patrick.net

 
  forgot password?   register

#housing #investing #politics more»
736,300 comments in 75,752 posts by 10,914 registered users, 2 online now: BayArea, MMR

new post

Should churches be tax exempt

By tovarichpeter   2012 Nov 21, 11:14am   944 views   5 comments   watch (0)   quote      

http://www.baycitizen.org/religion/story/pastors-challenge-irs-partisan-talk/

Sent from my iPad

Comments 1-5 of 5     Last »

1   FortWayne   403/407 = 99% civil   2012 Nov 25, 11:49pm  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

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.

2   coriacci1     2012 Nov 26, 12:47am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

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

3   leo707     2012 Nov 28, 3:39am  ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

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

4   curious2   570/570 = 100% civil   2012 Nov 28, 4:33am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

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.

5   TwoScoopsMcGee   1230/1230 = 100% civil   2012 Nov 28, 4:44am  ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

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.

Comments 1-5 of 5     Last »

users   about   suggestions   contact  
topics   random post   best comments   comment jail  
patrick's 40 proposals  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home