- Joined
- Jun 28, 2013
- Messages
- 1,681
- Reaction score
- 1,219
- Location
- Rhode Island
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Any business only gets taxed on profit.
That and land taxes.
I think property taxes are mostly what's in question here.
Any business only gets taxed on profit.
That and land taxes.
The catholic church making billions upon billions and owning prime real estate all over the world including a palace in the middle of Rome is "non-profit" and tax exempt, but when I simply try to provide food for my family I'm "for-profit" and must be taxed. The catholic church, among others, is a for-profit corporation and should be taxed as any other business.
So all Christian organizations automatically get tax-exempt status by simply being associated with a religion that meets the threshold for charity work, but churches of other smaller religions are shut out? How is that possibly a rational position?
If you really want to run with that idea, make it by church, not by religion. A church from a small religion that does a lot for the community should have a better chance of getting tax-exempt status over a church that does nothing for the community but is part of a big religion.
Pick a choice and post if you care to explain
People are welcome to have opinions, they just have to be intelligent, rational and based on evidence, not wishful thinking.
churches operating a for profit business are taxed on those proceeds.
The Separation of Church and State doctrine is mean only to stipulateI voted no... primarily because I very much respect the notion of there being a separation of church and state.
Churches are a business, and thus they should be taxed as one.
My local church runs a day care at break even, runs a pre-school, and does a lot of other volunteer charities like taking care of yards for senior members that fall behind for whatever reason, provide meeting places for youth organizations, food drives, and have stepped in to help with flood and fire situations etc etc.
They do a lot more than just proselytize. My grandfather was part of the financial committee before his death and I asked him about the church, they keep a small fund but the rest goes to works in my home town. They do a lot of good. I haven't attended since I was in my teens except for weddings and funerals, but I'm guessing my experience differs from a lot of others. Before anyone asks, Lutheran denomination.
Churches that are run in this way are doing a lot for the community, taxing them would just lessen what they are able to do. I guess I just don't understand the hate based upon churches that are not doing such. The correct action would seem to be to take action against unethical churches instead of all of them.
My local church runs a day care at break even, runs a pre-school, and does a lot of other volunteer charities like taking care of yards for senior members that fall behind for whatever reason, provide meeting places for youth organizations, food drives, and have stepped in to help with flood and fire situations etc etc.
They do a lot more than just proselytize. My grandfather was part of the financial committee before his death and I asked him about the church, they keep a small fund but the rest goes to works in my home town. They do a lot of good. I haven't attended since I was in my teens except for weddings and funerals, but I'm guessing my experience differs from a lot of others. Before anyone asks, Lutheran denomination.
Churches that are run in this way are doing a lot for the community, taxing them would just lessen what they are able to do. I guess I just don't understand the hate based upon churches that are not doing such. The correct action would seem to be to take action against unethical churches instead of all of them.
On the eve of his visit to the United States, Pope Francis blasted religious institutions who are exploiting tax loopholes to make money instead of helping the needy.
In an interview with a Portuguese Catholic broadcaster, the Pope discussed the need for Christians to fight the temptation of the ‘God of money’, into which many religious institutions often fall. He then called out those institutions that have opted to enter into the hospitality industry while exploiting a legal loophole to keep from paying taxes on their business enterprise operating under the guise of doing “God’s work.”
“Some religious orders say ‘No, now that the convent is empty we are going to make a hotel and we can have guests, and support ourselves that way, or make money.’ Well, if that is what you want to do, then pay taxes! A religious school is tax-exempt because it is religious, but if it is functioning as a hotel, then it should pay taxes just like its neighbor. Otherwise it is not fair business.”
Pick a choice and post if you care to explain
What's getting confused here is that churches that operate as charities and churches that operate as businesses are getting lumped into one category, which isn't really fair. As it stands, subsidies go specifically to those parts of a church that operate as charities, and none that practice the proselytism/actual faith part. But regardless of how the church operates, it's treated as tax-exempt, period. While researching this yesterday I saw a long list of all the individual taxes a church is exempt from, and it's just jaw dropping. That there aren't churches operating as money making ventures is just naive in the extreme.
And guess who agrees with me: The Pope.
Pope Francis Calls for Ending Tax-Exempt Status of Churches That Don't Help the Needy
Being very real, I don't think it will matter to some what churches do and how they are run, they dislike what they preach and what they say so they want them taxed as a penalty. There are some posts in this thread that bear this out.
Looking at it more ethically, how do you assign a government agency to investigate the churches that are working as a charity and those that are not? Either way, government is going to look like the bad guy, and its going to cost votes. Not to mention constant religious interference suits, I think that has a lot more to do with why its not looked at more closely.
The power to tax is the power to destroy. It should be unconstitutional for the government to tax nonprofit churches.
Non-profit churches that are legitimate charities? Sure. But let's not pretend that if an organization is a church, it's automatically doing that. Under the current tax exemption rules, a church is automatically...well...tax exempt.
I'm not interested in "the power to tax is the power to destroy" rhetoric.
The power to tax is more like the power to control through financial coercion.
I'm not basing my argument on whether or not someone is pissed off at them, but whether the church is legitimately acting as a non-profit charity, or whether it's merely hiding behind a 501c(3) tax exempt status in order to cynically make money.
And how do you know if an organization's behavior is kosher or not? You investigate them. As Planned Parenthood should know because it had SUPER motivated investigation panels starting up it's rectum with a microscope, all run by ideologically anti-abortion Republicans, and they still found nothing.
That is correct. Without that coercion, how would I be able to get your money and put it into my welfare check?
Right, I am saying you have people, even people in this thread, that want taxes levied as a penalty because they don't like what they say and do.
Secondly, potential conflict of interest in government, but it has to be done.
That's not really what I'm speaking towards. When you tax something you get less of it. This very reality can be used to the advantage of government to control how people behave in the marketplace.
If someone has an emotional reaction to churches in general, that's their problem, not mine.
And as I said, someone is always going to be pissed off at someone for something. If an organization (such as a church or PP) is cooking their books in some way, an audit will uncover that.
Its everyone's problem. Amendment rights and all that.
Agreed.