Should Organized Religions Be Taxed? [Archive]

Gvac

08-30-2006, 04:46 AM

One of the greatest benefits churches, synagogues, and mosques enjoy in this country is their tax exempt status.  Never mind that they generate billions of dollars a year in revenue; it's classified as charity work and they shoulder none of the burden of keeping our nation running.  I know that with "creative" bookkeeping even if laws were passed to revoke their tax exempt status, religious institutions would find a way to write off most of their earnings to "charity work" and still pay little or no taxes.  Maybe a flat tax is the way to go.Think it'll ever happen?  I'm not holding my breath, but it would go a long way to lightening the load for the rest of us.  Then again, Washington would probably just find a way to spend all this new found money and we'd continue to be taxed to death.

TheMojoPin

08-30-2006, 04:55 AM

If they want or expect even a shred of involvement in government affairs, yes.  If they're willing to keep "quiet" and out of state and federal legislation and rulings, I could live without them being taxed.

OGC

08-30-2006, 05:02 AM

TheMojoPin wrote: If they want or expect even a shred of involvement in government affairs, yes.  If they're willing to keep "quiet" and out of state and federal legislation and rulings, I could live without them being taxed. So in other words, tax them. Since they are always trying to get involved in politics

A.J.

08-30-2006, 05:10 AM

Render unto Caesar that which the rest of us have to.

booster11373

08-30-2006, 05:15 AM

Should it be done? YESWill it ever be done? NOConsidering whenever there is an election the first stop on the trail is some kind of church, dont see it ever happening.Maybe there will be a massive increase in IQ and wisdom all over the country, could happen then

UnknownPD

08-30-2006, 05:20 AM

It'll never happen, but they need to be taxed. More than any other industry, religion sucks from the system and never, ever puts back in.

A.J.

08-30-2006, 05:30 AM

UnknownPD wrote: More than any other industry, religion sucks from the system and never, ever puts back in.Sort of like the poor and irresponsible.

terry1979

08-30-2006, 05:35 AM

They should be banned

cupcakelove

08-30-2006, 05:36 AM

richg0404 wrote: TheMojoPin wrote: If
they want or expect even a shred of involvement in government affairs,
yes. If they're willing to keep "quiet" and out of state and federal
legislation and rulings, I could live without them being taxed. So in other words, tax them. Since they are always trying to get involved in politicsUnless you consider getting involved in politics charity.

UnknownPD

08-30-2006, 05:43 AM

Sort of like the poor and irresponsibleWhat's the point?

OGC

08-30-2006, 05:53 AM

cupcakelove wrote: richg0404 wrote: TheMojoPin wrote: If they want or expect even a shred of involvement in government affairs, yes. If they're willing to keep "quiet" and out of state and federal legislation and rulings, I could live without them being taxed. So in other words, tax them. Since they are always trying to get involved in politicsUnless you consider getting involved in politics charity. Yes, that would be great. But is there anyone involved in poiltics who does it for purely charitable reasons ?

A.J.

08-30-2006, 05:57 AM

UnknownPD wrote:  Sort of like the poor and irresponsible  What's the point?suck<strike>s</strike> from the system and never, ever put<strike>s</strike> back in.

UnknownPD

08-30-2006, 06:02 AM

suck<strike>s</strike> from the system and never, ever put<strike>s</strike> back inFunny, but i don't know any poor people that own massive buidlings, drive mercedes, tell me how to live my life, and never ever pay taxes.

SinA

08-30-2006, 07:45 AM

They don't really generate income, though.  They receive donations from other people.  The true scam is that you can deduct the amount of your charitable contributions from your tax payment (not that I would want that changed either).  However, the result is that the federal government essentially funds 100% of all non-profit organizations, through 200 million wage-earning middlemen.

FUNKMAN

08-30-2006, 08:17 AM

absofuckinglutely

UnknownPD

08-30-2006, 08:37 AM

However, the result is that the federal government essentially funds 100% of all non-profit organizations, through 200 million wage-earning middlemen.Charities are the domestic version of Halliburton

HeyGuy

08-30-2006, 10:10 AM

UnknownPD wrote: It'll never happen, but they need to be taxed. More than any other industry, religion sucks from the system and never, ever puts back in.agreed. There was a study done years ago (I will look for in online) that stated if all religion org paid taxes we will never have debt in this country. Think about it this way, churches want to help people. Well pay fucking taxes and help everyone! Also when you donate money it shoudnt be tax exempt. Why you ask? Well its just a bullshit way for rich people to get a break on their own taxes. If you want to be charitable then thats nice but you shouldnt benifit yourself by donating to something you want. Id rather see your taxes go to schools rather then a church! You have the right to donate all you want, but it shouldnt exempt you from that amount from paying taxes. 

This message was edited by CampoNJ on 8-30-06 @ 2:11 PM

keithy_19

08-30-2006, 12:05 PM

They should be banned Well, that was the smartest thing I've read ever. <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/wacko.gif" border="0" />

FUNKMAN

08-30-2006, 02:23 PM

religious leaders or administrations shouldn't be allowed to amass wealth and live in extravagant places. they should only keep enough to live like the average person and the rest should be provided to the needy.then we kill the corporate leaders or at least drag them into the street and beat their mothers...

booster11373

08-30-2006, 03:40 PM

FUNKMAN wrote: then we kill the corporate leaders or at least drag them into the street and beat their mothers... Now your talking. If you had a religion I would so want to join, is there a tax break?

Bulldogcakes

08-30-2006, 03:41 PM

I think they will, as soon as they figure out how to have a White House Lawn signing ceremony that's lightning-proof.

MrPink

08-30-2006, 04:05 PM

Like Doug Stanhope said, "The Catholic church has alot more money than a Columbian Cartel, and it leaves more bodies in the wake."

NortonRules

08-30-2006, 04:19 PM

Ummm...yes...they should pay taxes...

epo

08-30-2006, 06:59 PM

Organized religions not paying taxes is the great scam walking this country today.

FUNKMAN

08-30-2006, 07:23 PM

Should Organized Religions Be Taxed? They should but pursuing it would be very taxing...

UnknownPD

08-31-2006, 11:17 AM

An evangelist who tried replicating Jesus' miracle of walking on water has reportedly drowned off the western coast of Africa. Pastor Franck Kabele, 35, told his congregation he could repeat the biblical miracle, and he attempted it from a beach in Gabon's capital of Libreville.

DarkHippie

08-31-2006, 07:34 PM

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!If we start taxing religions, we will create an artificial system that will inherently favor the wealthier religions.  How do you decide how much to tax?  What the Catholics can afford maybe the Unitarians can't.  So do you tax the Unitarians less?  But that would be favoritism.  In this case the small religions would monetarily persecuted.We pay to insure governmental programs and services.  If religions pay taxes, they will be entitled to services as well.  Do you really want that? can you imagine the government having to prop up a bankrupt faith like they were an airline.  I'm speaking in extreme cases, but these are the issues that we will face if we tax religions.I mean, besides the fact that in my opinion, the first amendment forbids it (freedom of relgion also means freedom from having to pay to exist)

HeyGuy

08-31-2006, 11:08 PM

DarkHippie wrote: ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!If we start taxing religions, we will create an artificial system that will inherently favor the wealthier religions.  How do you decide how much to tax?  What the Catholics can afford maybe the Unitarians can't.  So do you tax the Unitarians less?  But that would be favoritism.  In this case the small religions would monetarily persecuted.We pay to insure governmental programs and services.  If religions pay taxes, they will be entitled to services as well.  Do you really want that? can you imagine the government having to prop up a bankrupt faith like they were an airline.  I'm speaking in extreme cases, but these are the issues that we will face if we tax religions.I mean, besides the fact that in my opinion, the first amendment forbids it (freedom of relgion also means freedom from having to pay to exist)What you said makes 100% NO SENSE. The tax would break down just like any other business the more the business brings in the more they will pay. If they are a small church they will pay less. Its just like America.Freedom of religion has nothing to do with taxes. It means you are free to practice any religion you want.And lastly Religion already has its mark in goverment. It shouldnt but it does.

cupcakelove

09-01-2006, 04:14 AM

DarkHippie wrote: ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!If
we start taxing religions, we will create an artificial system that
will inherently favor the wealthier religions. How do you decide how
much to tax? What the Catholics can afford maybe the Unitarians can't.
So do you tax the Unitarians less? But that would be favoritism. In
this case the small religions would monetarily persecuted.We pay
to insure governmental programs and services. If religions pay taxes,
they will be entitled to services as well. Do you really want that? can
you imagine the government having to prop up a bankrupt faith like they
were an airline. I'm speaking in extreme cases, but these are the issues that we will face if we tax religions.I
mean, besides the fact that in my opinion, the first amendment forbids
it (freedom of relgion also means freedom from having to pay to exist)I believe the question was about taxing the income organized religions generate, not actually taxing people for practicing religion.

walking joint

09-01-2006, 04:28 AM

FUNKMAN wrote:  Should Organized Religions Be Taxed?  They should but pursuing it would be very taxing...now you have 2 out of 18,001 jokes you should be sorry for.  please edit the Your Biggest Mistake thread post.

jeffdwright2001

09-01-2006, 04:34 AM

cupcakelove wrote: DarkHippie wrote: ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!If we start taxing religions, we will create an artificial system that will inherently favor the wealthier religions. How do you decide how much to tax? What the Catholics can afford maybe the Unitarians can't. So do you tax the Unitarians less? But that would be favoritism. In this case the small religions would monetarily persecuted.We pay to insure governmental programs and services. If religions pay taxes, they will be entitled to services as well. Do you really want that? can you imagine the government having to prop up a bankrupt faith like they were an airline. I'm speaking in extreme cases, but these are the issues that we will face if we tax religions.I mean, besides the fact that in my opinion, the first amendment forbids it (freedom of relgion also means freedom from having to pay to exist)I believe the question was about taxing the income organized religions generate, not actually taxing people for practicing religion. Well, in a sense you would be taxing the person.  They make a donation either directly for the church (building fund, salaries, or monies designed for specific purposes - youth group materials) and then a piece of that is cut off and sent to the government.Monies designed to pay for missions or even disaster relief (which many churches have given money for) would automatically be diminished because a piece of it is going to the government.  I'm not always pleased with how church's handle their money and distribution, but at least when I give to them (or any other non-profit type of organization) I can specify exactly where I want that money to go.  Something that I can't do with the Federal Government.

A.J.

09-01-2006, 04:39 AM

DarkHippie wrote: ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!If we start taxing religions, we will create an artificial system that will inherently favor the wealthier religions.  How do you decide how much to tax?  What the Catholics can afford maybe the Unitarians can't.  So do you tax the Unitarians less?  But that would be favoritism.  In this case the small religions would monetarily persecuted.We pay to insure governmental programs and services.  If religions pay taxes, they will be entitled to services as well.  Do you really want that? can you imagine the government having to prop up a bankrupt faith like they were an airline.  I'm speaking in extreme cases, but these are the issues that we will face if we tax religions.I mean, besides the fact that in my opinion, the first amendment forbids it (freedom of relgion also means freedom from having to pay to exist)Looks like a job for a Flat Tax!

jeffdwright2001

09-01-2006, 04:46 AM

A.J. wrote: DarkHippie wrote: ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!If we start taxing religions, we will create an artificial system that will inherently favor the wealthier religions.  How do you decide how much to tax?  What the Catholics can afford maybe the Unitarians can't.  So do you tax the Unitarians less?  But that would be favoritism.  In this case the small religions would monetarily persecuted.We pay to insure governmental programs and services.  If religions pay taxes, they will be entitled to services as well.  Do you really want that? can you imagine the government having to prop up a bankrupt faith like they were an airline.  I'm speaking in extreme cases, but these are the issues that we will face if we tax religions.I mean, besides the fact that in my opinion, the first amendment forbids it (freedom of relgion also means freedom from having to pay to exist)Looks like a job for a Flat Tax!Wouldn't work, eventually someone would be targeted and given implants.  You think there are political problems between people who have a "my religion" versus "your religion" complex now.  Wait until there's tax money involved.  Just a guess, but I suspect that congress might find a way/reason for Muslims to pay a higher tax.  Besides until the Government learns how to spend they money they currently have, why should we trust them with more?Too many cons versus pros.  Or is it that there are too many professional cons running the government?

A.J.

09-01-2006, 06:12 AM

jeffdwright2001 wrote: A.J. wrote: DarkHippie wrote: ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!If we start taxing religions, we will create an artificial system that will inherently favor the wealthier religions.  How do you decide how much to tax?  What the Catholics can afford maybe the Unitarians can't.  So do you tax the Unitarians less?  But that would be favoritism.  In this case the small religions would monetarily persecuted.We pay to insure governmental programs and services.  If religions pay taxes, they will be entitled to services as well.  Do you really want that? can you imagine the government having to prop up a bankrupt faith like they were an airline.  I'm speaking in extreme cases, but these are the issues that we will face if we tax religions.I mean, besides the fact that in my opinion, the first amendment forbids it (freedom of relgion also means freedom from having to pay to exist)Looks like a job for a Flat Tax!Wouldn't work, eventually someone would be targeted and given implants.  You think there are political problems between people who have a "my religion" versus "your religion" complex now.  Wait until there's tax money involved.  Just a guess, but I suspect that congress might find a way/reason for Muslims to pay a higher tax.  You and your implants!Muslims have to pay zakat or 10% of their income as part of their faith.  It's similar to Mormons tithing 10% of their income.

UnknownPD

09-01-2006, 08:33 AM

If we start taxing religions, we will create an artificial system that will inherently favor the wealthier religions. How do you decide how much to tax? What the Catholics can afford maybe the Unitarians can't. So do you tax the Unitarians less? But that would be favoritism. In this case the small religions would monetarily persecuted. 1) We tax religion just like any business. The poorer ones pay less the wealthier ones pay more.We pay to insure governmental programs and services. If religions pay taxes, they will be entitled to services as well. Do you really want that? can you imagine the government having to prop up a bankrupt faith like they were an airline. 2) We already provide all the services to the church that we give to private businesses. New York City provides sanitation, police, fire, water and sewer without a lick of taxes paid. (As a matter of fact my business has to pay for garbage collection. The church on the corner gets it for free) New York City even makes ConEd charge a “Religious” rate which is less than the business rate. All these freebies are not really free. The taxpayers are actually subsidizing the churches, temples and mosques. They drain from the system and put nothing back in. In many communities churches, synagogues and mosques are removing so many properties from the tax rolls that taxes are being raised on citizens. I mean, besides the fact that in my opinion, the first amendment forbids it (freedom of relgion also means freedom from having to pay to exist) 3) Churches engage in public discourse, benefit from government services and do not exist in a vacuum. They are required to follow many laws already. A church can’t order a murder, a church cannot allow children to be molested, its’ building must comply with all applicable fire laws. So it’s okay to make some laws they follow and not others?  Taxes do not alter a church’s standing any other way than by getting them to pay their fair share.

This message was edited by UnknownPD on 9-1-06 @ 12:36 PM

Yerdaddy

09-18-2006, 07:03 AM

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/18/us/politics/18church.html" target="_blank">The I.R.S. issued a report in February that said nearly half of the 110 tax-exempt organizations it investigated after the 2004 elections for improper political activity were churches. Of the 40 churches that the I.R.S. had finished investigating, 37 were found to have violated the law. These churches were given warnings or penalized with excise taxes and, although none lost their tax exemptions, the I.R.S. is still investigating seven more cases against churches.</a>

Furtherman

09-18-2006, 07:07 AM

Shocking.  Who would have thought a church would be cited for improper political activity?Pass around the basket!

A.J.

09-18-2006, 07:21 AM

Yerdaddy wrote: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/18/us/politics/18church.html" target="_blank">The I.R.S. issued a report in February that said nearly half of the 110 tax-exempt organizations it investigated after the 2004 elections for improper political activity were churches. Of the 40 churches that the I.R.S. had finished investigating, 37 were found to have violated the law. These churches were given warnings or penalized with excise taxes and, although none lost their tax exemptions, the I.R.S. is still investigating seven more cases against churches.</a>So much for separation of church and state.

BLZBUBBA

09-18-2006, 08:15 AM

If they've got a profitable operation they should be taxed.  Certainly.  They should pay property taxes for city services.  I think I read that the Catholics were one of if not the biggest property owners in the world.  And if caught preaching politics from the pulpit,  while enjoying a tax-free status,  they should be shut down and/or fined.

SinA

09-18-2006, 08:44 AM

Essentially, astheism is a religion, in that it is a system of belief about the creation and and operation of the world. The reason traditional religions get tax-exempt status is because they have a place they meet every week.  Go start an atheist clubhouse and stop worrying about what the Episcopalians are getting that you're not.

Furtherman

09-18-2006, 08:58 AM

SinA wrote: Go start an atheist clubhouse  That would be called Reality.  No gods allowed!

grandzu

09-18-2006, 03:09 PM

Pleeese.  The religious people in NYC didn't even want to feed the meters to pay for parking on Sundays and GOT THEIR WAY.  Politicians were tripping over themselves to back them up and repeal what they called pay to pray.  This was a law that was ALREADY on the books and got done away with.   And you think they will even allow themselves to be taxed?

Yerdaddy

09-19-2006, 01:39 AM

Furtherman wrote: SinA wrote: Go start an atheist clubhouse  That would be called Reality.  No gods allowed!<img height="721" src="http://www.orangecountyfineart.com/kuebler_images/Frenchie_the_butler.jpg" width="252" border="0" />"I say! Jolly good show, Sir."

grandzu

09-19-2006, 05:20 AM

TheMojoPin wrote: If they want or expect even a shred of involvement in government affairs, yes. If they're willing to keep "quiet" and out of state and federal legislation and rulings, I could live without them being taxed. Apparenty the rule that prohibits non profits to be involved in political campaigns or intervene in elections applies only if you are against big bad W because a church in California can lose its tax exempt status for having an anti war sermon before the 04 election.http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-11-08-antiwar-sermon_x.htm???why the hell is the link button shaded out?????  

This message was edited by grandzu on 9-19-06 @ 9:24 AM

sailor

09-19-2006, 06:01 AM

SinA wrote: Essentially, astheism is a religion, in that it is a system of belief about the creation and and operation of the world. The reason traditional religions get tax-exempt status is because they have a place they meet every week. Go start an atheist clubhouse and stop worrying about what the Episcopalians are getting that you're not.  also, the vast majority of churches are not filling their pockets and driving mercedes.  they take donations and use this to support their grounds (rent, electricity) and fund charitable work in their parishes.  they are not getting rich, and in the catholic church are all monetarily independent, for the most part.  they are barely break-even enterprises.

grandzu

09-19-2006, 01:44 PM

also, the vast majority of churches are not filling their pockets and driving mercedes. they take donations and use this to support their grounds (rent, electricity) and fund charitable work in their parishes. they are not getting rich, and in the catholic church are all monetarily independent, for the most part. they are barely break-even enterprises.    You've got to be kidding with that break even garbage.  After paying over $55 million in sex abuse charges, the Catholic Church is still rolling in money. From Time magazine, Can the church actually go broke? The short answer is no.In the U.S. the Catholic Church collects revenues totaling around $7.5
billion annually. Even more impressive are its vast property holdings,
which include everything from cathedrals and schools to beachfront
retreats, stately mansions, golf courses and television and radio
stations. But the real secret of the church's financial strength is
that each of the 178 Roman Catholic dioceses in the U.S. organizes its
affairs separately; nearly all employ a highly complex and
decentralized legal structure that so far has effectively shielded
their assets from legal claims brought against priests. Rhode Island, the Roman Catholic diocese of Providence operates more
than 220 corporate subsidiaries, including the Aldrich Mansion, a
sprawling compound on Narragansett Bay where the Brad Pitt movie Meet
Joe Black was filmed.  The Providence diocese owns
$44 million in real estate, and income from its property finances a
wide range of social services.The church coveres its assets so no one knows how much they have.  They plead poverty becaue that way people give them money, and the church is able to cut down their legal settlements. Unlike a public corporation, a church is not required to publicly list
its assets or overall revenue. Moreover, diocese officials, citing
their First Amendment right to religious freedom, often decline to
disclose details about church finances. $7.5 Billion just in the US and thats a conservative estimate.  Break even?  Hardly.

spoon

09-19-2006, 09:43 PM

Simple answer of late, yes.  These orgs are more involved with politics then ever so they should reap the rewards of their efforts. 

UnknownPD

10-07-2006, 05:12 PM

<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/business/08religious.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5009&en=9e10a7824c9237ec&ex=1160884800&adxnnl=0&partner=MSN_NYTHOME&adxnnlx=1160269326-wVT1nwaLylc27cdsQAKE2A">http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/business/08religious.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5009&en=9e10a7824 c9237ec&ex=1160884800&adxnnl=0&partner=MSN_NYTHOME &adxnnlx=1160269326-wVT1nwaLylc27cdsQAKE2A</a>

reeshy

10-07-2006, 05:21 PM

No...there is supposed to a seperation of church and state....if religious organizations are taxed, then they have every right to overtly participate in government!!!!

SatCam

10-07-2006, 05:59 PM

reeshy wrote: No...there is supposed to a seperation of church and state....if religious organizations are taxed, then they have every right to overtly participate in government!!!! 

not being taxed is due to their participation in government...

Staniel

10-07-2006, 06:56 PM

All religions should be taxed, then outlawed, then taxed again.

reeshy

10-07-2006, 07:10 PM

What?????????????? Explain, Please!!!! SatCam wrote: reeshy wrote: No...there is supposed to a seperation of church and state....if religious organizations are taxed, then they have every right to overtly participate in government!!!!  

not being taxed is due to their participation in government...

Yerdaddy

10-08-2006, 06:08 AM

<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/26/AR2006092601486.html?nav=rss_politics" target="_blank">House Passes Measure on Religion Suits</a>