"Didn’t a certain husband and wife 1have to account to Peter for certain financial dealings? Yes, they did, and 2when they lied to Peter about it they were both struck dead. If you want to accuse anybody of coercion, perhaps Peter should be your target." Grig
Your problem is mischaracterization:
1. The husband and wife were not required to account --in the context of the thread discussion on forced tithing to get a temple recommend-- and in fact Peter's statement to Ananias shows the money was volunteered as a gift, but with an embedded lie of omission seeking false glory, which was instantly evident to The Holy Spirit
2. The couple were struck dead not for lying to Peter but for lying to the Holy Spirit. Ananias and Sapphira were seeking to deceive the early church by using/copying Holy Spirit inspiration parsed to seek their self-aggrandizement. Having sold the land which belong to them to start with, they faked their 'gift' to the collection plate, which would open the door for false piety to enter the Holy Spirit directed early ecclesia (the church) and taint the body with deceit which would then be something Satan could use to discredit the whole body of believers.
For a strong clue that this meaning from the passage is accurate, read what happened in the ecclesia when these two deceivers were exposed, ied, and the news broadcast among the believers and those hearing of the story.
BTW, why do you seek to impugn Peter over the deaths of Ananias and Sapphira? And you should finally note that what the passage is addressing was not and had nothing to do with tithing. Those giving of their means were doing so under inspiration from the Holy Spirit, not by directive from the Apostles.
Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.
1. Peter required them to account for their actions and they lied to him. They didn’t say to Peter, ‘It’s my own business what I give and what I keep’ because they knew that wasn’t the deal. They didn’t go ‘Mind your own business Peter’ because they knew that it was his business. They both accepted his authority to ask such questions of them. By lying they showed they knew they had done something wrong in keeping part back, and that Peter was the authority figure they had to fool. Peter clearly shows in his actions that the expectation was that the whole amount would be turned over.
Now Peter’s statement to Ananias says that Ananias had full control over the money he got from the sale, IE: he could not blame somebody else for the full amount not being given. If this was a voluntary gift as you portray it and not a prerequisite for anything, then there was no reason for him to try and make Peter think it was the full amount of the sale.
2. They lied to the Holy Spirit by lying to Peter who was called of God to do this work.
And I do not seek to impugn Peter over their deaths, I’m pointing out that accounting to somebody called of God over what one has given to the church is not unBiblical.
Now there is a lot of detail lacking in Acts 4-5 over why they were doing this, how it started, how it was run etc. You’ve made certain assumptions about that but they are not assumptions I would agree with.
We believe that those early Christians were living a form of the United Order. That this was an organized community ran in a specific way by the apostles. Members of the community entered it by selling what they had and turning the whole of the proceeds over to the apostles who were the organizers of it. This couple held part back, contrary to what was required to enter the community, and Peter rightfully held them to account for it.
Tithing is a lesser law to prepare people to live the United Order so in that sense the passage is very relevant from our POV.