I see this notion tossed out all the time with very little explanation behind it, so I'm curious about people's ideas about whether churches should be taxed, under what circumstances, in what form, according to what basis, etc. I'd really love (hoping in vain, I know) for this not to devolve into an argument on the validity of religion or anything "left v right", because I don't think either of those are relevant to this particular topic. I'd just like to have a legit discussion on the merits of the various aspects of this concept.
The only time I think it makes sense to revoke a churches tax exempt status is when they participate in political activities; donations, fundraising, etc.. Other than that, churches provide great services to citizens and I understand why they are exempt from taxes. Full disclosure, I haven't been to church in many years.
If you want to have a political voice then you need to pay taxes. But if a church wants to provide services to community the and worship in a harmless way I have no problem at all with their tax free status.
It's great question. I'm for churches not being taxed, but believe there have been countless abuses. There needs to be a MUCH higher level of scrutiny/accountablity to qualify as a 501c3 organization. Don't get me started on some of these cats justifying trottin' around in jets. That's a virtual travesty to me.
Now when you say "If you want to have a political voice then you need to pay taxes", are you suggesting that people who are employed by churches need to remain politically silent in order for the church to not be considered a political organization? Or just organizations themselves issuing official positions on political topics (like the Catholic Church denying communion to Nancy Pelosi)? Or is it just an issue of political contribution (ie, if churches contribute to a political entity or cause, then they are taxable)? What types of "political voice" should be prohibited? For example, I remember our pastor making a point repeatedly about stating that he absolutely can not issue any kind of political opinion or recommendation from the pulpit; but he also repeatedly talked about life beginning at conception and supporting organizations like Pregnancy Resource Center who seek to provide support and counseling for women, primarily with the goal of preventing abortions. Should that still be sufficient to preserve tax-free status, or would you consider that political voice?
I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be taxed. One could argue that yoga studios have just as much reason to be tax-free. barfo
If the church or a representative of the church is supporting a political cause with the resources of the church then the church should be paying taxes. So if the church is paying the Pastor and the pastor is paying taxes then he should be free to do whatever he wants with the resources he receives and pays taxes on. But if he's not paying taxes and the church is not paying taxes then he and the church should get no right to a public voice beyond his vote.
Yoga studios sell a service, generate revenue, and pay taxes on the net profit after deduction of expenses. What is the analog for churches?
I think they should be taxed. I wonder if the best way to do it would be if they cross a specific threshold. I'd be more in favor of taxing some of these mega churches, but the tiny churches that don't make much money wouldn't need to be taxed.
If a yoga studio simply asked for donations from it's clientele, as churches do, should the donations be tax-free? They aren't currently, because the yoga studio provides a service in return. Are you interested in arguing that the church provides nothing of value to the parishioners in return for their donations? barfo
I would posit that yes, when run legally and properly, the church does not provide a service in exchange for donations. Those who attend without donating are no less entitled to anything the church offers to its parishioners than those who contribute the largest amounts. In fact, churches of whom I've been a part provide the most to those who contribute the least.
On what basis should said mega-churches be taxed? Simply on the surplus of contributions over expenditures in any given year?
Ok, if you are taking the position that churchgoers get nothing of value from attending, then I agree. But then why do you attend? You could just donate online and be done with it. barfo
I attend because I don't believe that one can properly and fully live out the Christian life, grow in relationship to God, and impact the world for Jesus without doing so in community with other believers. But again, my ability to participate in those activities is completely independent of whether or not I contribute to the church. In fact, my church is completely unaware of how much I contribute, as I make a point to do so in cash, anonymously, privately, into a dropbox. Thus, it is impossible to claim that I am "purchasing" anything from them.
That is one thing I agree with you on. When I was treasurer for my church for several years, it boggled my mind that we were exempt from property tax. I was never comfortable with that.
