Hey--let's TAX THE CHURCHES!

[Perry Logan]

Now that the right wing have decided America is a Christian country, and now that billions of taxpayer dollars are going to crackpot religious causes, I think it's time we started a debate on taxing the churches.

If the churches are electing candidates, taking government money, and determining public policy, they damn well better start paying for it. If they want to play, they've got to pay!

In addition to the obvious increase in tax revenues--which we despertaely need to crawl out of the hole the Republics have dug--this will also cause 99% of all churches in the United States to immediately implode. That would be fun to see.

[NotGivingUp]

1. They should have been paying all along. n/t

[southerncrone]

32. I've said this for years.

Most of them are either country clubs or cults. Few do any type of "community welfare" work anymore.

TAX 'EM!!!!!

[Solomon]

41. I've always said that if a fire breaks out in a church, they should pray

for rain, not call the fire department.

[ThomWV]

2. The First Amendment applies to the other side too. Sorry.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

this is an improper interpretation, I know, but just take that word "free" to mean free of having to pay anything to Government at any level and you'll pretty much understand how it goes. In truth were churches to be taxed then it would be easy enough to raise the tax rate until no church could exist.

So while if it were up to me every church in the nation would be turned into a homeless shelter or free clinic tomorrow its not likely that is going to happen - its just not the modern Christian way - I still have to side with the Constitution so they get to keep their 'houses of worship'.

[papau]

4. Power to tax is power to destroy - The "free" was intended per the Federalist papers n/t

n/t

[Lucinda]

38. In those terms I take free as meaning able to openly worship

without restriction. Not $$ wise. I think they should be taxed.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

63. Why should they be taxed?

A church is a group of individuals who come together and pool their funds to build and maintain buildings, pay for staff, activities, and charity work.
There's no profit involved in most churches.

Pastors like Joel Osteen make a fortune, but I believe their fees for speaking engagements are taxed, as are the books they write.

And remember that the average church has just a few hundred members.

[Zhade]

93. Fine, don't tax them - but don't let them use TAXPAYER-FUNDED services, either!

No cops. No firemen.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

104. Bull The members of the church PAY TAXES

for all those things! As a matter of fact, cops and firemen are members of those churches! Should all local civic and charity organizations also pay taxes on their members dues? Some of them own or rent buildings, just like churches.

The collections that support the church aren't taxed. What we give has already been taxed.

The employees of the church (minister, secretary, youth minister, etc.) ARE TAXED on their income.

Any businesses the church might operate ARE TAXED. My church doesn't run any businesses, so WE aren't taxed.

However, ministers who make money from speaking engagements and writing books ARE TAXED on that income, etc.

[rhett o rick]

66. Let the churchs keep their "houses of worship" but let their congregations

pay and not the taxpayers. The tax break for churches is fine for the small churches trying to get by, but the big, enormous, super wealthy churches should not be getting any tax breaks. They are using the break to make their CEO's wealthy.

[candycom]

91. I agree.

[MikeE]

3. I agree totally

I know the argument has always been "but we do charitable work". Well, if so, then write it off like everyone else.

[Critters2]

44. Churches are tax esempt under the same regs as other charities.

Churches are 501c3s, like the Heart Association, the Cancer Society, Homeless Shelters, etc. So, in these terms, churches are treated like everyone else. Everyone else that the government has named a non-profit.

[kath]

60. Except that the vast majority of them do little if any real charitable work any more - as a poster

above mentioned, most are just tax-exempt social clubs or country clubs.

You should see some of the mega-churches out here - vast campuses, with MANY buildings, not just a "hall of worship" -- coffee shops, rec rooms, theaters, etc, etc, MULTT_MILLION DOLLAR campuses, all tax-free.
NOT what the founders intended, especially when you consider all the politicking they do...

[Critters2]

85. Most churches are not mega-churches.

Most are small congregations visiting seniors in nursing homes, collecting for the local food pantry, working on justice issues (different churches interpret "justice" differently, but that's what freedom of speech and association is all about), visiting those in hospital, counseling the sad or hurt. Is this work not charitable?

[rhett o rick]

67. Churchs are not charities. nm

[Critters2]

86. See post no. 85. nt

[Perry Logan]

5. If religion is part of government, there is no possible rationale for giving churches a free ride.

[Az]

10. Religion is not part of our government

Despite the PR some would have you believe. This is not a Christian nation. In fact our government is specifically secular. Some religions have certainly spent a lot of time trying to infest our government but it does still remain largely secular. We have even made improvements from the initial conditions over time.

Just because someone claims our government is Christian does not make it so.

[populistdriven]

31. Religion has been made a part of our government. Hillary supports Government payments 2 Churches

All of this is despite the facts you posted. Our country has been corrupted by thieves wearing holy robes.

Our generals consider Iraq to be a war against Islam.

[Az]

6. Bad idea

Taxes are what we pay for our access to the government. If we charge taxes on religion then religion will have a direct claim to involved itself in government.

Furthermore taxes are a form of control. Taxes are the means by which drugs were rendered illegal. Taxes would also squash growth of new religions and that would be a destruction of freedom of thought.

That being said the megachurchs have pushed the notion of tax exempt status beyond the point of reason. Pulling a business practice within the walls of a church should not render it tax immune. It should be the core functions of the church that are free from taxation. Unfortunately many use this status as a shelter for real businesses and worse for political advocacy groups. These should be gone after with a vengeance.

[Bubba HoHoHo Tep]

7. You don't want

Government going after religion. What next? What other amendments do you think government should go to war over?

[Az]

9. Perhaps restoring a few instead of going after them

Or perhaps restoring habeas corpus. That would be nice. But trying to tax churches is a bad idea.

[RC]

18. Huh? Religion has gone after government.

Do you really think baby bu$h would still be in our White House without all that free money religion has? Define 'charitable works' and tax everything else they do.

[Bubba HoHoHo Tep]

22. Religious freedom

That enables them to complain about government. But government has no right to attack religion. And I don't want to live in that nation if it does.

[bluerum]

21. Government is going after religion. Holding the tax write off over their heads

if they speak out against government policy.

Providing tax benefits for those who tow the line.

[Vickers]

71. I pay taxes on those other Amendements.

1. Freedom of the press? I paid tax on the newspaper I received this morning.

2. The right of the people to keep and bear Arms? I paid tax on the ammo I bought for my Sig the other day (plus I paid a fee a couple of years ago for my concealed weapon permit).

etc. etc.

:eyes:

Welcome to DU yadda yadda yadda...

[yellowdogintexas]

16. you get the blue ribbon and the gold star. Very Well Put

the difference between a more traditional church (large or small) and a mega church in what they pull into the tax exempt umbrella is pretty impressive. I see the difference in the outreach, and what is done with the donations and income.


I am member of a church with a Justice Ministry, managed by an ordained minister who is a former Federal Prosecutor and practicing attorney. He helps people who have no recourse, no funds, no where else to turn with legal issues like child custody, nasty landlords, evil car repossessors,etc. This operates out of our general mission which serves homeless, aged, working poor etc with food, clothing, assistance in obtaining social services, infant formula for that period between baby's birth and WIC availability, etc. Several prominent local attorneys and a judge are on the board of directors of the Justice Ministry.

I shudder to think what would happen to this amazing man and his work if he had to account to the IRS. I have listened to him speak about his passion, this work several times and he almost glows ..if I believed in auras, I would say his is the size of a supernova.

I want to win the lottery so I can give some money to the Mission and the Justice Ministry.

To our knowledge no other church has anything remotely like this, it evolved from our fulltime ministerial staff seeking the absolute best way to use the unique gifts of this amazing man. A prominent member of the local media is a member of our church; he spoke to our Sunday School class a couple weeks ago..he said he joined this church because it has truly been the conscience of our community for over 100 years, and I do think he is quite right.

So I would hate to think we had to pay taxes on income/"profit" because all the things that serve the underserved in our community would be much more difficult to accomplish. Yeah we run a private preschool...well the parents pay tuition to put their kids in it and it is self sustaining. Yeah, we have a big campus and some pretty buildings...well when our current building was built, it was wisely placed in a location where lots of land was available..so we are a downtown church with a ton of parking. Yeah we gots some major players in our church...but when our ministers said let's use our wealth to help our neighbors (a major housing project was built 2 blocks behind the campus about 2 years after the church was built)..those were the neighbors they served, and have continued to serve. None of the other big downtown churches made that choice. Oh yeah, we lease that parking during the week to downtown workers at less than they would pay elsewhere, and all the parking revenue goes straight to the mission. WinWin! A foundation maintains the physical plant so we don't have to have continual fundraisers to fix the roof, etc.

Sorry about the brag. Some would call this a MegaChurch, by definition we are because we have over 5000 members, but in practice we are so NOT a mega church. Liberal theology, dignified formal worship, activists galore for community causes, alternative worship services (more casual and 'hip' if you will).. The true MEGAchurches with their insular selfcontained fear mongering schools, political interference, etc just make me grind my teeth. Too many of them around here, too.

[kath]

61. Does this attorney help *anyone* in the community, or just members of the congregation? Likewise,

does the assistance to the poor just go to members?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

64. In my church assistance goes to anyone, with no proselytizing

Yes, it happens, more often than not.

[JerseygirlCT]

80. I'll second that nt

[Critters2]

87. I don't know of any church that only offers assistance to members. nt

[Gregorian]

28. Bingo. I'm in total agreement. Keep religion out of government.

And that's coming from a christian. Capitalization left off on purpose.

Taxation gives the church the ticket to involvement in government. And we all see the dangers in that.

[Xenotime]

36. We can tax religion and keep them out..

They occupy land and use resources just like any other big business. They should pay for it.

[Az]

40. Worse idea

The initial complaint that set our nation on its path was "No taxation without representation". I don't want to see a Church shouting that.

[Critters2]

45. Not all churches are big.

The small ones, the ones that serve the poor and elderly, would be driven out of business, leaving only the megachurches with deep pockets.

[BlueJazz]

62. What you say is true but it seems that Religion/Churches already...

.have a direct access to our politicians and therefore, our laws.
My feelings are that if they continue on the path that they have taken and have chosen to take,
then tax them heavily....and warn them that they can have their tax status returned to the "Free Ride" when they keep their noses out of Politics.

[Az]

75. There have been many battles on that front

If a Church or any tax exempt org actually starts schilling for a candidate or party it places their exempt status in jeopardy. The problem is making sure the laws get enforced.

[DemBones DemBones]

72. Right. If all churches were taxed

it would hurt a lot of people who are helped by church-sponsored charities, which, contrary to popular belief, don't always come with strings attached.

Remember also that black churches have hosted Democratic candidates as speakers at services for many years. They'd have to quit doing it if they were going to lose their tax-exempt status.

[JerseygirlCT]

79. Yes, absolutely

Well-run non-profits understand what "unrelated business" means. And too many churches have boldly crossed the line into candidate advocacy. The restrictions in place on these things ought to be enforced, and strongly.

Because a strong separation between church and state benefits both.

[1932]

8. Churches that use their donations to do good deeds should not be taxed.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

27. The tax deduction should only apply to actual good deeds, though

Calculate how much is spent on things like feeding and clothing the poor, as opposed to what is spent on lavish furnishings, landscaping, and amenities to the parishioners. It just galls me to see all the Escalades parked outside the mega-church near my home, knowing that the parishioners are writing off every damn dime they give to it, while the church itself pays no property taxes on a very valuable parcel of land. As far as I know, this particular church does little to nothing for poor people.

[1932]

37. I think there should be a rebuttable presumption of the tax-free status.

And I feel the IRS should be willing to provide evidence to rebut the presumption, especially in cases like Oral Roberts University.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

106. As far as you know? Here's an example for you.

I live in a burb of Houston. Although I'm no fan of the personality driven mega churches, many of those same churches around here do a lot of charity work. Most of these churches are divided into smaller groups, which organize their charity work.

Furthermore, Mayor Bill White did a great job opening the city to victims of Katrina/Bush; however, the megachurches really opened their doors with shelter, clothes, food, money, places to sleep, and shoulders to lean on. They mayor said several times that it was really the churches that deserve the credit. Of course, many, many small churches were very involved in the effort to help, as well. Churches sent members with supplies to help out in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama.

I also want to add that - OF COURSE - there were non-church groups and individuals involved in helping the people from New Orleans in Houston. However, I wrote this to point out that it was the megachurches that had the resources and warm bodies to mobilize quickly. As much as I'm not a fan of those types of churches, I feel they really should get the credit for what they did.

[JVS]

70. Is there a legal definition of good?

[1932]

98. Charitable donation. No quid pro quo.

[Zhade]

94. Define "good deeds". Some think missionary work is a good deed.

I find it a despicable manipulation of people in need.

Who decides?

[1932]

99. Helping the poor and needy. Alleviating suffering.

[Zhade]

100. Who decides "needy" or "suffering"?

For some arrogant magical thinkers, my not buying into their superstitious scam means I'm "suffering" (when, in fact, I'm happier than I ever was trying to swallow that nonsense).

See my point?

[mn9driver]

11. The Bush IRS has already attempted this.

In Bush's America, Churches are welcome to organize their members to support the GOPers, support the current War, and support the Preznit. Churches that preach Peace and Social Justice are threatened with the loss of their tax-exempt status.

All Saints Pasadena fought the IRS for over two years because they dared to allow actual Christian principles to be preached from their pulpit. Even though the IRS has dropped this case, they have put the church on notice that they will be back if any more subversive peace talk is heard there:

http://www.votelaw.com/blog/archives/005413.html

America is dead.

[randr]

12. Many churches own huge tracts of land that should be taxed

State and County land assessment taxes provide needed services, such as ambulance and law enforcement. Numerous religious organizations escape this collective responsibility. There is also the issue of capitol gains made when these lands are sold.
If I,as a private citizen am required to pay taxes on profit made of sales, so should a collective body of people acting in their self interest.

[Rabrrrrrr]

111. In Wisconsin, those huge tracts ARE taxed - charitables only get a few acres for free

and then they get taxed on everything else.

I don't know how other states are, but I imagine it's fairly common around the country.

Our two church camps in WI pay a fair amount in taxes. One of our camps gets a discount, because they've turned 50 or 60 acres into a protected nature preserve something or other. Something they would not have been able to do had the "tax the church" people gotten their way - because the camp would have had to sell that land to pay its taxes.

Thankfully, though, the camp gets a big tax break for being a non-profit, so that it can AFFORD to put 50-60 acres of land in a growing tourist area back into nature, and preserve it in perpetuity from development.

[mcscajun]

13. There are traditional churches doing the usual things, and then there are

Mega-churches, doing business.

Politics or not, I think the ones doing business more than religious practices and charitable works should absolutely be taxed. This includes property ownership beyond that required to support the church, parsonage/rectory, and related school(s) or building(s) directly and wholly related to charitable works, IMO. Any church, traditional or mega-church, mixing in politics should lose their tax-exempt status. Period.

Church members and church leaders have the right of free speech, certainly, and pastors speaking from the pulpit generally on spiritual and ethical matters have the right to do so without consequence even if such speech verges on issues deemed political (like abortion) but when they start blasting individual politicians from the pulpit, suggesting who parishioners should vote for (or against), or worse, handing out voting guides, they've crossed the line into politicking, plain and simple, and the IRS should be notified and required to yank their exemption.

[Az]

15. Bingo

Simply because you enclosed a business within the Churches walls does not mean it should get a free pass on taxation. The core functions of a religion (ie gathering and discussing) should not be taxed. But if you making millions of dollars selling things then thats not a Church.

[Critters2]

52. For-profit businesses owned by churches pay taxes. nt

[Gregorian]

29. Even that scares me.

I don't want the slightest crack in that wall of separation.

Let's find a way to keep churches from becoming businesses, rather than let them be part of government in any way.

[bluerum]

14. Since they have become platforms for political propaganda - they should

be taxed.

The last time I was in a catholic church the priest mentioned pet issues and candidates by name. My jaw dropped I walked out and never looked back.

The last thing I want to do is be associated with crooks wearing religious garb taking kickbacks from local pols for pushing their agendas. Besides being illegal it is so very republican.

Don't tase me bro.

[yellowdogintexas]

17. LOL and here I so want my senior minister to speak out more forcefully

on the things I know he holds dear (he is a GOOD DEMOCRAT, folks) but I also fully understand why he does not!

so we don't hear real specific sermons but if you listen and you know him and our church's long history in helping the poor etc, you know what he Really Means in that Carefully Cloaked Symbolism backed up by scriptural references. LOL

all our staff are quite gifted in this area actually, and all are Yellow Dog Democrats, too. Love them love them!

[Bubba HoHoHo Tep]

23. Tax African-American churches?

Because they went political decades ago and, thankfully, helped bring us civil rights legislation. So let the gov tax them into oblizion to silence them?

Not good.

[bluerum]

24. Slightly different beast. Civil rights are not aimed at any one political party or

group. Presumably we all benefit from the enactment of such legislation and activism.

Promoting specific candidates and their agenda wanders off into the area of political endorsement and I think that is what the church needs to stay away from.

[Bubba HoHoHo Tep]

26. So that never happened?

In my life, I've seen African-American churches largely promote AA candidates or Democratic candidates. You want to outlaw that too? Because under Bush, that means lots of black leaders are going to go to jail for pushing the opposition.

Or do you intend to use it as a club so only GOP supporters get locked up? Either way, I think it's appalling and easily politicized.

[bluerum]

74. Well, you make a good point. But clearly you can't have it both ways.

Consider - the republics will always be bankrolled by corporate interests. Is it fair for them to use the church as a platform for broadcasting their agendas? They could easily outspend you and your church - in fact they could probably influence local pols to pressure them.

Fundamentally, your church or any church that preaches politics from the pulpit and does not pay taxes breaks the law. Whatever happened to "render unto Ceaser,,," It is simple enough to speak on issues in biblical terms. People understand biblical metaphors without having to name candidates or specific issues.

I am all for human rights and democratic candidates but keep it out of my religion. Now, meeting and organizing after church is another thing altogether,,,

[Critters2]

49. It's what the church is REQUIRED to stay away from.

Churches are allowed to speak out on non-partisan social and political issues (like civil rights). They are not allowed to endorse candidates or parties.

[Chovexani]

33. I grew up in the black church and yes some of them need to be taxed

We are not talking about churches that use donations wisely to uplift the community. We're talking about churches, white and black alike, where it's clear that "bidness" is first and ministering to the flock is secondary. And let's be real about some of these black churches, I'm not even talking about TD Jakes' trifling ass, I'm talking the old school black churches. The ones with the "Building Funds" collecting donations out the butt with 15 offerings in a service (General offering, Love offering, this offering and that offering), when nothing ever gets built yet Pastor is driving a new Mercedes every year. That's some bullshit right there and don't tell me my church was the only one.

Hustlers in robes, whether their skin is black, white, brown, purple or green, need to be taxed. My mom goes to a predominately black megachurch and it's criminal what these bastards get away with. They built this huge, 5-star hotel looking church with thousand dollar tropical fish in giant tanks, a bookstore, cafe, gourmet restaurant all in church walls. Yes, they do community outreach but the right-wing motherfucker that runs this outfit lives like a sultan. They don't pay a dime to Uncle Sam. Is that right?

[Bubba HoHoHo Tep]

35. Yes

Not morally right, but I am opposed to legislating morality. If they want to build a fancy altar to the lord, so be it. If they think their leader -- pope, bishop, imam, etc. -- should live in a fancy way, that's OK.

Because I don't know how to do otherwise without stepping all over the freedom of religion.

[Critters2]

46. If he mentioned candidates by name, he violated his 501c3 status.

Why didn't you call the IRS? Churches can speak out on issues (even "pet issues"), but not endorse candidates or parties--or tell people NOT to vote for these specifically.

Tomorrow, my senior deacon will make an announcement asking people to sign a petition to bring the troops home. This is perfectly legal. And yes, it's legal to speak against abortion or other things you may not agree with.

If my church wants to be able to speak against the war, we have to let the priest down the street speak against abortion. Free speech is a bitch.

[JerseygirlCT]

81. Political advocacy -- on issues -- is perfectly allowed, and

in many cases, to be desired. Many churches are very active in social justice issues like civil rights and poverty. You really wouldn't want to shut them up, would you?

When it crosses over into advocating for candidates, they've crossed the line.

[blondeatlast]

19. This secular-state believing Christian is good with that, at least for

the ones that play politics.

[Perry Logan]

20. Yea--the people screwing things up are not really Christians. I mean no ill to real Christians.

[Critters2]

50. The prblem is...who decides who the real Christians are.

I preach peace and social justice, nothing about "gettin' to heaven". Some insist this means I'm not a real Christian.

Who makes that call?

[liberalsoldier5]

82. If you believe Jesus is the Christ,

meaning the son of God and gateway to eternal life after death through belief in Him, then you are a Christian. That's about all it takes, in my opinion. "Confess with your tongue and believe in your heart" that Jesus is the Lord. That's all. (And "good Christians" actually follow what Jesus actually said, y'know, "blessed are the poor and the peacemakers", but I hate to get sidetracked...haha)

[Critters2]

84. I'm agnostic as to life after death.

I don't interpret eternal life as life after death. I'm open to the possibility that there is such a thing, but I don't know for sure. And, again, that's not what "eternal" means. Am I not a Christian? My congregation and my ordaining committee have never questioned my standing.

[Zhade]

95. Oh, they're Christians, they just happen to also be assholes.

NT!

[Critters2]

47. That's already the law.

Churches are not allowed to endorse candidates or parties. They can, however, speak on social or non-partisan political issues. If you know of churches that are endorsing candidates, please call the IRS. They are in violation, and should, according to the law, be paying taxes.

[brentspeak]

25. Uh, in case no one told you, most Democrats are church-goers

And most churches aren't politically-motivated GOP resource centers.

[Critters2]

48. And those that are are violating existing law, and are taxable

under IRS regulation 501c3.

[otohara]

30. Especially Those Praying For Armageddon in Israel

they have clearly crossed the line of church/state and sanity.

[Critters2]

55. Not according to IRS code.

They can preach anything they want, except endorsing parties or candidates.

So can I. It swings both ways.

[Hepburn]

34. Totally, totally, totally agree!

Especially the ones that hand out flyers in the church parking lot with marked up sample ballots on how to vote.

[Critters2]

57. If you know of churches doing this, call the IRS!!

They are in violation of their 501c3 status!! This is how the Christian Coalition lost its tax-exempt status.

If you know of churches doing this, please turn them in. If you're not going to do the responsible thing, though, please stop complaining.

[Hepburn]

77. I did back in 2004 during the election....

...but as far as I could see, nothing happened.

[Dr. Strange]

39. Are we also taxing the Salvation Army?

And United Way, and March of Dimes?

'Cause I kinda like the idea of NOT taxing charitable organizations.

[kath]

110. FYI, the Salvation Army is a religious organization.

[and-justice-for-all]

42. If Churches and their ilk are taxed...

Then the Speration between Church and State would be void(it seems that it is void now however). Also, since the rake in so much and we all know that taxation discriminates between rich and poor, the Churches would just screw us even harder then they are screwing us now.

I do not think it is a good idea to tax churches, at least for the moment. If taxation was fair across the board, meaning EVERYONE would pay say 13% right off the top regardless of how much is made; including corperations.

[bemildred]

43. There should be no exemption for a business just because a church owns it.

I have no problem with exemptions for churches, or other non-profit organizations, but anything that is in the business of making money, as opposed to raising money from members, should be taxed.

[Critters2]

51. I think those businesses are taxed.

I've served two churches that rented out former parsonages. We paid taxes on that property, because the church was making a profit from it. I think it's this way for all for-profit business done by churches.

[bemildred]

53. Did the church pay income tax, have to file with the IRS?

Or is it property tax on the rented properties? Seriously, I want to know what you saw. It's a murky area. I think some churches themselves ought to be treated as for profit corporations, others I think should be treated as non-profits, it's a murky subject. I don't really know how to distinguish between the two. I do know that vast properties do not pay property tax because they belong to a church, and that religious personages get special treatment in the income tax code.

[Critters2]

54. If they're making a profit, that business pays whatever taxes

competing businesses pay. I served two churches that rented out property (former parsonages). We paid property taxes on them, and some other tax liabilities. Not being the treasurer (who, in both cases, were CPAs) I'm not sure what all the taxes were. But I do know that for-profit businesses that belong to churches are taxed in the same way as everyone else.

Parsonages just don't pay property taxes. That's the only "special treatment". But, I pay self-employment taxes on the fair-market value of my parsonage, which is a pain in the butt, because I don't have extra salary to cover that. What money I am paid to cover SS is taxed as income. So, living in a parsonage is nice, but it isn't without it's problems.

[bemildred]

69. That is interesting, thank you.

I have heard that the tax breaks given to churches go farther than you indicate, but have never looked into the details. I think it was a book I read. I'll have to look closer into the handling of religious institutions.

However, the issue is treatment of the church itself, not its employees, who are treated as other employees with a few extra breaks like you describe. The FICA tax on non-monetary income gets a lot of people that receive non-monetary compensation or whom are self-employed. It is one of the most regressive and pernicious features of the tax code.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

65. Parsonages are counted the same as the apartment given to an apartment

caretaker. In churches that HAVE parsonages (increasingly rare today) the expectation would be that the minister lived next door to the church in order to be available 24/7.

These days, most churches do NOT provide parsonages but give their clergy a housing allowance.

[Critters2]

88. Actually, more and more of the parsonages that still exist

are not next door to the church. In Iowa, I lived 6 blocks from the church. All three Lutheran pastors lived on one street--in church-owned homes--not next door to their churches. I live near the church here.

[jpgray]

56. Yeah, if you want to galvanize the newly fractured GOP evangelical base, sure!

[williesgirl]

58. Couldn't agree w/you more! It'll never happen, though. rec'd

[midnight armadillo]

59. frank zappa says...

Tax the FUCK out of the churches!

[Lydia Leftcoast]

68. This is an ignorant and bigoted thread

Somebody who has seen only a limited subset of churches thinks they're all like suburban fundie megachurches.

There are a lot of myths spread by religion-bashers, such as the myth that clergy don't pay taxes. If clergy don't pay taxes, then what was my father, a Lutheran pastor, doing every April 15 all the years I can remember?

Most churches are small and struggling and yet manage to provide amazing benefits to society.

Sometimes I wish that the churches would just go on strike and refuse to provide any social services for a week.

Believe me, society would notice.

Most churches (the ones that aren't in the headlines) provide all sorts of public services without proselytizing. My current provides meals for the homeless, meals for low-income and street youth, clothes for people who are transitioning from work to welfare, drop-in centers for the homeless, sponsorship of refugees, free meeting space for Alcoholics Anonymous, support groups for the bereaved, cancer patients, and the emotionally disturbed; regular volunteer teams for Habitat for Humanity and a local housing advocacy group, and out-of-state and overseas volunteer trips. It sponsors Scout troops for immigrant youth and respects the wishes of the parents that it NOT meet in the church. It is working on an environmental plan.

We fill in the major gaps in the social safety net. As such, we should not be taxed any more than any other non-profit. And believe me, most churches are VERY non-profit.

I'm sick of seeing this "tax the churches" crap every couple of months, when some religion-basher brings it up as if it's a brand new idea.

I agree that the IRS should go after churches that advocate for political candidates. However, most of them are scrupulous about remaining neutral in elections.

[DemBones DemBones]

73. Brava, Lydia, Brava!

:yourock:

[Critters2]

89. Thank you, Lydia. I'd add more, but sitting at the 'puter

is uncomfortable for me tonight. My shoulders ache from the work my parishioners and I did yesterday--winterizing and repairing homes for seniors and disabled folks in our town. None of those we helped were church members. All of them seemed happy to be helped by church members.

Painting a ceiling leaves one's shoulders sore!!

[JVS]

92. the real reason your arms are sore is that you spent all afternoon counting those big donation trays

Isn't that the real reason? ;-)

[Zhade]

96. Bigoted? Where?

Where are posters hating or calling for persecution of Christians for simply being Christian? Because THAT would be bigotry.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

113. Broad-brush stereotyping is bigotry, too

And that's what many of these posters were doing.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

107. Excellent post

My church does almost everything your church does, too, and yeah, we "spread the gospel," but spreading the gospel isn't tied to all that we do.

We also have a sister church in the inner city where we provide monetary and warm body support - we work in their Sunday Schools once a month so the teachers can take a break (they don't have as many teachers as we do), we send their kids to summer church camp, we help buy school supplies and new clothes for their school children, etc. However, if you would drive by my church, you would see a nice brick building in the burbs with lots of nice cars parked in it, and you know the kind of thoughts some of these hateful DU'ers would have. God help us if they're ever in charge. :hide: :hide: :hide: :hide:

[Le Taz Hot]

76. I would say tax the churches that blur the line

between church and state and those that take taxpayer dollars. Remember, not all churches engage in political activities. However, the fundies and the Catholics are particularly bad about it.

[goodgd_yall]

78. Do you realize that selective taxing of churches goes on?

There are churches where sermons have been given using present day policies in the U.S. as a way to make the tenets of that religion relevant. These churches, where sermons have been given against what is going on in Iraq and against civil rights violations, are taxed by the IRS.

I wouldn't favor taxing all churches. I think if the donations and other sources of revenue are over a certain amount, taxing would be a good idea, but many churches are scraping by. There may be some that are despicable, but there are others that are true to their spiritual foundation. I'd like to see the despicable, right wing fundamentalist churches taxed, but that would require someone making a judgment over church belief and practice, which isn't something the state should get involved in.

[midlife_mo_Jo]

109. Which churches?

I know several churches have been threatened, but how many of those churches are actually paying taxes, now? This bothers me. We need to be speaking out against the war. That is not the same thing as endorsing a candidate or party.

Unfortunately, this is not new, and is a tactic of both parties once they get into power.

[CreekDog]

83. Churches that are politicking are not exempt from taxes

But why punish all churches because of those that are politicking?

[Critters2]

90. Exactly. We need to insist that existing IRS regs are enforced.

That would solve the problem.

[ecstatic]

97. maybe mega churches or ones that appear on TV nt

[cherokeeprogressive]

101. Excellent Idea. Let's tax every penny that's put into the collection plate. n/t

[Beerboy]

102. I really don't have a problem w/ it in principle,

but writing the policy could get messy, as in I wouldn't want to see black churches, UCC congregations, the NCC, synagogues, and mosques have to hire high-powered attorneys and accountants for day-to-day operation. Maybe they already do?
I don't know how 'churches are electing candidates', they're institutions. Supposedly, individual voters elect candidates, but I've been wrong before. And yes, not only are they taking government money, they're also contributing nothing, and are sometimes a drain in using government services, such as if a church catches fire. As for religious orgs determining public policy, if by 'determine' you mean calls-the-shots government must obey, that then reverts to who the individual voters in the U.S. (as far as I know), and vice-versa in other cultures.
I don't know that I agree that churches paying taxes necessarily means 99% would go under. Those with actual congregations would save their place of worship.
It's actually a very intriguing idea, but it's politically touchy. I can hear Rush screaming already, "Well folks, that's it for Jesus in America, the Democrats have bankrupted churches across the fruited plain." The part he would leave out is that they probably don't have 2 nickels to rub together after settling with their victims.
I'd say it differently than you did, but yeah, tax the churches.

[Cleita]

103. We used to let them have tax free status so that they would

mind their own business and stay out of politics and government. The theory was that if they did that they would lose their tax-free status, so I guess it's time to start taxing every single one of those who can't stop meddling in our nation's business.

[raccoon]

105. I wanted to rec this, but too late. so Kick! nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

108. I wonder why none of the Democratic candidates for President have yet to come out in favor of this

:shrug:

[Thothmes]

114. IMO

Millions of Democratic voters are regular attending members of some form of church. Many of these institutions would have to fold if were not for their tax exempt status. In the area where I live (Tidewater VA) the impact on poor and minority churches would be devastating. Church taxation is not an issue that would endear a candidate to the constituency. This would be on par with recommending that we confiscation of all personally owned fire arms.

[deaniac21]

115. Possibly because they aren't stupid.

[Thothmes]

117. Agree wholeheartedly

[Orsino]

112. If we want the chruches even more firmly allied with the corporations against us, yes.

We should be winning their support to work against Caesar.

[lonestarnot]

116. Too late to recommend.