Sheila Bair... former head of the FDIC.
[2/3/2025] [link]:
✅ "Tax-free credit unions are thriving at public expense"
"Many have used nonprofit status to expand beyond their mandate of serving low- and moderate income communities. Many have been abusing their nonprofit and tax-exempt status to expand beyond their mandate of serving low- and moderate-income communities with common bonds. I meet no such criteria, yet I will soon become the customer of a Massachusetts credit union that is using some of its untaxed income to buy my Maryland community bank."
"Credit unions have evolved dramatically since they were formed in the United States in the early 20th century. They have been exempted from federal taxes since 1934, when Congress chartered them as nonprofit institutions to serve households of modest means who fell within a specific “field of membership."
"Credit unions once played an important and proud role in serving strongly associated, well-defined under-served communities. Many still do, and for them, tax benefits could be preserved. But too many have been egregiously abusing their tax benefits..."
Someone gave Sheila Bair the ABA talking points.
ReplyDeleteSo what. SECU Board hasn't done one thing that other credit unions are doing to trigger the more recently rhetoric about CU taxation, which has been on an ongoing discussion for decades. You can blame the Board for a lot of things, but not this.
12:17 pm Open membership/anyone-can-join and commercial banking services are the two we've been discussing recently. ... [sounds like a bank definition]
ReplyDeleteThere was also that little issue about Chairman Ayers' ""no formal proposal proposal" to merge weasel with LGFCU. ... [mergers, consolidation, bank purchases]
The "most profitable year ever" non-profit speech by our CEO and prohibiting member discussion at the Annual Membership Meeting. ...[faux non-profit, faux co-op]
Lobbying on behalf of H410 at the N.C. Legislature to permit unlimited national membership for businesses with unlimited commercial lending.... [full commercial banking services, while not paying income taxes]
The "We Are Whatever" ad campaign, with new fanciful logo design and the never denied Super Bowl advertising. ... [expansion ambitions, commercial advertising]
What else? Seems like there was something else...
... oh yeah, race-based lending. ...[SECU "ending the subsidy of the rich by the poor" ]
We didn't run a super bowl ad, haven't changed the logo or sponsored a stadium. Last I checked we're not doing commercial loans. Your post is just illogical.
ReplyDelete1:42pm The concern is not what you didn't do...under pressure from the membership.
ReplyDeleteThe question is why the Board let all this happen in the first place - hasn't been exactly an Emmy winning performance over the last 3 years, has it?
The greater question now is if the Board can be trusted going forward not to drive off a cliff again?
You say:"We didn't run a super bowl ad, haven't changed the logo..." That's right, but why did SECU pay for a Super Bowl Ad and pay to design and file to trademark a new logo... just fancifully screwing around with somebody else's money - the members'?
You say: "Last I checked, we're not making commercial loans". That "smells of weasel", given the history of the last 3 years!
1:54.. the Board let what happen? All the things that haven't happened? Drive off a cliff? That's a matter of perspective
Delete2:35pm Guess the financial performance can be debated... but not much.
DeleteBut since you're here, how about a straight answer at least on the sceduled Super Bowl ad and filed new logo registration... so we can all move forward, ok?
... careful, independent, authoritative records exist.
easy. the answer is we don't have a new logo and we never ran a super bowl ad. what other answer were you looking for? that seems pretty clear to me. you should stick to criticizing what you know, and what has actually occurred.
DeleteAh, a "no answer answer"! Been the patern over the last 3 years... any reason not to understand the lack of confidence about the future?
Delete... be constructive. taxation is a threat and if it happens, larger credit unions will likely be targeted. SECU, through no fault of its own, might get taxed.
ReplyDelete1:56pm You evidently overlooked this phrase:
Delete""Credit unions once played an important and proud role in serving strongly associated, well-defined under-served communities. Many still do, and for them, tax benefits could be preserved."
Stop shooting for industry standard mediocrity, give up "the no fault of its own" humbug.... try being a unicorn instead!
I can find no IRS regulation taxing unicorns, can you?
The employees and members who have been depending on and supporting SECU for decades want to see SECU continue to play this role in the community. We need to be vigilant and protect the unicorn.
Deletewhen you're worth 50+ billion you have a target on your back and everyone under the sun wants a piece of the action... so if they tax the credit union who pays the tax?
ReplyDeleteThe members do that's who ...
If credit unions are forced to start paying federal income tax, then it won’t make sense for them to exist any longer, at least in their current form. They would all convert to a structure that would reduce the overall tax liability of their owners. Credit unions and credit union members still pay plenty of taxes, even with being exempt from federal income taxes.
Delete