Re: Scientology/IRS: The McDonald Papers
[27 Dec 1997]

I experienced similar betrayal by Scientology as John McDonald did.
In 1979, things really began to go weird in Scientology.

From: Warrior <>
Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology
Subject: Re: Scientology/IRS: The McDonald Papers
Date: 27 Dec 1997 16:48:27 -0800
Lines: 151
Message-ID: <6847kr$>
Xref: szdc alt.religion.scientology:240683


In article <f495f0f60181d9880c9a0b74feca049c@anonymous.poster>, Secret
Squirrel wrote:
>Zed gave us the following (McDonald papers):
>>In 1994, a new kind of policy was issued: a "Scientology Policy
>>Directive", or SPD. Entitled "Personal Income Taxes", it forbade
>>Scientologists from engaging in "tax avoidance schemes". It described
>>the tax system as "Suppressive", but required all Scientologists to
>>pay tax on their personal income.

Scientology Policy Directives were first issued in 1982, not 1994!
I have in my possession several SPD's.

SPD #25 was issued 28 July 1982 and is entitled "Cancellation [of]
HCO PL 29 September, 1980 CVB Policies". It begins "HCO PL 29 Sept 80
CVB Policies is hereby CANCELLED. It was not written by or approved by

For those of you on ARS who don't know, there has been long-standing
policy written by Hubbard that no one may cancel one of his issues. In
fact, SPD #25 even states in the second paragraph "LRH Policy may only
be modified or cancelled by LRH."

>>[...]He expected the illegal policy to be cancelled forthwith.

I experienced similar betrayal by Scientology as John McDonald did.
In 1979, things really began to go weird in Scientology. It all started
with a CMO Int Mission to PAC to "slam in" a new finance system. It
was called the "Staff Pay System". It was also referred to as the
"CGI/VSD System". It RADICALLY changed long-standing finance policies
written by Hubbard. In fact, the new issues contradicted Hubbard's
policies pertaining to the allocation of the FP sum, the welfare
sum, the promo sum, the organizational expenses sum, etc.

This new finance system was very unpopular amongst staff in PAC.
Almost everyone hated it and recognized that it was "off-Source".
One fellow, Marty Sherman, at LA Org was VERY vocal about the fact
that he had disagreements with the new SQUIRREL finance system.

He was quickly declared a SUPPRESSIVE PERSON!

After that (the head on a pike), everyone shut up and reluctantly
accepted the new finance system. I continued to write weekly knowledge
reports to senior management for two years, pointing out that the new

1) Were green ink on white paper but were signed by the "Board of
Directors" or "Lyman Spurlock" or "The Watchdog Committee".

2) Contradicting Hubbard's long-standing orders with regards to

3) Issued over existing Hubbard policy WITHOUT cancelling existing
policy by Hubbard. In fact, since the advent of these new policies,
there were now TWO contradictory sets of policy.

4) In violation of Hubbard's HCO PL "Issues, Types Of".

5) In violation of the policies on how to defeat illegal orders.

None of my reports were ever acknowledged, nor were they acted upon.
Meanwhile, the squirrel issues kept on coming.

After two years of this crap, I decided to leave the Sea Org. And I
did leave in total disgust in March 1982.

Approximately nine months later, the HCO Area Secretary called me up
one day and said "Please come back. You were RIGHT. All the 'SQUIRREL'
issues have been cancelled". She went on to tell me about a new issue
by "Hubbard" called "Changing Workable Finance Systems". This new issue
essentially said that some squirrels and SPs had issued policies in
violation of Hubbard's "green on white" (HCO PLs), and that ALL staff
should be on the watch for future violations of policy and to never ever
"allow" this sort of thing to happen again.

I did go back on staff, but left in a little less than a year later.
Nothing had really changed. It was the same old double-talk. I mean,
I remember thinking "What the fuck! Who in the hell is this 'WDC' anyway?
And HOW can they issue policies with green ink on white paper?!?"

It was totally absurd. I still have some of these weird issues. I left
the Sea Org again in total disgust. And I've never looked back or thought
for an instant I would go back.

Miscavige is an absolute SQUIRREL. Ditto for Lyman Spurlock. Ditto
for Wendell Reynolds. In my opinion, these guys will say anything to
protect their money-making machine, even to the point of lying and
defrauding their own fellow Scientologists.

>>This didn't happen. He was told that the SPD was based on the
>>"agreement" between the IRS and the Co$. When he asked to see the
>>agreement, he was shocked to hear that it was a secret, and that both
>>the IRS and the Co$ wanted it that way. It appears that the majority
>>of Scientologists are completely unaware that the "peace treaty"
>>between the IRS and the Co$ is secret.

One thing is FOR SURE. Scientology certainly has some HUGE "missed
withholds" here! That is why the agreement with the IRS is secret.

>>A comm-ev was convened for Jon Randall and six others which he was
>>unable to attend. He was found guilty of tax evasion, although the
>>actual results of the comm-ev were witheld from him for some time. He
>>believes that the changing of policy and the unfair treatment he
>>received are because the Chuch is no longer been run by Hubbard's
>>principles, but is in fact being run by the IRS.

I have thought myself that the IRS perhaps took Scientology into
receivership in order to satisfy collection of the millions of dollars
in back taxes the cult owed (and may continue to owe).

> Lets not forget that prior to the agreement between the
>IRS and Scientology, that Scientology operated a lobby group to
>attack the IRS and they tried to "pull in" supporters from the
>people who were equally opposed to the IRS (tax evaders). Up to
>that point, Scientology was actively supporting (without outright
>saying so) tax evasion. This was also reflected in Hubbards
>attitudes toward the IRS which was well known internally in
> I don't think its all that surprising that as part of
>their agreement with the IRS that they agreed to stop all attacks
>on the IRS (including lawsuits against the agency and its
>employees, as well as its tax lobby group). Its also not surprising
>that they might have agreed to publicly change their policy
>toward the IRS to voice support for paying taxes (reversing their
>earlier policies). Very hypocritical though - "you pay your
>taxes so we won't have to pay ours".
> I don't believe that means that the IRS has "taken over"
>Scientology in any way. But I do believe the agreement needs
>to see the light of day in view of the many irregularities found
>in the IRS to make sure that Scientology didn't obtain the
>agreement (at least in part) by blackmailing or coercing a
>settlement with the IRS through knowledge of illegal or improper
>activities of the IRS or its agents.
> (Sorry Justin, that means I'm very much in favor of
>enforcing the law and paying taxes - Scientology and its leader
>Hubbard are the ones that have advocated tax evasion and Co$/RTC
>only changed their tune to get tax exempt status from the IRS
>so that THEY wouldn't have to pay taxes)

There is much I will write on the subject of finance and the
cult of Scientology, the IRS, etc. Stay tuned...