which means there is no way.

taxing Churches. And as we have come to realize, any law written and passed in Congress and signed into law can be undone the same way.

I am 100% in favor of taxing churches.

Taxing of churches means the government could tax a church out of existence.

If they are operating as for-profit corporations, not so much.

If they are operating as churches but pushing a political agenda, tax the whole ball of wax.

to pay money in order to practice it.

The power to tax is the power to destroy.

"Freedom of Religion" if it decides to involve itself in the Government of this country because we are supposed to have separation of church and state.

Careful, though, since the church in the African-American community has been behind political activism for quite some time.

applies to everybody then no one can claim that you are picking on them. Treat everyone equal instead of letting all these Corporations and 1% skate by on minimal to no tax payments.

Can't go there. Just like they can't tax people for voting.

I suggest you check out Lemon v Kurtzman.

And no, it's not going to change.

sometimes I really wonder.

Those hucksters are getting rich AND they're political.

Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York, 397 U.S. 664 (1970), held that granting tax exemptions to religious organizations does not violate the First Amendment.

Granting religious organizations is a form of discrimination against all other classes/groups. Why should they be granted protected status?

What "good" do they do with their wealth? And what about those whose main purpose seems to be personal enrichment?

I think "tax-exempt" and "non-profit" status should be narrowly defined and closely watched.

enforcement of what is and is not a true non-profit. Clearly there are those flaunting the laws.

OTOH, for every one of them, there are hundreds that are not.

FWIW, the Mormon Church does do a lot of charitable work through their Humanitarian Services division. Like them or not, they most likely do meet non-profit status in this regard.

I completely agree with your last statement. The responsibility lies with the IRS.

In addition to the nifty genealogical archives they run.

They have support groups and counseling for members.

They support their own youth groups, including and at times especially Scouts.

They have a nifty university.

They run schools and educational programs.

If you're Mormon and you're hurting for food or clothing or shelter, they'll find it for you. Don't know that they do much for outsiders in that respect, but I could be wrong.


Those groups that seem to be for personal enrichment are a botch. However, just as a bad school doesn't mean that we have to straitjacket all schools; just as a bad Senator doesn't mean that they're all scum; so a bad church or other kind of non-profit doesn't mean they're all bad. Usually those that are really bad get identified by disgruntled members and things go wrong for them, either long-term or in the courts.

They keep genealogical archives so that they can baptize their ancestors--or whoever--posthumously. Support groups, counseling, youth groups (but Boy Scouts only, in my experience), schools and educational programs, missionary work (at the missionaries' expense) BYU--all of it is to promote their religion, and not the general good. I have never known them to do anything for outsiders--well, except for preaching at us in public venues.

http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/13/13262285-mormon-church-earns-7-billion-a-year-from-tithing-analysis-indicates

The Mormon Church is Big Business, not charity, and like many other churches, it supports only itself.

I have a feeling the situattion in the US differs from the UK considerably.

Advocate taxing churches. See how that idea goes over with the African-America community, with the Latino community, and with the Jewish community.

"The director of issues analysis of the fundamentalist American Family Association (AFA) told his radio listeners that they and every American had a "patriotic duty to worship God."

On his Wednesday radio show, Fischer read from the Old Testament Book of Haggai to explain why the U.S. economy was "in a slump."

"If you want a prosperous economy, you've got to have a vibrant spirituality," he said. "When you worship God, you are not just doing the right thing in terms of your relationship with God, you are doing your patriotic duty."

"It is your patriotic duty to worship God in order that we have a prosperous and flourishing economy," Fisher added."

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/bryan-fischer-americans-have-patriotic-duty-

See apparently God pays for your faith in cold hard cash. Don't see why he shouldn't pay taxes.

They think Jesus was a blond, blue-eyed suburban American military veteran and that Americans are God's Chosen People.

When I was growing up, churches had American flags in their sanctuaries. I haven't seen one in a mainline church for years. The only way we celebrate Fourth of July is to have "America the Beautiful" as the recesssional hymn.

Being able to tax churches would give the government the ability to directly pick winners and losers when it comes to religion.

The law is the non-profit organization tax laws. But it's not likely to change. Churches will likely stay substantially tax free for the foreseeable future.

I would be satisfied with two changes which could be implemented without major changes.

1. The IRS already has the authority to tax tax exempt non-profits for being political. They can and should enforce this. This may not take any new law at all, just enforcing extant regulations. If churches want to get involved in elections, that's okay, but then they lose their tax exemption.

2. The church parsonage exemption is being wildly abused. It should be severely curtailed so that pastors raping their flocks' wallets do not get to live in tax free splendor. That's not to say eliminate it. This will likely take legislative action. It'll be a tough one, but there are plenty of examples where the parsonage exemption goes horribly wrong.

It's a start.

endorsing specific candidates.

As you know, I am in some agreement with you about the parsonages, but the nature of these residences vary wildly. I would like to see the IRS take a closer look and perhaps institute caps, but to take it away completely would hurt the most vulnerable in our society, imo, because it would mean the church had less for charitable endeavors.

That would be a difficult bill to write. But you know that.

Yes, re political. I knew it was candidate endorsement. My bad. That is common with all tax exempt non-profits, not just churches, temples, etc. but churches are treated specially in this regard. Not just any IRS investigator can initiate an investigation. It has to be some big IRS muckity muck. That's why churches have been able to run all over the tax regulations and cross the endorsement line with impunity. They rarely if ever get called to account, so to speak.

But with a little effort, these two taxes could be collected on churches.

The parsonages I grew up in were not fancy, but they were decidedly adequate. One of the considerations is that the minister's home has multiple uses. There were meetings and other related events in our home on a frequent basis, including some very anxiety inducing episodes during the late 60's when my father was meeting with rival gang leaders.

Some churches openly flaunt their violation of the law. IIRC, there was even a widely publicized event last year where churches said they were going to openly advocate for candidates. If there was ever an opportunity to intervene, it might have been then.

I think the IRS is still quaking from it's encounters with the scientologists, where they lost badly.

As usual, it is a pleasure.

People in the area
Hell yes mega churches should be taxed
And large organized Religions

They take huge sums of $$ from the community and give very little back

Liberty U is buying up property all over Lynchburg. That's property that now the city can't get a tax revenue from. They are definitely taking advantage of the system.

When a few people onwelfare do that Christian Repugs want to shut the entire system down. Well that should be done to wealthy organization too

My church does a lot of good in the community and even though many of us, including the pastor, are liberal politically, it is *never* suggested from the pulpit how one should vote.

To take the extreme case, the LDS Church owns the dominant TV station and newspaper in Utah, and formerly owned its largest department store chain.

I would be happy with that as a compromise, at least.

You are poorly informed. The only tax exempt property is that which is used for worship. If they have dual use property then they have to pay taxes on the commercial use.

1776 is the year that Church taxation should have started.

So that it if equal . No organizatio shall be tax exempt.

It IS taxed, in most countries and in the US. Tax law and tax exemptions in the US are purpose-based.

So a church building can be tax-exempt, but if the church operates a book store, that is not tax exempt. A church can rent or own a food kitchen without paying taxes on it, but not a bowling alley.

If you want the tax exemption removed from churches, then lobby Congress about it! That's what they're there for.

Or do you just want to single out churches? There might be some 1st amendment issues here.

IMHO, the IRS needs to do a much better job of examining the non-profit status of some groups, including some churches.

under 75

Obviously the repubs would never support it. But just as importantly, you would never get anything approaching a majority of Democrats to support it since it would be opposed by three of the largest Democratic constituencies: African-Americans (who identify themsleves as church goers and who regard church as an important element of their lives in greater numbers than any other segment of the population; Latinos, who are just behind African Americans in this regard; and Jews, who may be less devout, but nonetheless would oppose any move that appeared to be "anti-religion," which is how it would be depicted.

This doesn't mean that the government shouldn't be cracking down where religious groups abuse their tax-exempt status, but it does meant the government needs to proceed with extreme caution

If a church wants to have 40,000 members, make millions, preach politics, and endorse candidates, they pay.

If a church wants to include everybody, help the poor and actually practice what they preach, they're fine.

Somehow, taxing the free exercise of religion would probably be unconstitutional.

Remember that taxing churches means taxing synagogues, mosques, and atheist discussion groups.

Some of you come out of megachurches or have no religious background at all. You don't know what your talking about when it comes to the mainline churches, especially the ones in the city.

Those of you who know only evangelical megachurches have no idea what a shoestring most mainline churches operate on and how they use volunteers to leverage that money to help an awful lot of people. My church feeds hundreds of people per week and provides a drop-in center for street people.

Are secular people going to take up the slack if my church and other like it are forced to close because of having to pay taxes?

If a church is a political front group or a scam for moneymaking, by all means the IRS should go after it.

Do you think the exemption should be removed for all non-profit organizations?

for taxation.

So do you want to eliminate all tax breaks for non-profits?

Of course that can never happen because the Constitution could never be changed.

I can't imagine if all restrictions were lifted.

limiting it to local organizations who are strictly limited to non-profit spiritual services, and specifically prohibited from profit-making and political activities.