I bet you would.
It is because these Christian charities are going to cut into their profit scheme of selling humans from their international acquisitions of salvation by selling chattel in the name of God.
The 2016 tax credit for a foreign adoption is quite the lucrative scheme for all stakeholders involved.
 |
| "My new mommy and daddy said that God told their tax adviser that I am worth $13,400 a year to them and that did not even include the tax exempt trust fund!" |
Topic 607 - Adoption Credit and Adoption Assistance Programs
- Reasonable and necessary adoption fees,
- Court costs and attorney fees,
- Traveling expenses (including amounts spent for meals and lodging while away from home), and
- Other expenses that are directly related to and for the principal purpose of the legal adoption of an eligible child.
The schemes are run like this.
A church comes up with the "save the savages" scheme utilizing the age old salvation pitch of the imperialist morality parade..
Of course, no one questions the work of God as it is a tax-exempt organization.
This means the Christian
(Just as a side note. Domestic adoptions acquire its
Now, comes the reasonable fees the agency may assess for the adoption.
Here is a price list promoting the end of year tax season to
(Please note that these price lists do not include citizenship processing fees.)
"Agency fees" is nothing but a diluted term to make buying a human trafficked child more palatable in the eyes of one's tax preparer.
The new parents now have a permanent tax deductible dependent and will more than likely give back a healthy tax exempt donation to the Christian human trafficking organization, like the ones busted in Guatemala and Haiti that are in the process of being shut down by the U.S.
Here is a link to U.S. Senators Bob Casey Bill and Sherrod Brown's attempt to make the adoption tax credit fully refundable.
We now have a synoptic overview of the money scheme in international adoptions, but it gets better.
Not once does one find language requiring legal verification that the child is an orphan, whether a paper orphan, meaning parental rights have been terminated, or that the parents are deceased, or even that reasonable efforts were made to place the children with kin.
The reasonable efforts is the underlying premise as to why the U.S. refuses to sign on to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Reasonable efforts would significantly interfere in these Christian
So, the moral of the story for domestic and foreign adoptions is this: deportation
International adoptions may get harder due to proposed U.S. regulations
WASHINGTON — It’s been nearly 19 years since a social worker placed Douglas Althauser’s 5-month-old Cambodian son in his arms and said, “Here you go, Dad.”
Nothing has been the same since.
Althauser, now a Westerville lawyer, was 36 when he adopted Michael, now 19.
Before that moment, he’d traveled, he’d published a book. He’d received a couple of college degrees.
But “I can’t think of a single thing that was important to my life prior to becoming a father,” he said, reflecting on the moment he first held his boy. “All those things went on the back burner."
Michael was one of more than 15,000 children adopted internationally in 1998. But by 2015, that number had dwindled to 5,647.
And now, international adoption agencies worry that a sweeping set of proposed State Department regulations could erode that number further.
“This would have the effect of strangling international adoption,” said Thomas Taneff, a Columbus adoption attorney.
Others say they’re a much-needed attempt to better protect children and families from being set up to fail.
“If you want take care of kids, more oversight and better conditions for success should trump any business objective,” said April Dinwoodie, chief executive of the Donaldson Adoption Institute, a research and advocacy organization that studies adoption.
Among the proposed provisions that critics worry most about:
• Effectively preventing agencies from charging prospective adoptive parents for the cost of caring for their child after families are matched with a child. Families say that because they’r e adopting from impoverished countries, they feel obliged to pay for food, clean water and medical care during the period between being matched with a child and taking their children home.
• Creating a second level of authorization to adopt from a specific country in addition to the existing accreditation process. Adoption agencies say this creates yet another layer of bureaucracy, requiring more staffing and more potential hurdles to adoption.
• Requiring parents pursuing international adoptions to participate in their state’s foster care training. Critics say some states don’t offer the level of training required by the new regulations, and that the foster training doesn’t provide the specialized training that adopting a child from a foreign country might require.
“These rules would have a devastating effect on international adoption,” said Chuck Johnson of the National Council for Adoption.” “It’s regulation upon regulation, but they really in our opinion did not get to the real root of some of the issues we wanted to get at.”
Many say the rules are well-intentioned — a response to high-profile cases of corruption, fraud and child trafficking.
In 2003, a Pennsylvania man was arrested for child sex trafficking. His victim was a Russian girl he’d adopted in 1998. In 2010, a Siberian boy was sent alone on a flight back to Russia after his adoptive mother decided she could no longer care for him.
But such cases, though high-profile, are rare, argue critics of the new proposals.
The greater risk, said Taneff, is leaving children in orphanages in impoverished countries.
“What’s the worst evil?” he asks. “Is it, ‘let’s cure this thing with a sledgehammer so all kids get stuck over there because we want to minimize fraud on less than 1 percent of cases?’ ”
Taneff, himself the father of an adopted girl from China, said the existing international adoption process is fraught with bureaucratic hurdles.
“I consider myself an above-average smart person, and my wife is too,” he said. “But the amount of red tape that already exists is daunting, and this is simply more red tape, more bureaucracy. Who suffers in the end? The child in that orphanage.”
A State Department official said the changes simply aim to improve a system that has placed more than 200,000 children over the past 15 years.
“The proposed changes seek to strengthen standards for those seeking accreditation or approval to provide intercountry adoption services,” the official said, speaking only on the condition of anonymity.
But Dinwoodie said the increased educational requirements are aimed at preparing adoptive families for as many potential challenges as possible. And the fee rule, she said, is aimed at protecting adoptive parents from financial fraud.
“There should be some kind of clear understanding of what the money goes for, who handles the money and where it goes to,” she said.
“Adoption and intercountry adoption has traditionally been a savior mentality, these strong Americans are going to go help kids in other countries, we can do this better. Children have needs in other countries and we, in some shape, are designed to fill a need. But at the same time, it has to be with the highest level of ethics … having more checks and balances is a good thing.”
Among those who signed on to a congressional letter opposing the regulations was Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, who said pre-adoption trainings already work to prepare parents for adoption.
“Adding even more costs to this already expensive process and making parents jump through unnecessary hoops could make it impossible for some families to adopt and deprive children of loving homes,” he said.
In Strongsville, Margaret Cole has handled 8,000 international adoptions through her agency, European Adoption Consultants, in the 25 years she’s been in business. She’s watched, meanwhile, as other agencies have gone out of business, overwhelmed by regulations and cost.
She doesn’t oppose the idea of reform. But she said many of the reforms proposed make little sense.
“We don’t have the staff to do things that don’t do any good,” she said. “There are babies starving, and if we spend the money on a license instead of helping orphans, then what? Why would we do that? We already have licenses.”
Althauser, meanwhile, feels grateful that the adoption process for him was relatively easy, though the paperwork involved made it something of “an endurance test.” His son, now a sophomore in college, is studying video-game design.
“You just can’t regulate the commitment a parent is willing to have in order to adopt a child,” he said. “Those of us who have worked so hard to be able to adopt a child have really shown a lot of dedication to being great parents.”
Voting is beautiful, be beautiful ~ vote.©
No comments:
Post a Comment