Should churches be tax exempt

By tovarichpeter   follow   Wed, 21 Nov 2012, 11:14am PST   ↑ Like   ↓ Dislike   795 views   5 comments   Watch (0)   Share   Quote

Sent from my iPad

Comments 1-5 of 5     Last »

FortWayne   befriend (12)   ignore (3)   Sun, 25 Nov 2012, 11:49pm PST   Like   Dislike     Share   Quote   Comment 1

They should be taxed the way non profit organizations are. And I don't know much about it, but I thought they are currently taxed that way.

coriacci1   befriend (1)   ignore (4)   Mon, 26 Nov 2012, 12:47am PST   Like   Dislike     Share   Quote   Comment 2

time to make em pay back all that the churches have sucked out of their flocks and local communities.

leo707   befriend (11)   ignore (1)   Wed, 28 Nov 2012, 3:39am PST   Like (2)   Dislike     Share   Quote   Comment 3

No they should not be tax exempt, and their financials should be competently transparent.

curious2   befriend (4)   ignore (5)   Wed, 28 Nov 2012, 4:33am PST   Like   Dislike     Share   Quote   Comment 4

Real tax reform would include revisiting the whole tax exemption issue. The Kaiser "non-profit" HMO took in more than $1 billion in net income in 2011, and paid no tax. Churches take in vast sums and pay no tax. Yet, actual charities struggle for money.

Currently, "bona fide" religions (including Romney's cult but excluding Travolta's) are automatically exempt, but are prohibited from preaching politics. They should be treated like newspapers, which are equally protected by the first amendment. Newspapers pay taxes and are allowed to endorse candidates.

Ending the tax exemption for churches would result in more money for actual charity. For example, the Pope might not be able to buy as many dresses, but Catholic Charities might have more $ to help people in need. Current IRS policy presumes that preaching is inherently charitable, but it isn't.

thunderlips11   befriend (14)   ignore (3)   Wed, 28 Nov 2012, 4:44am PST   Like   Dislike     Share   Quote   Comment 5

Another reform: Churches can't copyright, or trademark, or own companies that do. No more Multi Million Dollar Record and Publishing companies tax free, or claiming that the Revelations of Xenu and his 747-like Interstellar Mothership are trade secrets or whatever. They can charge for products, but can't prevent them from being disseminated. It's an odd Church that doesn't want to "Spread the Gospel"

Religions should only be allowed to buy land that they actually use a minimum of 40 hours a month. Too many churches lock up tax free land on spec.

All non-profits for that matter.

I assume that a non-profit wants to spread their ideas, so copyrighting and trademarking what they produce it is ridiculous. I suppose they could trademark their name or logo only to prevent confusion.

Watch comments by email

home   top   share   link sharer   users   register   best comments   about   source code  

#housing   #investing   #politics   #economics   #humor  
please recommend to your friends