Do Churches Deserve Tax Breaks?

[Dewey]

Churches don’t pay taxes. They don’t even have to file income tax returns. They don’t pay for the services they receive from government. The citizens pay for those services in addition to paying for their own services.

Why do we exempt the churches? Mostly, we wish to avoid the appearance of overstepping the constitutionally-required boundary between government and church. Also, we assume that sll churches provide valuable services to the community, including the charitable services already generally exempt.

The exemption is conditional. The constitutional boundary also applies to the churches. They are barred from engaging in excessive political lobbying and any political campaigning. And, religious organizations are supposed to pay taxes on business activities unrelated to their ministry.

So, how does all that register with you? Is it all a good idea? Is it all working the way it’s supposed to? What, if anything about it, bothers you?

[Khethil]

Oi! Hadn't thought on this one in a while.

At first blush, I'd have to say I'm torn; Tax exempt status for purely fellowship based organizations, that sustain themselves only, seems to make sense.

On the other hand...

... some religious organizations are huge, sprawling complexes with a hundreds or thousands of branches branches sounds and million-dollar incomes (billions? trillions?). Such as these seem so much more like a business to me (albeit with a distinctly-different commodity).

That's a tough one. But if you put a gun to my head, I'd have to say: No, I think tax-exempt status - except in rare cases - should remain intact.

I'd look forward to others' views on this though.

Thanks, nice idea for a thread

[Dewey]

Originally Posted by Khethil

At first blush, I'd have to say I'm torn; Tax exempt status for purely fellowship based organizations, that sustain themselves only, seems to make sense.

Question: Some churches, such as the evangelicals and the Watchtower folks, expend a large part of their resources on proselytization. Is that a self-sustaining activity and therefore properly exempt from tax?

[Deftil]

I don't know as much about this topic as I'd like to. (tax laws in general really)

If a church engages in political lobbying and such, do they lose their tax exempt status? Are there are any (other) ways for them to lose their status? What does an organization have to do to legally be considered a church? Can I call my house a church and become tax exempt? Do secular charitable organizations receive tax exempt status?

I don't think churches should be tax exempt just on principle of being religious organizations, but based on how much charitable work they do, and even then, only if the same benefit can be extended to secular charitable groups. There should be some burden of proof on the churches to show that they actually do charitable work or they should lose their TE status. I can only speculate that some churches reap the benefits of being TE while they spend most of their time, energy, and money proselytizing, but doing little to otherwise help in their communities. On the other hand, I know there are some churches that do amazing charitable work and deserve any benefit that the government can possibly give them.

[Dewey]

Originally Posted by Deftil

I don't think churches should be tax exempt just on principle of being religious organizations, but based on how much charitable work they do, and even then, only if the same benefit can be extended to secular charitable groups.

Hi Deftil:

That same exemption benefit is, in fact, generally extended to secular charitable groups.

Question: What if we decide to tax church properties and income except with respect to their charitable work? Some might say that to do so would violate the First Amendment concern to prevent government involvement with religion. Others might say that not to do so would allow the government to continue its financial subsidization of churches and thus continue to violate the First Amendment.

What do you think we should do about this dilemma?

[Justin]

No! My opinion is that Churches may as well get into laundering money because that's sort of what it is.

[Dewey]

Hi Justin: Please identify just what is sort of like money laundering and explain the connection.

[Justin]

Well, maybe no necessarily laundering but taking money and not paying taxes doesn't seem right. This would mean that I, as a member of the church could give a charitable contribution to the church and they receive it without taxation. Then the church could return the money in other ways to the original contributor thus certain members within a church are avoiding taxation.

There's corruption in churches all over the world when it comes to $$.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by Dewey

Churches don’t pay taxes. They don’t even have to file income tax returns. They don’t pay for the services they receive from government. The citizens pay for those services in addition to paying for their own services.

Why do we exempt the churches? Mostly, we wish to avoid the appearance of overstepping the constitutionally-required boundary between government and church. Also, we assume that sll churches provide valuable services to the community, including the charitable services already generally exempt.

The exemption is conditional. The constitutional boundary also applies to the churches. They are barred from engaging in excessive political lobbying and any political campaigning. And, religious organizations are supposed to pay taxes on business activities unrelated to their ministry.

So, how does all that register with you? Is it all a good idea? Is it all working the way it’s supposed to? What, if anything about it, bothers you?

To answer your question... No! People pay for their rights with a common sacrifce, and those church people get a cut rate to belong to a community they reject, and whose rules they do not accept. They want things their own way. Who doesn't. They want every body to act as they believe without troubling to make the moral argument. It is because they hold non believers in contempt, which makes the thought of driving them to belief seem acceptible. It is not. If you want your say; fine. Accept first the equality of all people, the rights of all people, and pay your fair share. Don't expect to have your piece of democracy on the cheap.

[AtheistDeity]

I don't personally think the public tax dollars should be going to fund private religious organizations at all. Especially not ones that don't even have to pay their oun taxes.