Dutch tax exemption revoked + bonus announcements

Discussion in 'Leaks & Legal' started by Anonymous, Jul 18, 2012.

  1. Quentinanon Member

    Wonder if the Belastingdienst will pursue back unpaid taxes.
    If so, much lulz to be had.
    • Like Like x 3
  2. Because they have the governments of the DWI completely in their pockets including some very important people.
    They mus be paid here by the tax payers:-( And people are afraid here, because of serious harassments intimidation by officers, etc.
  3. Quentinanon Member

    Please provide the names and titles of the corrupted officials.
    If you are afraid, then do it for the lulz.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. DWI ? Dienst Werk en Inkomen ?
  5. Quentinanon Member

    Dutch West Indies is en engelse naam voor de Nederlandse Antillien.
    • Like Like x 2

  6. BAM ! DOX


  7. Quentinanon Member

    Bonaire is not listed. I wonder why.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. TrevAnon Member

    • Like Like x 1
  9. Quentinanon Member

    Ah, it's low and flat like the NL, but warmer. Thanks.
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Quentinanon Member

    Is my understanding correct that the ruling of the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden just applies to the Netherlands and not Curacao, Aruba and Sint Maarten, within the Kingdom of the Netherlands?
  11. TrevAnon Member

    The Supreme Court of the Netherlands (Dutch: Hoge Raad der Nederlanden pronounced [ˈhoːɣə raːd dɛr ˈneːdərlɑndə(n)], literally "High Council of the Netherlands") is the highest court of the Netherlands, Curaçao, Sint Maarten and Aruba.[2]

    IANAL: it could well be that the Supreme Court's recent verdict only applies to the European part of the Kingdom. This would be the case if Curacao, Sint-Maarten and/or Aruba have their own tax system. Wouldn't know. Maybe a Dutch lawfag would know more about it. I'll ask around.

  12. Yes, Curacau, Sin Maarten are now like Aruba like federate countries within th Kingdom. But European law apllies to Bonaire, Saba and St-Eustasius as they are special municipalities of the Netherland as a country within the Kingdom.
  13. They have their own parlements, own tax systems and police force. Defence is done by the Netherlands as is counter-drugs smuggle operations and such together with the Americans who have ships and planes at Aruba.

  14. TrevAnon Member

    Yup. :)
    • Like Like x 1
  15. TrevAnon Member

    Update on the Dutch COS


    Dutch Way to Happiness posted the 2015 financial results.

    SCIENO LINK http:// www. dewegnaargeluk .nl/officiele-documenten/

    The board ( Joop Remmerswaal, Hans Beekmans, Natascha Krienen ) donated almost 34,000 euro to the foundation, which was used for printing leaflets and broadcasting an ad on Amsterdam TV-station AT5.


    Dutch CCHR seems to have a new site. They posted 2014 results. Nothing impressive though.

    SCIENO LINK http:// www. ncrm .nl/ nederlands-comite-voor-de-rechten-van-de-mens-gegevens-van-de-stichting/

    Haven't seen the 2015 results, but they still have time to publish them until July 1 2016.


    Dutch Youth for Human rights: no changes on their site. Check at the Belastingdienst revealed they still have ANBI-status, so I fired of an e-mail to YFHR asking for their financial results for 2013 and 2014. If they don't publish I would have to report them, which again would be very sad. :D
    • Like Like x 6
  16. anonysamvines Member

    Would be very sad indeed!

    Thanks for the update trevanon
  17. The Wrong Guy Member

    Here's a comment that was posted on Tony Ortega's site today. Quote:

    scamofscientology6 hours ago

    There is also an update in the legal battles between the Dutch Tax Office and the Church. Unfortunately, Jonny is swamped so there won’t a blurb for it on Tony’s main blog. But given today’s topic, it's a good moment to post the update in the comments section:

    Court confirms hefty tax fine for the Dutch Church: upwards of 600 thousand dollars

    As has been reported by Tony several times, the Dutch Church attempted – and failed – to obtain a tax exemption status for itself. The latest development was in December last year when an appeals court ruled that Scientology is commercial in nature and therefor not tax exempt. Despite an earlier positive ruling for the Church, the Tax Office never actually assigned the tax exempt status, pending its own appeals.

    However, the Church did in fact enjoy tax exemption for a while, at least for its Ideal Org fund raising. They managed to get tax exemption for a shell foundation called Nabesa in January 2008, which was used primarily for its Ideal Org funding. Early 2012 a newspaper published articles about this, which lead to questions in parliament and ultimately the removal of the tax exempt status: Newspaper articles at the time confirmed that the tax office would levy a back tax for the taxes it missed out on between 2008 and July 2012.

    Scientology, of course, appealed. First with the Tax Office itself and, after that failed, in the courts. The lowest court verdict dating back from april last year was only published a few weeks ago. The ruling is a straight forward dress-down of the arguments put forward by the Church, bordering on a tongue-in-cheek style (one of the judges’ comments reads as a double entendre mocking the folly of buying such a huge building for such a tiny Church). Anyways, the court confirmed that Nabesa isn’t tax exempt and the retrospective removal of this status was rightful. And that means that the verdict is a go-ahead for the Tax Office to levy the back tax. The size of the fine is a bit difficult to calculate because the first 2 grand of each donation per household per year is exempt from the gift tax. But we do know that the donations in the period are very close to €3M and that the rate of the gift tax is 30%. This means that the upper limit of the fine is 900k€, with realistic estimates ranging between 550K€ and 750K€.

    I’ve called media relations of the Tax Office to get confirmation whether they have levied the back tax in the meanwhile. Unfortunately, they cannot comment on individual cases. They said that, in a general sense, they would not start the collection process until there are no further appeals in a particular case. That means it’s not yet certain they have started the collection process, but it seems extremely unlikely at this point that the Church will escape a very punishing back tax.

    • Like Like x 7
  18. TrevAnon Member

    • Like Like x 1
  19. RightOn Member

    tax these fuckers!
    Oh TC!
    Grant Cardone or Duggan!!!
    We needs mo money!
  20. TrevAnon Member

    YFHR did respond (yada yada), but has not (yet?) published 2013 and 2014 results, so I sent an e-mail to the Dutch IRS, noting that YFHR is a known COS-shill.

    If anyone wants to join me: see for e-mailaddress at

    As "scamofscientology" above mentions the Dutch IRS is not allowed to give information about individual cases so we will just have to wait and see. I'll check every now and then if YFHR published results.

    I haz a sad now. :D
    • Like Like x 5

  21. Scamofscientology on Tony's blog here.

    I vaguely remember YFHR publishing records on a separate site, though I can't found it now.

    I'll shoot an email to the tax office for YFHR (and Narconon) this weekend.

    Some more updates:
    - The Amsterdam city council ought to be denying the cult a building permit for the Ideal Org because of past illegal activities as part of the Bibob law. For some reason they are not. They also don't care about the cult's fraudulent ANBI application through Nabesa (I sent them a message, with a meh response).
    - I made another report with the privacy watchdog. This one is based on a SP declare which was published in a newspaper late last year. This is a breach of privacy law, but I awaited a change of law from january first this year to report it to the privacy watchdog. Like the dozen or so reports preceding it, they'll ignore this one as well since they are abhorently understaffed.
    • Like Like x 5
  22. TrevAnon Member

    Whatever the reason (me sending e-mail to YFHR or Dutch IRS reminding YFHR to publish): financial reports for 2013, 2014 and 2015 are now all up (2012 already was).

    For 2013 and 2014 YFHR got donated respectively 1,983 and 1,716 euro, however in 2015 they only got 570 euro. So that's a downstat. :p

    In 2013 Mary Shuttleworth visited the Hague, and they funded her visiting costs. In 2014 YFHR did some presentations on Dutch schools. In 2015 YFHR petitioned the Dutch Parlaiment about education on human rights in Dutch schools.

    It's not much, but they don't have much money to use anyway.
    • Like Like x 3
  23. TrevAnon Member

    • Like Like x 4
  24. Update on Narconon. They have finally posted their financial reports, which they have to do as a ANBI/tax free foundation.

    Good news!

    The key number are:

    Turnover - €118K
    Costs - € 210K

    Operating loss - €91K

    Total debt - €675K

    They admit in the report that they are on the brink of financial liquidation and that the current ED wants to quit.

    • Like Like x 7
  25. TrevAnon Member

    Thanks! I'm surprised to see the 2014 financial reports. A search at the anbi search module gives me the result that their anbi status has been revoked on March 29th 2016. They had anbi status from Jan 1 2008 until Jan 1 2014. So I'd guess they didn't have to publish the 2014 financial report. Any insights on that?
  26. Lol! To me it is clear what must have happened: tax office warned them multiple times to publish reports, eventually pulled the plug and Narconon is now desperately turn the tide by belatedly publishing the reports :).
    • Like Like x 1
  27. TrevAnon Member

    Nice! As anbi regulations state that you have to publish yearly reports befor July 1 in the next year, that means they will have to publish their 2015 reports in a few weeks time. We'll just have to wait a little. :)
    • Like Like x 2
  28. TrevAnon Member

    I saw you did a web archive. I don't know if that automatically includes PDF's, so I'll just post them.

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 1
  29. TrevAnon Member

    Just checked the CCHR (Dutch NCRM) site for 2015 financial report.

    Damn, someone left them a heritage of 65,000 euro. They didn't spend it (yet).

    SCIENO LINK http:// www. ncrm .nl/ nederlands-comite-voor-de-rechten-van-de-mens-gegevens-van-de-stichting/

    Attached Files:

    • Like Like x 2
  30. Quentinanon Member

    Any way to find out exactly who bequeathed the 65K Euros?
    That's less than 10% of NarCONon's debt.
  31. I'd like to add that the recovation of the tax free ANBI status is reciprocal between 1-1-2014 (when it became a legal requirement to post financial statements) and March this year. This means that it is likely or possible (not sure how to best qualify) that Narconon will have to pay a back tax for the gifts they received in that period.

    At ~50K in gifts a year and a tax rate of 30%, we would be looking several tens of thousands of Euro.

    It seems that Narconon (whilst refusing to post financial statements online) didn't realize they might be in for this treat and a now scurrying to try and reverse the tax decision for a removal of tax free status and fine.

    If so, things are probably quite panicky at the moment at Narconon.
    • Like Like x 2
  32. fishypants Moderator

    I don't understand. 'reciprocal'? Do you mean 'back-dated'?
  33. Yes, sorry, my nethenglish tripped me up. I posted a more extensitve version on TO earlier:

    Slightly OT, but yesterday, Tony wrote a short blurb about the financial woes of the Dutch Narconon: in 2014 they made a loss of €90K on a turnover of €120K and by the end of that year their had a total debt of €675K.
    After Tony published this, Trevanon found out that Narconon recently also lost its tax exempt ANBI status. This leads to a potential timeline of events, which I am pretty sure is factual. Narconon has been tax exempt since 2008, though they surely must have hated a change in tax law in 2014 which required them to post financial statements online. They never did and of course, the small Dutch critic community pointed this to out the Tax office several times.

    I must assume the Tax office gave repeated warnings to Narconon to publish their statements and finally decided to revoke the tax free status last March. Moreover, they did so retrospectively from January 1st 2014, when the change in law became active.

    A few months back in my comment history, you’ll find a lengthy comment describing how this leads to a back tax. In that case, the back tax concerned Nabesa, the shell foundation of the Dutch Mother-church, not unlike the Cosreci foundation in the UK. Since then, we have had confirmation that this fine was indeed levied at the Church. If Narconon received such a back tax as well, it would be in the order of tens of thousands of Euro.
    Given the already dire situation for Narconon, they must have scrambled to comply with legislation after all and publish their accounts, which allowed us to pick them apart yesterday. I’m curious how this will develop. Will they publish the 2015 financial report, which is due in a few weeks? Will they convince the Tax Office to reverse their decision to revoke the Tax exempt status?

    In 2014, Narconon already showed a tax debt exceeding the value of the remaining liquid assets and that was even before they potentially received a back tax. Not a pretty situation to be in. They haven’t filed bankruptcy yet, but unless they are bailed out by Narconon International or the Catholic cloister that is supporting them financially, that may well change soon.
    Edit: I think the religious organisation they mention in their accounts as their creditor is a Catholic cloister, but I am not 100% sure.
    • Like Like x 4
  34. anon8109 Member


    I thought the Catholic position vis-a-vis the scientology corporation was that it is an abusive cult. So why is a Catholic institution offering scientology's narconon financial support?

    Is the cloister unaware that Narconon is scientology? If so this may be solved by manning the 'poons (i.e. sending them the information).

    Here's a few articles published in Catholic magazines regarding the cult.
    • Like Like x 4
  35. Incredulicide Member

    Can you please edit this list marking which ones include analysis/criticism of Narconon specifically?
  36. anon8109 Member

    None of them do. But if you're looking for criticism of scientology's narconon there's no lack of information about that on the internet.

  37. This "Chatolic" cult you mentioned; is it dangerous ?

Share This Page

Customize Theme Colors


Choose a color via Color picker or click the predefined style names!

Primary Color :

Secondary Color :
Predefined Skins