The Duggars: In the Media and TLC

[Absolom]

I'm curious about the contracts, too.  Mad Family wasn't actually a production company.  Figure 8 was the real production company.  Given some of the attorneys JB has hired, I rather expect a real entertainment attorney would tear it apart.  If Travis Storey did it, it's probably at least half worthless.  

[satrunrose]

Yeah, the only lawyers that JB has ever hired that seemed to be halfway competent were the ones for J'Inmate and even they made some pretty half-assed arguments. 

 

In other news, I wouldn't be surprised if TLC saw some dollar signs after SHP, but they really are in a bit of a bind. They can't go back to a full on show on how quaint the Duggars are, but I don't think any of the Duggarlings (including Jill and Jinger) have broken away enough to do a Breaking Duggar/90 Day Fiancé screaming match. Maybe something like the Little People Big World specials with that weird combination of Happy Families! / We are slowly imploding. 

I would still watch the hell out of a Duggar expose that asked tough questions/got the grandkids tested to see if they're actually at grade level/ asked the kidults what they plan to do in the future when the payout runs dry (I'm assuming we're not talking "never have to work at all" money here). 

[Minivanessa]

10 hours ago, Absolom said:

I'm curious about the contracts, too.  Mad Family wasn't actually a production company.  Figure 8 was the real production company.  Given some of the attorneys JB has hired, I rather expect a real entertainment attorney would tear it apart.  If Travis Storey did it, it's probably at least half worthless.  

Okay. I found a couple of screenshots from SHP. It appears that Mad Family, Inc. was the entity that provided the personal services of the "talent" for the show. So a few posts back, when I referred to Mad Family's new contract(s) with the Duggar kidults with the term "representation," I wasn't far wrong. (We haven't seen those new contracts; we've only heard about them from Jill on SHP.)

Obviously I haven't seen the entire package of the contract documents, only the bits shown on SHP. But these sections show why, when Jill and Derick asked for compensation for their out of pocket expenses for Izzy's birth, they were told "You've been paid what you're entitled to. We paid the family. You need to talk to your dad." Because Mad Family, Inc. provided the "talent" for the show and in return, the show paid Mad Family, Inc. 

Maybe the family just calls Mad Family, Inc. a "production company" although as you said, the actual production company was Figure 8. Mad Family was in the deal under a Talent Agreement, as the "lender" of the talent - and the entity that received the talent fees. 

Here are the screenshots. At the date of the agreement (April 21, 2014), Jinger was still unmarried. We've heard that later on when Jeremy showed up and married her, he didn't pile into the Mad Family package, but instead the Vuolos made their own deal with TLC. That wouldn't be reflected in these documents. Just saying.

 

I notice that in the first para of the exhibit that appears to be some kind of letter, the parties agree that "any future children born to" JB and Meech shall be added to the named talent as of their dates of birth. Josie was already four years old in April 2014, but I assume they had that clause in the deal from years past and didn't take it out because hope springs eternal. Or something.

[lookeyloo]

I might watch some kind of reboot but only as snark fodder knowing it is all sanitized and curated for public consumption and crap goes on in their real lives. 

[quarks]

Oh, thanks for the screenshots. That's very helpful, even if it isn't the entire contract.

So to me it looks like that Mad Family was set up as a some sort of combined talent management/production company, which is usually not a good idea for any number of reasons. Thus the confusion. They aren't just representing the talent; they are, as that one paragraph notes, "furnish[ing] the services of Participant," which makes them a production company.

Mad Family sold these services are work for hire, which is fairly standard. The next bit is somewhat less standard:

"....Company may produce the Program in whatever manner it chooses, including without limitation recording by means of motion picture tape or other electronic device for live broadcast."

So it looks like Mad Family surrendered consultation rights over the first run final product, for perpetuity, and probably surrendered archival/ancillary rights, also apparently for perpetuity, which may be what Jill and Jim Bob were referring to.

The other thing is that this is a contract between Mad Family/Discovery, not a contract between the adult kids and Mad Family. I don't know if anyone did sign a contract with Mad Family; if they didn't, that just adds to the messy legal situation here.

So with that more or less muddled/cleared up, I'll just add that exclusive production contracts haven't really been a thing since the late 1940s, and probably not something TLC/Discovery would have been interested in or recommended for any number of reasons, including liability and tax concerns.

Exclusive management contracts, which may be what we are talking about here, are more common, but typically contain termination clauses that can be exercised by either party. When exercised for whatever reason (for instance, finding out that a client downloaded CSAM), representation ends, although the agency/management company may continue to handle any work contracted under that agent/management. For instance, the agency I had back in the late 1990s no longer represents me, but does continue to handle residuals/royalties and ancillary rights for work they negotiated for me. This is fairly common throughout the entertainment industry - film, books and music. 

An exclusive management contract without that termination clause sounds both sketchy and unlikely. But even if the adult kids did sign exclusive management clauses without termination clauses, either these contracts are not getting enforced, or no one has told Jim Bob and Michelle that YouTube and Amazon Prime Video are as of now, at least, legally film distributors.

 

[Edit: my apologies for the earlier strike out font; not sure what happened there. I think I've removed it.]

 

Edited July 16, 2023 by quarks

[AstridM]

4 hours ago, lookeyloo said:

I might watch some kind of reboot but only as snark fodder knowing it is all sanitized and curated for public consumption and crap goes on in their real lives. 

I wouldn’t if JB were to benefit in any way and they continued to lie.

[lookeyloo]

1 hour ago, AstridM said:

I wouldn’t if JB were to benefit in any way and they continued to lie.

I guess I would assume both would be true. 

[GeeGolly]

I would definitely take a peek. I'm not sure I would stick with it though. But I would be very, very curious to any show the Duggars were in.

[Minivanessa]

@quarks - there were some signature pages shown on SHP as well, for the 2014 contract(s). I think I have screenshots, but I'll have to get back to my home office to access them. IIRC the signatures were of each of the adult Duggar kids, JB and Michelle on behalf of their minor kids, plus Anna and J'inmate not only for themselves but on behalf of their minor kids, plus Discovery and Mad Family Inc. So however they structured the deal, they got signoffs from all the adult talent and parents of the minors. 

[quarks]

5 hours ago, lookeyloo said:

I guess I would assume both would be true. 

I wouldn't assume that JB would be financially benefiting from any future Duggar-centered project.

The lying, though, yes! I would assume that.

2 hours ago, Jeeves said:

@quarks - there were some signature pages shown on SHP as well, for the 2014 contract(s). I think I have screenshots, but I'll have to get back to my home office to access them. IIRC the signatures were of each of the adult Duggar kids, JB and Michelle on behalf of their minor kids, plus Anna and J'inmate not only for themselves but on behalf of their minor kids, plus Discovery and Mad Family Inc. So however they structured the deal, they got signoffs from all the adult talent and parents of the minors. 

They should have signed contracts with both Mad Family and Discovery. Separate contracts. 

[Minivanessa]

I found these screenshots. I'd blacked out the signatures and posted these in the Dillards topic in mid-June. I think I saw signature blocks for Discovery on screen though didn't capture them in the image.

[quarks]

Thanks for those!

Ok, that does look like two different contracts, but that said, signing contracts for talent representation/management and recording rights on the same date is....let's go with unusual. Usually you sign with talent representation/management first and then with the studio on a later date.

Although I suppose it's possible that these were contracts for different episodes/seasons - for instance, if they were signing contracts for a special wedding episode and for future episodes?

[Salacious Kitty]

25 minutes ago, quarks said:

Thanks for those!

Ok, that does look like two different contracts, but that said, signing contracts for talent representation/management and recording rights on the same date is....let's go with unusual. Usually you sign with talent representation/management first and then with the studio on a later date.

Although I suppose it's possible that these were contracts for different episodes/seasons - for instance, if they were signing contracts for a special wedding episode and for future episodes?

These were signed right before Jill's wedding.

[quarks]

58 minutes ago, Salacious Kitty said:

These were signed right before Jill's wedding.

Just adding to the weirdness!

[merylinkid]

Weren't some of the kids that Michelle signed on behalf of also adults at the time?

 

Honestly the way it was signed could invalidate the whole thing (I think this is how Derrick won).   Just grabbing people as they came by and telling them to sign is not proper procedure.   Every adult had to have the opportunity to read it AND SEEK INDEPENDENT COUNSEL if they so chose.   Of course non of the Duggar kidults knew an attorney to talk to other than one of JB's buddies.   But an ethical attorney would tell them, I can't help you because of my relationship with your dad, here's the names of some other attorneys.  

The same goes with all the LLCs they sign.   The kidults should have independent counsel before signing all of those and Travis Story should ONLY be acting on behalf of JB.   Although I will bet they all signed conflict waivers.   Which they were not allowed to have explained by independent counsel.

 

(yes the attorney in me is screaming)

Edited July 17, 2023 by merylinkid

[Minivanessa]

46 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

Weren't some of the kids that Michelle signed on behalf of also adults at the time?

I think they cleaned up that issue when those documents were signed in 2014. Jill said in SHP that JB and Michelle had signed documents/contracts listing kids as minors, after those kids had already turned 18, and "nobody had fixed that." Until 2014. 

49 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

Honestly the way it was signed could invalidate the whole thing (I think this is how Derrick won).   Just grabbing people as they came by and telling them to sign is not proper procedure.   .   .   .

(yes the attorney in me is screaming)

I know! My inner lawyer wakes up from retirement and fusses when this situation comes to mind. It's a shoddy bullcrap way to handle a deal with a network for the appearance of your kids in a show for which each episode brings in THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.

OTOH, it's textbook fundamentalist patriarchal procedure. Tell your subjects, aka the kids, what you think they need to know, and more importantly, TELL THEM WHAT TO DO, and receive instant obedience with no questions asked. And that includes signing legal documents with no disclosure of what they are.

Yes, I yelled. I intended to.

PSA: Just this week's reminder that JB Duggar is a POS.

That is all.

[quarks]

1 hour ago, merylinkid said:

Weren't some of the kids that Michelle signed on behalf of also adults at the time?

 

Honestly the way it was signed could invalidate the whole thing (I think this is how Derrick won).   Just grabbing people as they came by and telling them to sign is not proper procedure.   Every adult had to have the opportunity to read it AND SEEK INDEPENDENT COUNSEL if they so chose.   Of course non of the Duggar kidults knew an attorney to talk to other than one of JB's buddies.   But an ethical attorney would tell them, I can't help you because of my relationship with your dad, here's the names of some other attorneys.  

The same goes with all the LLCs they sign.   The kidults should have independent counsel before signing all of those and Travis Story should ONLY be acting on behalf of JB.   Although I will bet they all signed conflict waivers.   Which they were not allowed to have explained by independent counsel.

 

(yes the attorney in me is screaming)

 

Agreed with all of this except for one small thing: from what I'm seeing here, I don't think Travis Story should have been acting for any of them.

Arkansas presumably has entertainment attorneys who could have explained just why a combined talent management/production company is usually not a good idea, and why they all - including Jim Bob - should have had independent agency representation.

If they had, honestly, they might have avoided much of the legal mess with Jill.

[merylinkid]

If JB wants to use Travis Story for his entertainment stuff knowing Story does not specialize in entertainment law, that's his business.   He's make his decision as an adult.   But to not even let the kids know they have a choice to talk to someone who know what they hell they are doing is the problem.   And that includes that Michelle should have had independent counsel on behalf of the minor children.

[Minivanessa]

1 hour ago, merylinkid said:

If JB wants to use Travis Story for his entertainment stuff knowing Story does not specialize in entertainment law, that's his business.   He's make his decision as an adult.   But to not even let the kids know they have a choice to talk to someone who know what they hell they are doing is the problem.   And that includes that Michelle should have had independent counsel on behalf of the minor children.

I totally agree!

But of course, in the all-knowing opinion of Master of the Family and Umbrella of Authority JB Duggar? The kids did not have a choice. Kids having choices is not a thing in his worldview. Kids might choose to step out from under his umbrella of authority and he won't allow that - as he famously said in another context. 

Thank goodness that despite his religious delusions, the laws of our land recognize the legal autonomy of persons of legal age (18 in Arkansas), and also that minor children are entitled to protection from abusive exploitation and fraud. I agree with your comment above that Derick was probably able to succeed in pushing JB for Jill's payout (and I assume a bit for Derick who appeared in several episodes), because perhaps the contracts themselves were sketchy, and definitely the way the kids' signatures were obtained, was deceptive.

I enjoy imagining how the negotiations between Derick/Jill and JB went down. I think we heard that the Dillards hired a lawyer. Who no doubt read all the contract documents, heard how the signatures were obtained, and laid it all out in a demand letter to JB. Then JB would have totally lost his sh*t over the letter, and demanded that his lawyers shut Derick down (if not run him out of town or have him jailed, LOL). Whereupon JB's lawyers (Travis Story or someone else) would have read the letter and looked into the situation, and had to tell JB he was f*cked if all that went before a judge. And it could open a can of worms not just about the Dillards, but about all the other adult and minor kids involved in that fustercluck of JB's genius creation.

Of course, we don't know that's what happened. But if the Dillards did hire a lawyer, I think something like that probably did. We know that JB paid out and AFAIK no actual lawsuit was filed about the matter. 

ETA: I wonder if JB had lawyers other than Travis Story on his TLC deals. We know JB had Chad Gallagher on board as an advisor, and from the context of Jill's comments on SHP I think that was the case prior to 2015 so it might have gone back pretty far. If Gallagher was advising JB on PR/entertainment issues, he may have linked JB up with legal counsel who had more experience/expertise in that area than good old Travis. 

Edited July 17, 2023 by Jeeves

[quarks]

58 minutes ago, Jeeves said:

ETA: I wonder if JB had lawyers other than Travis Story on his TLC deals. We know JB had Chad Gallagher on board as an advisor, and from the context of Jill's comments on SHP I think that was the case prior to 2015 so it might have gone back pretty far. If Gallagher was advising JB on PR/entertainment issues, he may have linked JB up with legal counsel who had more experience/expertise in that area than good old Travis. 

 

I'd like to think that any legal counsel with entertainment experience would not have signed off on this mess.

[merylinkid]

1 hour ago, quarks said:

 

I'd like to think that any legal counsel with entertainment experience would not have signed off on this mess.

Ehh there are bad lawyers in every specialty.    One might have done it just for $$$ or to be able to say the Duggars were clients.

[ginger90]

22 minutes ago, merylinkid said:

or to be able to say the Duggars were clients.

There’s a poor marketing choice.

[merylinkid]

In the right circles, it could be really good.   Look how big their show was.   Can you imagine saying "yeah I negotiated their contracts?"   In Hollywood that's gold.   In fundie circles, he would be a King.

[quarks]

In her book, Jill Duggar apparently states that she and Derick estimated that Jim Bob earned a total of $8 million from TLC over the years. She seems to think this is a significant amount of money, which, to be fair, compared to what she ended up earning, it is.

By TLC and Hollywood standards, less so. It's about $26,000 per episode. Yes, granted, industry rumor at the time was that they took a 40% to 60% fee cut for Counting On, but even considering that, that means they probably got a one time filming fee, lifetime exclusive, for $30,000 to $40,000 per episode for 19 Kids and Counting, and around $15,000 to $20,000 per episode for Counting On.

Which might sound great, until you realize that the fee probably should have been around $50,000 to $75,000 at least - even taking into account the low streaming income I mentioned in this thread. 

[GeeGolly]

If the $8 million figure is close to accurate JB&M made about $1 million a year, plus the perks of house cleaning, food, clothes (in the beginning) and trips. That is far more than JB would have made busting butt selling real estate and far more than the average American makes in a year. So even if they were lowballed the Duggar family made out pretty good.

[quarks]

Just now, GeeGolly said:

If the $8 million figure is close to accurate JB&M made about $1 million a year, plus the perks of house cleaning, food, clothes (in the beginning) and trips. That is far more than JB would have made busting butt selling real estate and far more than the average American makes in a year. So even if they were lowballed the Duggar family made out pretty good.

Oh, sure, but I'm not sure that the Duggars making more money than the average American makes in a year at all justifies Discovery taking advantage of them.

(However I am admittedly very anti-studio right now, so....this is absolutely a case where everyone's mileage may vary.)

[Minivanessa]

12 hours ago, quarks said:

By TLC and Hollywood standards, less so. It's about $26,000 per episode. Yes, granted, industry rumor at the time was that they took a 40% to 60% fee cut for Counting On, but even considering that, that means they probably got a one time filming fee, lifetime exclusive, for $30,000 to $40,000 per episode for 19 Kids and Counting, and around $15,000 to $20,000 per episode for Counting On.

Which might sound great, until you realize that the fee probably should have been around $50,000 to $75,000 at least - even taking into account the low streaming income I mentioned in this thread. 

Here's what the book said. I don't know how they did the math but they spilled the deets on Mad Family Inc.'s per episode fees:

Quote

We spent most of the morning studying the contract. Derick had to translate some of the legal language for me, but there was plenty in it that I didn’t need any help with.

Like part three, titled “Compensation.”

It stated that for each half hour episode, Mad Family Inc. would be paid $50,000, and for each one-hour episode $65,000, with the numbers rising to $58,000 and $73,000 if the show hit a fourth season.

Pops later determined somehow that each child would receive 3 percent on their tax return each year. However, even this was a phantom payment, seemingly just reported on paper for tax purposes with no apparent intention to actually pay out this amount. We would later be told that this previously reported income was an investment or inheritance that we could only have access to upon my parents’ death.

We did the numbers. Over the years there had been well over three hundred shows, for which we estimated that TLC had paid Mad Family Inc. over $8,000,000 total. Our wedding alone had netted well over $100,000 for Pops, and Israel’s birth had been the focus of two special episodes, earning Pops another six-figure sum. Yet when we’d asked him to cover our $10,000 deductible and out-of-pocket expenses from the hospital stay, he’d pushed back.

Over the years Pops had bought more and more properties, and his fleet of private aircraft now contained multiple airplanes, including one with ten seats. There was no denying that he was a generous man who had helped a lot of people, but it was also true that he’d grown rich off the show and had fought hard to keep that under wraps.

     -- Duggar, Jill. Counting the Cost (pp. 225-226). Gallery Books. Kindle Edition. 

I'm utterly unskilled at number crunching so I'll let others check their math. 

Edited September 13, 2023 by Jeeves

[quarks]

Ok, those fees sound somewhat more reasonable, though if they received $50,000 for a half hour episode they should have been earning at least $80,000 for a full hour episode.

And honestly, this is all still at the low end; once Counting On proved that yes, people would still tune in post the first round of Josh scandals, they should have fought for a minimum six figure episode fee, and didn't.

 

[Absolom]

I don't think TLC has paid six figures per episode on a regular basis for any of their shows ever.  They used to pay $2500 plus the episode freebies for the first season.  It went up from there to $5K, etc with bonuses available for episodes that met certain audience metrics.  

[quarks]

14 minutes ago, Absolom said:

I don't think TLC has paid six figures per episode on a regular basis for any of their shows ever.  They used to pay $2500 plus the episode freebies for the first season.  It went up from there to $5K, etc with bonuses available for episodes that met certain audience metrics.  

Grossly exploiting a number of people by grossly underbidding/underpaying the talent fees.

[AstridM]

JB sent Jill this list of her “expenses” when she requested payment for her work on the show over the years. 😡😡😡

[quarks]

And to make this even worse, apparently that gently used $15,000 harp was paid for out of the money the girls received for kinda sorta working on Growing Up Duggar: It's All About Relationships. 

 

[AstridM]

Just now, quarks said:

And to make this even worse, apparently that gently used $15,000 harp was paid for out of the money the girls received for kinda sorta working on Growing Up Duggar: It's All About Relationships. 

 

I would’ve been devastated to receive something like this from my parents. Poor Jill. 

[Laura Holt]

What an absolutely appalling thing to send to your child.  Essentially charging them for being your kid.  

[Salacious Kitty]

2 minutes ago, Laura Holt said:

What an absolutely appalling thing to send to your child.  Essentially charging them for being your kid.  

And using that as a tax write off! Disgusting. 

JB is vile.

[AstridM]

2 minutes ago, Laura Holt said:

What an absolutely appalling thing to send to your child.  Essentially charging them for being your kid.  

Yep. And they aren’t even given the chance to move out at 18 like most kids . They were forced to remain at home and part of the show. 

[Laura Holt]

$3.00 a day for eating at home sounds about right for the quality of food I used to see being prepped and served.  Which makes me think Jill should be sending HIM a bill for all the unpaid childcare, cooking and cleaning she did growing up.

[AstridM]

1 minute ago, Laura Holt said:

$3.00 a day for eating at home sounds about right for the quality of food I used to see being prepped and served.  Which makes me think Jill should be sending HIM a bill for all the unpaid childcare, cooking and cleaning she did growing up.

For all the time she spent being a sister mom and raising JB’s kids. 

Edited September 13, 2023 by AstridM

[crazycatlady58]

I want to make sure I am understanding this,  Cheapskate  kept track of the money spent on Jill after she reached adulthood and then submitted that amount to the IRS as her income? Is thst legal? What chaps my hide is HE KEPT TRACK OF WHAT JILL, HIS DAUGHTER,ATE AT HIS TABLE and reported that as INCOME???? I have no words...just...no words. I do want to know if this is legal if any one knows..and if it is legal I do not think it is moral unless there was an agreement between Jill and Cheapskate. 

[mythoughtis]

JB stated on the show that the cars etc given to the girls  were gifts - given because he didn’t allow  them to work.   So he can’t deduct that on his taxes, nor can he now say she worked after all and  the cars were part of  her compensation.  Nor can he say theitems listed for over multiple years were compensation because he never gave her 1099s or W-2s for those years.   If they were gifts, they fell under the gift maximum  per year and the giver   pays the taxes if they go over the maximum not the receiver.  Unfortunately he can’t be audited now for this because it’s been several years. 
 

Plus he listed her as a dependent on his tax return some of those years meaning he was financially responsible for her needs. 

[Salacious Kitty]

5 minutes ago, mythoughtis said:

JB stated on the show that the cars etc given to the girls  were gifts - given because he didn’t allow  them to work.   So he can’t deduct that on his taxes, nor can he now say she worked after all and  the cars were part of  her compensation.  Nor can he say theitems listed for over multiple years were compensation because he never gave her 1099s or W-2s for those years.   If they were gifts, they fell under the gift maximum  per year and the giver   pays the taxes if they go over the maximum not the receiver.  Unfortunately he can’t be audited now for this because it’s been several years. 
 

Plus he listed her as a dependent on his tax return some of those years meaning he was financially responsible for her needs. 

Maybe he was audited the year that the Dillards got that tax bill. We don't know what went on behind the scenes.

[CalicoKitty]

I wonder if JB's CPA will be questioned by anyone.  Or the other kids.  It sounds like there were questionable IRS forms filed.  This has the potential to get interesting.

[Salacious Kitty]

1 hour ago, CalicoKitty said:

I wonder if JB's CPA will be questioned by anyone.  Or the other kids.  It sounds like there were questionable IRS forms filed.  This has the potential to get interesting.

The CPA is as sleazy as JB. Who on earth would put those "deductions" on a tax return?

[satrunrose]

Okay, I'm even more curious about the kiddult finances now, particularly for Jessa, Anna and Jed!. The $80,000 payout makes sense for the way most of the crew has been living. It's not high on the hog, but it's a step better than you would expect given the combo of jobs they seem to do. On the other hand, Anna doesn't have any income coming in, Jessa is raising four, soon five, kids on a minister's salary for a very small church and Jed! has managed to rack up the expenses for a wedding, two babies and multiple expensive trips in less than two years. Does JB have an itemised bill like that for them?

Edited September 14, 2023 by satrunrose

[Ohiopirate02]

I'm thoroughly confused by the utilities section.  $600 a month is the discounted rate of Jill's portion???? And this was for the years she was living in the TTH if I'm reading it correctly.  A house with her parents and 17 other siblings.  I do not doubt JB and Michelle's electric bill was rather large, but not that large.  

[GeeGolly]

A lot of the items are 8 years. Is it safe to assume JB was calculating from Jill's 18th birthday? And 3 or 4 of those years included Derick? But then the $3 food expense for 12 years, WTF is that?

I asked this question in the J&D thread:

Is this what happened?

• The Dillards request money for medical expenses from JB
• JB says no
• The Dillards request back pay
• As revenge JB put Jill on his taxes as a subcontractor
• The Dillards say, Whoa, wait, whaaatt?!
• JB sends an 'invoice' and offers a payout of $20,000
• The Dillards eventually get $175,000

[AstridM]

13 hours ago, satrunrose said:

Okay, I'm even more curious about the kiddult finances now, particularly for Jessa, Anna and Jed!. The $80,000 payout makes sense for the way most of the crew has been living. It's not high on the hog, but it's a step better than you would expect given the combo of jobs they seem to do. On the other hand, Anna doesn't have any income coming in, Jessa is raising four, soon five, kids on a minister's salary for a very small church and Jed! has managed to rack up the expenses for a wedding, two babies and multiple expensive trips in less than two years. Does JB have an itemised bill like that for them?

Can you imagine Anna and the kids’ bills??? 😳

[Minivanessa]

I just commented about the finances over on the Jill and Derick topic. With numbers and some details.

tl;dr: the book provides some details establishing that JB's CPA filed returns showing Jill received income that she hadn't actually received. While we know some details - enough to tell Jill's story -  there are many more things that we don't know. BTW Jill says she believes the CPA didn't realize she was in the dark about those returns, and he was cooperative when they asked for copies, etc. I think  - but the book does not say ETA: the book gives clues - that JB's telling his CPA that Jill had received X amount of income each year (which she had not actually received) may have been his standard operating procedure for all the adult kids.

I'll add this: JB's nasty "invoice" was just one of things he did out of his rage at being questioned by Jilly Muffin and her hand-picked spouse. He pulled some really sh*t moves and that was just one. I think he really lost it in reaction to that challenge to his authority over his entire immediate world. And to his money. That "mind blown" emoji may never have been more appropriate to any situation than JB's at that time.

Edited September 14, 2023 by Jeeves

[ozziemom]

1 hour ago, Jeeves said:

I just commented about the finances over on the Jill and Derick topic. With numbers and some details.

tl;dr: the book provides some details establishing that JB's CPA filed returns showing Jill received income that she hadn't actually received. While we know some details - enough to tell Jill's story -  there are many more things that we don't know. BTW Jill says she believes the CPA didn't realize she was in the dark about those returns, and he was cooperative when they asked for copies, etc. I think  - but the book does not say - that JB's telling his CPA that Jill had received X amount of income each year (which she had not actually received) may have been his standard operating procedure for all the adult kids.

I'll add this: JB's nasty "invoice" was just one of things he did out of his rage at being questioned by Jilly Muffin and her hand-picked spouse. He pulled some really sh*t moves and that was just one. I think he really lost it in reaction to that challenge to his authority over his entire immediate world. And to his money. That "mind blown" emoji may never have been more appropriate to any situation than JB's at that time.

The CPA has an obligation to provide copies etc to their client, which is Jill since it’s her tax return. No matter if Boob pays the accountant or provides the data to complete the tax return. I don’t think the CPA is innocent in all this, any CPA with a bit of common sense would know Boob was up to something. But clearly most of the blame should go to Boob, he is truly a piece of work.

[Minivanessa]

Just now, ozziemom said:

The CPA has an obligation to provide copies etc to their client, which is Jill since it’s her tax return. No matter if Boob pays the accountant or provides the data to complete the tax return. I don’t think the CPA is innocent in all this, any CPA with a bit of common sense would know Boob was up to something. But clearly most of the blame should go to Boob, he is truly a piece of work.

Good points. I wonder if JB is still that CPA's client, or if the CPA wised up and terminated that relationship.