Religion
Related: About this forumAsking Churches To Pay For Fire Protection Isnt a Burden on Their Religious Rights
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2017/06/05/asking-churches-to-pay-for-fire-protection-isnt-a-burden-on-their-religious-rights/----------------------
While churches, like other non-profits, dont have to pay taxes, they still use the same city resources as everyone else. So if a church catches on fire, the fire department will come in to help not just to save the church, but to protect the community around it. (If the church across the street from you caught fire, you can bet youd want firefighters to put it out immediately.)
...How does the city pay for this protection when the churches arent paying taxes? Simple. They charge a set fee to all non-profits specifically to cover the costs of social services. (The churches are welcome to train and provide their own firefighters, for example, provided they meet all required standards, but thatd be a hell of a lot more complicated, not to mention expensive.)
There are places where churches are exempt from paying even these fees, but as long as theyre assessed the same as everyone else, theres really no legal issue with asking them to cover the costs of being part of a larger community. Thats just part of public safety.
In Fort Walton Beach, Florida, city officials have recommended an annual fire assessment of 5 cents per square foot for all non-profits. But some churches in the area are acting like this is specifically harming their ability to convert people.
----------------------
doc03
(35,349 posts)trotsky
(49,533 posts)but it would subvert god's will (to destroy their church?) if they installed one.
Ah, the poor omnipotent creator, thwarted by a metal rod and some wire.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)They pay NOTHING for fire, police, utility access, road access, water runoff mitigation for impermeable surfaces (Big assed parking lot) etc.
Not a dime.
*I* pay for it, and so do my neighbors. We all do, whether we use it or not. Whether we're religious or not.
We have to wheedle and vote for specific levy's for the community pool, parks, rec facilities, etc. But NOT ONCE do these religious freeloaders come up for a vote. Never.
struggle4progress
(118,295 posts)Those who want to abolish various tax exemptions for all non-profits are, of course, free to do so; but it is misleading to present these issues as issues involving churches alone
(2) Property taxes are not the only available source of revenue for funding services such as police and fire protection: a number of states allow municipalities to levy annual fees to fund such services, on a basis other than assessed property value -- such as square footage
(3) In deciding how to charge for various services, it may be worth noting that different property uses are associated with different risk profiles: no one, for example, is likely to start a fire by smoking in bed at a church used only during the day several times a week, whereas this is a common cause of house fires; and no one is likely to burglarize a typical church in hopes of finding a box of expensive jewelry in a bedroom
Igel
(35,320 posts)
In the USA, labor unions are usually considered to be 501(c)(5) nonprofit organization.
In essence, labor unions are a way that individuals can pool their expenses together and expended collectively. Because this funding has already been subject to income taxes when earned by the individuals, Congress believed that the funding should not be subject to income taxes a second time just because a group of individuals decide to pool their funds together.
For the same reason, social advocacy organizations, business leagues, recreational clubs, fraternal societies, and political organizations are also usually tax-exempt nonprofit organizations.
Actual, unions even have more exalted status. At some point, it was determined that since they're collectives and must always have a purely advocacy purpose, they can't be taxed. They have a truly special status, even though they're not Constitutionally protected explicitly. What's not stated is apparently more important than what is. Anyway ...
The problem is when there's a group you (or I) find disgusting. We want to carve out an exemption for them. Churches are "social advocacy" as I define them, so they should pay taxes. Well, others might well find that unions aren't *really* social advocacy organizations. Or maybe Greenpeace. Or NARAL. Or the Cato Institute. They may pool their expenses and expend funds collectively, but not for a purpose *I* like. (Yeah, and who died and made me god?)
trotsky
(49,533 posts)It's about paying for fire protection. Complaining about unions not paying taxes doesn't really apply here. Plus you should probably consider the site you're on before griping about, of all things, unions. Sheesh.