U. S. Customs and Border Protection Reports Aggressive Enforcement of Cash Smuggling and Smurfing Laws

In May and June, I wrote posts about cash smuggling on the part of staff and students affiliated with Gospel for Asia (link, link, link, link, link). GFA leaders gave individual travelers envelopes of cash containing $4500 which was to be carried in personal belongings and then given to Believers’ Church headquarters in India. Since the travelers traveled in groups, the total amount of unreported cash was often over the $10,000 allowed by law. Travelers may take any amount of cash out of the country but any amount over $10k must be reported to Customs and Border Protection. Breaking up the total amount into smaller portions carried by individual travelers in a group to avoid detection (sometimes called “smurfing“) is illegal and can result in seizure of the cash and sometimes criminal charges.
After my reports on the practice, GFA leaders said they stopped sending cash to India via student groups, telling staff they were told by their auditor (Bland Garvey) that the practice was legal. Bland Garvey referred me to their attorney who refused to confirm or deny GFA’s claim. Inexplicably, GFA has remained publicly silent about the reasons for cash smuggling or how the donations were used.
In the mean time, U.S. Custom and Border Protection has aggressively enforced laws on cash smuggling. On the U.S. CBP website, numerous press releases detail enforcement actions related to cash smuggling. For instance just yesterday, USCBP reported the following activity:

LAREDO, Texas – U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers and agents at the Laredo Port of Entry seized $266,000 in unreported currency in an outbound enforcement action this weekend at the Gateway to the Americas Bridge.

 “Our outbound team maintained their vigilance, utilized their keen inspection skills and seized a significant load of unreported currency,” said Port Director Joseph Misenhelter, Laredo Port of Entry.  “Seizures of unreported currency like this one remove the profit potential from possible illicit activity and help advance our border security mission.”

Stacks of bills totalling $266,000 in unreported currency seized by CBP officers and agents at Laredo Port of Entry
From the U.S. Customs and Border Protection website

The interception occurred on Saturday, Sept. 12 while CBP officers and Border Patrol agents conducting outbound (southbound) inspections at the international bridge referred a 2007 Chevy Equinox driven by a 22-year-old U.S. citizen from Dallas, Texas for a secondary inspection.  CBP officers conducted an intensive secondary examination of the vehicle and discovered packages within the vehicle that contained $266,000 in unreported currency.

CBP officers seized the currency and the Chevy Equinox.  The driver was turned over by CBP officers to Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) special agents for further investigation.

Individuals are permitted to carry any amount of currency or monetary instruments into or out of the U.S., however, if the quantity is more than $10,000, they will need to report it to CBP. “Money” means monetary instruments and includes U.S. or foreign coins currently in circulation, currency, travelers’ checks in any form, money orders, and negotiable instruments or investment securities in bearer form. Failure to declare may result in seizure of the currency and/or arrest.

According to their website, CBP seises just over $650,000 each day in illegal cash:

CBP seized $50,510 in unreported U.S. dollars and Chinese yuan from a family that arrived Saturday from China after the family reported possessing $3,000.
CBP seizes $650,117 in undeclared or illicit currency every day. There is no limit to how much currency travelers may bring to, or take from the U.S. However, federal law requires travelers to complete financial reporting forms for any amount that exceeds $10,000 in U.S. dollars or equivalent foreign currency.

Since I last reported on cash smuggling, CBP has reported several other actions relating to smuggling (list, list, list, list, list, list, list, list, list, list, list, list, list, list,  and smurfing (list, list, list, list). In GFA’s situation, some groups carried over $100k in cash without reporting the cash to U.S. Customs or Indian Customs.

Gospel for Asia Reneged on Pledge Not to Take Loans or Money from Mission Field to Build New Headquarters

GFA HQ FrontIn May 2010, Gospel for Asia’s CEO and founder, K.P. Yohannan, told GFA staff that GFA might move from Carrollton, TX to Wills Point, TX. A month later, GFA acquired 350 acres which would eventually become the site of the current compound. As reported previously, GFA began building the project without sufficient funds in hand to complete it. In April 2013, GFA leaders realized they were very low on cash and approached City Bank in Lubbock for a loan. According to GFA COO, David Carroll, the City Bank was willing to loan the money but before that happened, a board under the control of Believers’ Church in India took a loan there and then sent almost $19.8 million as a gift to help GFA complete the office buildings (link).
I have since learned that GFA borrowed $11.5 million from City Bank in Lubbock in July 2014.
In May and June of 2010, GFA staff were informed that GFA had initiated a process of acquiring land for a new headquarters and compound. During these meetings, staff were told that the move would save millions and be cheaper for staff living expenses (neither of these claims appear to be true which will be addressed in future posts). In addition, staff were told that GFA would not divert money from the field nor take loans to help construct the headquarters. However, as we have seen, GFA did both. In October 2013, nearly $19.8 million was wired to GFA from a source in Asia (later disclosed to be Believers’ Church, headed by K.P. Yohannan). In India, GFA is an arm of Believers’ Church. According to GFA’s David Carroll, Believers’ Church took a loan which allowed them to give the $19.8 million to GFA in the U.S. to complete the headquarters. In one act, it appears that GFA reneged on the earlier promises to staff. Then another loan was taken by GFA in the U.S. in 2014.
Below listen to Yohannan’s statements to staff in 2010.

One of the main complaints from former staff is a feeling of betrayal over the policies portrayed by GFA leaders and that which actually happened. The story that is emerging about the move to Wills Point is quite different than what was described at the time.
What might be more serious even than misleading statements to staff are the the misleading statements in the 2013 audit conducted by Bland Garvey. The $19.8 million payment from Believers’ Church in India to GFA was clearly a related party transaction with financial repercussion both in India and the U.S. However, the “anonymous” gift was reported in a different section of the audit:
GFAGiftIndiaBC
This description does not alert potential donors or potential lenders (e.g., City Bank in Lubbock, TX who loaned $11.5 million to GFA) that the cash to help build the buildings actually came from a related party (Despite his claims to the contrary, Yohannan is listed in legal documents in India as the managing trustee of Believers’ Church). Some donors might wonder why funds are so urgently needed on the field if a beneficiary of GFA’s work can turn around and give such a large gift with assurances that it can be repaid very quickly. A bank might view the credit worthiness of GFA differently if it is known that an anonymous donor is really a related party.
The ECFA review of Gospel for Asia is supposed to be completed by October when GFA is supposed to answer all outstanding questions. Looking forward to that.

Believers’ Church India Gave Nearly $20 Million to Help Build Gospel for Asia’s New Office Complex

Daily, Gospel for Asia affiliates all over the world solicit donations to help support children and mission activities in Asia. GFA affiliates in the U.S., Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand collect money from donors and funnel it to various non-government organizations affiliated with GFA in several Asian nations, most notably India, Nepal, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Bangladesh.*

I have recently learned that on at least one occasion the flow of funds was reversed. In May, David Carroll and K.P. Yohannan revealed to GFA’s staff that in 2013 Believers’ Church (GFA in India is an arm of BC) gave nearly $20 million to GFA in the United States toward the construction of a new compound in Wills Point, TX. The compound serves as GFA’s headquarters and the location of GFA’s School of Discipleship. I am getting figures together but my estimates of the costs of the compound were between $30-45 million.

Several staff speaking anonymously due to fears of retaliation told me that staff were told by GFA leaders that an anonymous donor gave the large gift to help complete the project. The 2012 and 2013 audits done by Bland Garvey refer to an anonymous donor as well.
GFAGiftIndiaBC
The sentence outlined in red above discloses that GFA received nearly $20 million “from an anonymous donor.” Former staff told me that the impression they had was that a single donor provided the gift and they had no idea that it came “from the field.”

Listen to David Carroll and K.P. Yohannan describe the gift. (Author’s note: When this post was first published I had audio from the staff meeting embedded. On November 13, 2015, I was notified by the management of Patheos that GFA had an attorney demand that Patheos remove the audio. Rather than engage in a costly lawsuit with GFA, management and I decided to remove the embedded audio. Instead, readers may click the link to hear the relevant portion of the staff meeting).

May 14, 2o15 staff meeting.

UPDATE on November 25, 2015: A transcript of the audio can now be read at this link. Not only did GFA demand removal of the audio but they demanded that the transcript be removed as well. I do not agree with this demand and am only doing it until I can determine a better course of action. I will leave some of the significant statements up but for now go to this link to read the entire transcript.

Below is a summary of the audio:

David Carroll told staff that there had been a story about a $19 million dollar anonymous gift for the campus construction. He said he wanted to clear up what happened.  He said in April of 2013, GFA leaders went to City Bank of Texas for a loan since GFA was running low on funds for campus construction. He said they were about to get the loan when “Brother KP mentioned it to some of the folks in Asia and mentioned that we were not able to do any better than that. We couldn’t, we would loved to have borrowed money from one of the Asian banks cause actually it’s much better terms, it would be much less costly, we weren’t able to do that being a foreign corporation.”

Carroll then said a board under Believers’ Church sent the nearly $20 million dollars because they thought it would be a good investment. Carroll then asked, “Was it field funds that should have gone to Nepal for earthquake victims or…” and then he was interrupted by K.P. Yohannan. Carroll told Yohannan he was getting to Yohannan’s point. Then Carroll said the board on the mission field “actually took a loan from one of their sources to replace that money so they could use it for the purpose it had been designated for there. So in essence, they got our loan.” He added, “They made that decision to give us that money and they wanted it to be anonymous. And I’m a little sad that it’s not anonymous, but I did want to explain to you where it came from, and the reasons behind it, and so, in their minds it was an investment.”

At that point, KP Yohannan chimed in and said, “It’s legal.”

Carroll added, “It’s completely legal, thank you.”

Carroll then claimed that the transaction was not a related party transaction. He said, “It is not a related party transaction because the board members here, they’re not the same board members as there. In other words, the leadership here did not influence that decision there. Brother KP mentioned it but it was not his decision. He had to get permission…”
KP Yohannan interrupted Carroll to claim that he is only a spiritual father in the Believers’ Church and that he does not “have any legal say or decision about legal matters. My role is a spiritual leadership.” He claimed that he doesn’t sit on any of the trusts in “these countries.”

For the entire transcript, go here.

This narrative raises so many more questions than it answers.

First, the gift
According to the Bland Garvey audit, nearly $19.8 million was given to GFA from the “anonymous donor” which we now know to be an entity of Believers’ Church. According to Carroll, the $19.8 million came from “a board under the Believers’ Church umbrella.” It sounds as though the entity took money given for field work and then replaced it with funds from another source. Carroll said:

But what they did on the mission field is they actually took a loan from one of their sources to replace that money so they could use it for the purpose it had been designated for there. So in essence, they got our loan. There are several income producing entities in Asia. That’s why partly why we have 35% of our church is self-sustaining, by God’s grace now in Asia. And they felt they could pay that loan off very very quickly.

What source has nearly $20 million dollars which can replace money given by donors for designated purposes? So Believers’ Church borrowed $19.8 million from “one of their sources” in order to replace money given for other purposes but given instead as a gift to GFA in the United States. I am not sure about the legality of sending donor money back to GFA when an Indian NGO borrows it from another part of their operation.

I also wonder why the Indian NGO needs donations from GFA affiliates if it can “very very quickly” repay a $19.8 million loan. GFA said they sent $58.5 million to India in 2013 while Indian government reports say only $28.5 million came in. This is one of the big discrepancies GFA refuses to address. For now my purpose is to show how the $19.8 million gift compares to what GFA sends Indian NGOs per year, and as one can see, the $19.8 million gift is a substantial portion in comparison to what they receive each year.

K.P. Yohannan, his board memberships and related party transactions

As I showed in two prior posts, that K.P. Yohannan is referred to in India as the “managing trustee of Believers’ Church.”  However, in this staff meeting, Yohannan again says, along with David Carroll, that he is not on any boards and has no legal standing. While it is possible that he might not be on boards at this moment, he was “managing trustee” up until February 2015. He would have been in management at the time these gifts were given. For GFA leaders to have any credibility on this matter, they need to explain the discrepancy between what Yohannan told the staff in May and what their own websites and legal documents filed in India say. They refer to K.P. Yohannan as managing trustee of Believers’ Church.

Furthermore, Yohannan is also the Metropolitan Bishop of the Believers’ Church. Bishops pledge their allegiance and obedience to him.  He sits on the boards of GFA (UK) and GFA NZ. He also sits on the interagency council involving Canada, US and Germany. The gifts were given in order to enhance GFA International which Yohannan leads. Carroll said Yohannan “mentioned it.” Why did he mention it if he has no power? In contrast to what David Carroll said, it is hard not to see this as a related party transaction.

This gift was reported by Bland Garvey but not as a related party transaction. It is oddly posted under “Concentration of Credit Risk.”

Many more questions

I will let readers suggest more questions, but here is one. Why did GFA find itself in so much trouble that a gift from the field was necessary? Did they not anticipate that a $40 million project would require funds? According to the records I have seen, GFA only took in a little over $20 million for the building in 2013. In other words, GFA was in the middle of a building project with no funds and no fund raising campaign. They were bailed out by the funds which came from Believers’ Church which is led by the CEO of Gospel for Asia. What builder would undertake a project of that magnitude without knowing something about the funding? What responsible board would start a $40 million project with no idea where the money would come from?

*These are the major donor nations and recipient NGO locations. There may be more donor nations and there are most certainly additional recipient nations but GFA has not provided specific information on the flow of funds to these nations and public records aren’t readily available.

Transcript:

David Carroll: There is, I don’t want to call it a rumor, a story, an inquiry about, what about the $19 million anonymous gift that was given for the campus back a year or so ago? What’s that all about? Did that come from the mission field, from field funds? So I want to explain that gift to you so that you know.

In about April of 2013, as we were building the campus here, we were running pretty critically short on money. We went to a bank at the time, City Bank of Texas, they’re located in Lubbock. Many of you might remember, we were still at the other building and A group of 11 bankers came, talk about a room, 11 bankers and an accountant and John [Beers]. That’s 12 bankers and an accountant. That was a rip-roaring time. Anyway, um, they came interested in our project to loan to it. So we brought them out here, we showed them the whole thing, we explained our vision, and actually we were working toward finalizing that loan, we were at the place of getting terms from them and when we realized the cost of the loan, Brother KP mentioned it to some of the folks in Asia and mentioned that we were not able to do any better than that. We couldn’t, we would loved to have borrowed money from one of the Asian banks cause actually it’s much better terms, it would be much less costly, we weren’t able to do that being a foreign corporation.

And so, what the people in Asia did, and it is a board that is under Believers’ Church umbrella, but Brother KP’s not on that board, it wasn’t his decision. The decision was made by them that since GFA North America had sent so much money to us from undesignated field funds, where needed most funds over the years, and since this campus to us is seen as an international headquarters which will be leadership training, it will be RYPs, which are always fruitful for the field, every time we have an RYP, the field tends to benefit from that. It will save the ministry somewhere between 4 and 5 million dollars a year when we’re at capacity here which is about 350 people. When that happens, we’re going to receive a lot of that extra money back and so they made the decision while we were in that bank loan process, that rather than go with that bank loan, we would like to make an anonymous gift for the campus fund.

And they did that. Was it field funds that should have gone to Nepal for earthquake victims or

K.P. Yohannan: – (Unintelligible)

DC – I was just getting to that.

KP – Sorry

DC – That’s fine. No, it wasn’t. But what they did on the mission field is they actually took a loan from one of their sources to replace that money so they could use it for the purpose it had been designated for there. So in essence, they got our loan. There are several income producing entities in Asia. That’s why partly why we have 35% of our church is self-sustaining, by God’s grace now in Asia. And they felt they could pay that loan off very very quickly. They made that decision to give us that money and they wanted it to be anonymous. And I’m a little sad that it’s not anonymous, but I did want to explain to you where it came from, and the reasons behind it, and so, in their minds it was an investment.

KP – It’s legal.

DC – It’s completely legal, thank you. There’s a board member, board documents as I understand it, I don’t live in Asia, but there’s board documents on the other side. The whole thing was done in complete legality.

By the way, one question, one part of that question was, is this a related party transaction? And the answer is no. It is not a related party transaction because the board members here, they’re not the same board members as there. In other words, the leadership here did not influence that decision there. Brother KP mentioned it but it was not his decision. He had to get permission, actually they told…

KP – I think David, it is important for people to know the person I am. It’s like Paul said in one place he’s a doulos, he’s a servant, another place he’s an apostle, another place he’s a brother, and my role is being a spiritual father of right now about 2.7 million people scattered throughout all these nations and I do not have any legal say or decision about legal matters. My role is a spiritual leadership. You may not have asked that but there are hundreds of trusts and entities in all these countries. I don’t sit on any of those things. There are their own people. And my role is the spiritual leadership. And I hope to some extent that is here also.

Information Missing from Gospel for Asia Websites After Report on K.P. Yohannan's Board Memberships in India

On August 14, I posted an excerpt from a May 14 Gospel for Asia meeting where K.P. Yohannan told GFA staff that he was not on any organization boards in India. Yohannan said:

I am not legally on any boards, any trusts, anything in any of these countries. I have no powers to make decisions or sign money, or release money, or make decisions…why? Because anybody who work in the United States or overseas countries have a board membership or have legal membership should not be part of their legal entities in India. It’s a conflict of interest… 

However, documents from Indian courts, the Indian state of Kerala, and a few of his own schools say otherwise. Yohannan is listed as the managing trustee and president of Gospel for Asia in India. He is also listed as managing trustee and lead Bishop (Metropolitan) for Believers’ Church. GFA in India is billed as a nation building arm of BC.
In that post, I have links to five court cases (there are many) and a state document where Yohannan is listed as a managing trustee of GFA and/or BC. I also have links and screen captures to Believers’ Church websites which describe Yohannan as chair of two boards within the church. However, those links now do not work or go to a “maintenance” page.
If you click the link to a Believers’ Church Residential School page which is supposed to contain “mandatory information” for schools in Delhi, it now looks like this:
BCMandatoryInfoChanged
Ten days ago, it looked like this (see also Google’s cache image):
YohannanBCTrustChairman
Yohannan’s son also serves on this managing committee and he is referred to as the V.P. of GFA and member of the trust.
BCRSSchoolcommittee
 
Siny Punnoose is a member of Yohannan’s family (niece I believe) and Daniel Johnson is his son-in-law. Rev. Daniel Punnoose is Yohannan’s son and serves on both the Trust* and as Vice President of GFA. Yohannan told his staff that such a dual membership was a conflict of interest.
The website for the Caarmel Engineering College also comes up blank. On August 14, Yohannan was listed as Chairman of the Trust (here I assume this means the Caarmel Educational Trust) and Metropolitan of the Believers’ Church, clearly a leadership position which makes him the leader of the denomination.
YohannanCaarmelEngTrust
The information page for the Believers’ Church Seminary’s administration continues to be live and shows Yohannan as president and his son as a board member.
In another post, I plan to post another denial by Yohannan of being on any board. This comes in context of a revelation in May to staff that an entity related to Believers’ Church in India gave $19 million to help pay for the construction of new headquarters and compound in Wills Point, TX.
More to come…
 
*I am not completely certain that this “Trust” is the Believers Church board. It may refer only to the school trust. Given the information on the rest of the page, it appears that Yohannan and his son are trustees of the Believers’ Church. According to documents filed by Believers’ Church lawyers, Yohannan is the managing trustee, yet another reason to believe that Yohannan has governing authority in Believers’ Church.
 
 
 

Gospel for Asia's 2014 Audit is Late

Member organizations with of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability with are supposed to file renewal documents each year. When those documents are due depends on when the fiscal year ends.

The renewal information is due by January 31 if your fiscal year ended on April 1 through September 30.
The renewal information is due by July 31 if your fiscal year ended on October 1 through March 31.

Gospel for Asia in the U.S. operates on a calendar year schedule so their renewal was due July 31. As a part of the renewal, an audited financial statement is required. However, I have learned that GFA’s audited statement for 2014 is not complete. Those who inquire about the 2014 audited statement are getting this reply:

Currently, we do not have 2014 finance reports ready yet, as our auditors are in the process of auditing GFA’s 2014 year.

This means that GFA’s renewal is incomplete. However, not to worry, the ECFA gives member organizations an automatic two-month extension.

Financial Statements Policy

Current members should submit financial statements with the Annual Membership Renewal (AMR) by the due date. However, occasionally members are unable to supply the financial statements on a timely basis for a variety of reasons. ECFA will evaluate the reason for the delay, balancing a desire to help an organization through a possibly difficult situation not of its own making, and the necessity of maintaining standards to protect the integrity of ECFA, through the timely submission of information.
Policy

  1. Financial statements.Financial statements should accompany the AMR when it is due. (This provides the member a minimum of four months from the end of their fiscal year end to obtain the required financial statements.)
  2. Two-month extension.If all other AMR materials are submitted on time, an automatic two-month extension to submit the financial statements will be granted.
  3. Additional extensions.Members unable to meet the two-month extended deadline will generally be granted an additional two-month extension if the extension does not exceed 12 months from the end of the fiscal year. A request for this extension must include an explanation of the status of the audit, the reason for the delay, and the expected date of completion.

However, renewals can still be processed and that seal can still be displayed as long as the fees are paid.

Our financial statements are not complete. What should we do? Although your financial statements are due along with your renewal formif they are not available,  complete the renewal form without them (we understand the financial section of the renewal form will be incomplete). You will be asked to provide an approximate date the financials will be available and also to estimate your total cash contribution in order to estimate your membership fee. Once financials are finalized, please forward a copy to ECFA or to href=”mailto:[email protected]”>[email protected]. We will complete the financial section and refund or invoice for any payment difference. If the financials are complete but the Form 990 is not, please submit the renewal form and financials and send the Form 990 when complete.

Last year, the audited statement was dated June 13, 2014.
Regular readers can probably guess about why the audit is late.
While I appreciate that the ECFA’s audit requirement puts some pressure on an organization to disclose important information, at the same time, I believe the ECFA should flag those organizations which have not turned in the documentation. If donors rely on ECFA, they won’t know that after months of not answering legitimate questions, GFA hasn’t turned in an audited statement of their 2014 finances, even though GFA has had over 7 months to do so.