially rabbis - had better be ready to act ethically, ourselves; and
2) This applies even to the justifiable cases. In reality, all of them are "justifiable" cases, or at least look like it at the time.
False deductions, funnelling money through a Benevolent Fund, accepting payment in cash, hiring a nanny off the books, these are just as illegal as the crimes committed by Agriprocessors in the scandal du jour.
קשוט עצמך ואחר כך קשוט אחרים, the gemara says, with a sharp play on words: קישוטים are ornaments, but קושטא is truth. Ornament yourself before you ornament others, and make sure you are telling the truth before you insist that others do the same.
Showing posts with label Jewish community: Agriprocessors. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jewish community: Agriprocessors. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Wednesday, August 6, 2008
‘Dark Meat’ humiliates good people, fails to correct the problem
I had an entirely different topic on which to post today, but I am so annoyed with the end of the Forward’s latest Agriprocess piece and this morning’s “Dark Meat” editorial in the New York Times that I’ve got to say something here.
[1:40 PM Just saw Gil Student's post here on the topic. Glad to say we agree.]
Important Disclaimer: I am not a fan of Agriprocessors. Personally, I am uncomfortable buying their products at this time. I have explicitly told congregants that if the allegations turn out to be true, then hashgachah should be removed until conditions change.
But there’s a world of difference between my own stance and contacting the Forward and publishing a New York Times Op-Ed piece to tell the world that you personally feel the OU and RCA are being too prudent. Frankly, that smacks of ugly grandstanding and opportunistic self-aggrandizement - and all on the backs of innocent people.
In both articles the author blasts the RCA and OU for relying on the results of a federal investigation. Instead, the author wants to have the OU launch an independent rabbinic investigation of the plant.
What, exactly, is the OU going to find, in terms of worker and animal treatment, that the federal government is going to miss? This is patently absurd. On the one hand, you have specially trained, experienced personnel. On the other hand, you have a group of well-intentioned rabbis. Where is the logic?
I think the author knows there is no logic in his position. I also think the author knows that putting this position into The Forward and the New York Times is not going to inspire the OU to do it. [needless ad hominem deleted here, on re-read.]
To me, the right thing to do in the wake of Agriprocessors is to work to correct the problem. This means suggesting specific standards for factories, marshalling halachic sources, getting a committee together to develop a good standard. This publicity stunt did nothing of the kind.
R’ Zecharyah ben Avkulus was wrong for holding his tongue when Bar Kamtza was evicted from the party; he contributed to the public humiliation of Bar Kamtza. (Yes, this was his real sin; see Eichah Rabbah, as well as Maharam Shif and Maharatz Chayes to Gittin 56-57.)
How much worse it would have been if R’ Zecharyah ben Avkulus would have stood up at the party and bashed all of the sages, instead of correcting the host! He would have been guilty of humiliating innocent people, of rechilus, etc – and he would have accomplished nothing.
This person who called the Forward and wrote the New York Times piece is guilty of exactly that – humiliation of good people, without lifting a finger to correct the problem.
(And a side note on the NYT piece: Refraining from meat before Tisha b’Av, in all of the original sources which discuss the practice, is not a way to “limit ourselves so that we can better focus on the spiritual.” Rather, it’s an act of mourning for the Beit haMikdash and its korbanot.)
[1:40 PM Just saw Gil Student's post here on the topic. Glad to say we agree.]
Important Disclaimer: I am not a fan of Agriprocessors. Personally, I am uncomfortable buying their products at this time. I have explicitly told congregants that if the allegations turn out to be true, then hashgachah should be removed until conditions change.
But there’s a world of difference between my own stance and contacting the Forward and publishing a New York Times Op-Ed piece to tell the world that you personally feel the OU and RCA are being too prudent. Frankly, that smacks of ugly grandstanding and opportunistic self-aggrandizement - and all on the backs of innocent people.
In both articles the author blasts the RCA and OU for relying on the results of a federal investigation. Instead, the author wants to have the OU launch an independent rabbinic investigation of the plant.
What, exactly, is the OU going to find, in terms of worker and animal treatment, that the federal government is going to miss? This is patently absurd. On the one hand, you have specially trained, experienced personnel. On the other hand, you have a group of well-intentioned rabbis. Where is the logic?
I think the author knows there is no logic in his position. I also think the author knows that putting this position into The Forward and the New York Times is not going to inspire the OU to do it. [needless ad hominem deleted here, on re-read.]
To me, the right thing to do in the wake of Agriprocessors is to work to correct the problem. This means suggesting specific standards for factories, marshalling halachic sources, getting a committee together to develop a good standard. This publicity stunt did nothing of the kind.
R’ Zecharyah ben Avkulus was wrong for holding his tongue when Bar Kamtza was evicted from the party; he contributed to the public humiliation of Bar Kamtza. (Yes, this was his real sin; see Eichah Rabbah, as well as Maharam Shif and Maharatz Chayes to Gittin 56-57.)
How much worse it would have been if R’ Zecharyah ben Avkulus would have stood up at the party and bashed all of the sages, instead of correcting the host! He would have been guilty of humiliating innocent people, of rechilus, etc – and he would have accomplished nothing.
This person who called the Forward and wrote the New York Times piece is guilty of exactly that – humiliation of good people, without lifting a finger to correct the problem.
(And a side note on the NYT piece: Refraining from meat before Tisha b’Av, in all of the original sources which discuss the practice, is not a way to “limit ourselves so that we can better focus on the spiritual.” Rather, it’s an act of mourning for the Beit haMikdash and its korbanot.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)