Tax Exempt Religious Organizations

[Armistead]

"the Italian government made a historic change in 2013 tax code to boost revenue: the Roman Catholic Church will no longer be exempt from property taxes in Italy. "

Should the US do the same?

http://www.policymic.com/articles/21...-be-tax-exempt

[Betonov]

For one thing, Slovenia should do the same.

They got more than enough to cover the countries deficit

[mookiemookie]

Since many churches are run as huge businesses and interject themselves into politics, yes, they should have their tax exempt status revoked.

[GoldenRivet]

Tax Baptist churches in my Texas town alone and you would likely squash the federal debt within 5 years.

You cant throw a rock around here without busting a stained glass window

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Since many churches are run as huge businesses and interject themselves into politics, yes, they should have their tax exempt status revoked.

I wouldn't go that far but I would say that they should be treated more locally as in you get one property exemption for one building in each town and beyond that you pay taxes on any additional properties you own.

this would keep the churches themselves exempt but be more reasonable and fair so they don't own and hold as much property as the government does yet pay no taxes on it.

convents and monastaries and such since they don't hold public religious services should be classified differently along with charities and be held to the same one property exemption for each town and beyond that you pay taxes on any additional properties you own.

any charities that don't give out a minimum of 60% of all total gross money they take in must lose there charity exemption so no more 90% goes to expenses and "administrative costs" (saleries) and "maybe" 10% or less actually ever gets to the reason donations were collected in the first place. I would like to se it at 90% payouts but fundraising must pay for services and such so it cant be done for free so 60% is more reasonable and realistic

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Since many churches are run as huge businesses and interject themselves into politics, yes, they should have their tax exempt status revoked.

I would agree. Let's look at this way. Remember the infamous, "You did not build that." statement? Well, the church did not build that either so they should have the tax exemption revoked.

INMO, a majority of religion is a business.

[Ducimus]

The problem I see with revoking the tax exempt status is it kind of makes things, "official", in terms of church interferring with matters of the state. Yes the church already invokes political influence to varying degrees though it shouldn't. But remove the tax exempt status, and how now it's open season to do what it wants because church dollars will be pumped directly. In the longer view, removing this tax exempt status will only serve to further erode the barrier between church and state.

To be fair, I also maintain that the state has no business interjecting itself with matters of the church either.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

The problem I see with revoking the tax exempt status is it kind of makes things, "official", in terms of church interferring with matters of the state. Yes the church already invokes political influence to varying degrees though it shouldn't. But remove the tax exempt status, and how now it's open season to do what it wants because church dollars will be pumped directly. In the longer view, removing this tax exempt status will only serve to further erode the barrier between church and state.

To be fair, I also maintain that the state has no business interjecting itself with matters of the church either.

All excellent points.

[vienna]

The problem I see with revoking the tax exempt status is it kind of makes things, "official", in terms of church interferring with matters of the state. Yes the church already invokes political influence to varying degrees though it shouldn't. But remove the tax exempt status, and how now it's open season to do what it wants because church dollars will be pumped directly. In the longer view, removing this tax exempt status will only serve to further erode the barrier between church and state.

Actually, tax revenues are least likely to exert great influence as opposed to direct contributions to candidates or parties. Since the churches pay no taxes, their influence is more through those direct contributions in the same manner as, say, a corporation or PAC. We pay taxes, but our influence, financially, is far less than deep pocket contributors. The various churches are in a rather better position because of tax exemptions since, without taxes, they have more cash to distribute, proportionally, than a corporation or private entity paying taxes. Remove the exemptions and you reduce the amount of "disposable" income the churhes would have to influence or leverage policy...


<O>

Originally Posted by Ducimus

The problem I see with revoking the tax exempt status is it kind of makes things, "official", in terms of church interferring with matters of the state. Yes the church already invokes political influence to varying degrees though it shouldn't. But remove the tax exempt status, and how now it's open season to do what it wants because church dollars will be pumped directly. In the longer view, removing this tax exempt status will only serve to further erode the barrier between church and state.

To be fair, I also maintain that the state has no business interjecting itself with matters of the church either.

Can you give links that to Laws that say that religous orginizations can't contribute to political causes?
How did they get Tax exempt to start with?
So if a movement to get them required to pay taxes as stated above do you really think that will fly or will we see the real power play come out?

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

Since many charities are run as huge businesses and interject themselves into politics, yes, they should have their tax exempt status revoked.

Taking religion out of it
Do the many affect all or how to distinguish between those that do and those that don't?
Webster hands up an arbitrary cut off point in his post, but any charity or more importantly "charity" would have no problem running the figures in circles to make sure they hit the magic 60%.

It is worth noting that the Italian tax move only aims for property tax on the churches commercial investments not on the actual churches churchy stuff

[Ducimus]

Originally Posted by privateer

Can you give links that to Laws that say that religous orginizations can't contribute to political causes?

I never said they legally couldn't, as I'm not sure what the legalities are in the case of campaign contributions or what not. I just implied I didn't agree with the church becoming involved in matters of state.

How did they get Tax exempt to start with?

No idea. I never really agreed with it either. But after thinking about it in the past, i let the subject go.

So if a movement to get them required to pay taxes as stated above do you really think that will fly or will we see the real power play come out?

If I had my way, hell yes I'd make religious institutions of whatever denomination pay taxes. It's one of the biggest rackets in America, taking in millions of dollars a year, tax free. I am not a fan of that.

However, I for one don't want to make things easier for them by removing any barriers between church and state. Speaking in terms of social acceptance, I think paying taxes gives one "a say" in policy. From, " What the hell, I pay my taxes don't I? " to, "Your tax dollars at work" , being used in context of putting up a new 10 commandments monument.

As much as I'd love to stick it to the racket that is organized religion, I think opening certain doors is going to cause bigger problems down the road. Even if they pay taxes, it's not going to effect their disposable income all that much. Any well organized church can make it back in tithes and donations in no time at all.

EDIT:
Heh, now here's an interesting thought. A big honking crucifix being erected outside a state building with a sign below it reading, "Your tax dollars at work". No thanks.

Fair enuff answers Mate.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by privateer

How did they get Tax exempt to start with?

The Roman emperor Constantine was converted in the year 312. Shortly after that he made Christianity the official State religion of the Empire and exempted The Church from paying any taxes. It's been the unofficial (and sometimes official) policy of western countries ever since.

It wasn't official US policy until 1894, but the idea has always been there.

Here is a website that discusses both sides of this issue (and many others) relatively fairly.
http://churchesandtaxes.procon.org/

[August]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

The problem I see with revoking the tax exempt status is it kind of makes things, "official", in terms of church interferring with matters of the state. Yes the church already invokes political influence to varying degrees though it shouldn't. But remove the tax exempt status, and how now it's open season to do what it wants because church dollars will be pumped directly. In the longer view, removing this tax exempt status will only serve to further erode the barrier between church and state.

To be fair, I also maintain that the state has no business interjecting itself with matters of the church either.

Yep. Imagine some families evicted from their homes under eminent domain because a church building would potentially generate more property taxes. If they can do it for other developers they can do it for a tax paying church too.