Tax and religion.

[Technosoul]

With our national and state budgets in need of more food in the way of new taxes why not tax the business of religion?

Why should they get a free ride as a non-profit organization if they are running around buying up real estate and what not? What is the real difference between the business of religion and the business of phychology if they both are used to help people deal with life? If the phychologist must pay taxes why not the preacher man?

We should tax all donations collected by a religion same as we would tax any other kind of income. And as part of that tax we would tabulate the unpaid "free time" donated by people who work for the church using minimum wage standards. They can of course deduct real charity expendatures same as other businesses.

These religions have branched out into the business of bingo gambling, book publishing, special interest lobby groups seeking poltical representation, day care business, and have established thrift stores, collages and schools, the busness related to marrages and funerals, and they actively compete with other businesses (such as the rap music industry) to attract consumers, as well as aspects of the business of science and medicene. If they wish to compete in the market place of ideas they should being paying taxes just like atheists do and like other secular businesses do.

Just look at how much of our economical wealth is being absorbed into the sub-cultures of organized religion. It is simular to untaxed underground black markets only made legal. As long as the memberships of those religions can vote for people that favor what they want representation they should fork up their dues in taxes. Under the fundamentalistic interpretation of the Consitution reguarding the seperation of state and religion only anteists should be represented and only they should pay taxes. But if we are going to allow representation and allow our canidates to be religious then that should automatically amend the Consitution such that religion can now be taxed. It cannot work one way on one end and not the other. In other words, admit the amendment and tax religion. Or force religion to remain totally dedicated to non-profit charity which would be determined by their efforts to help people out economically with food or other needs. "Spiritual needs" are no different then "needing phycholoical help".

But should religion compete with markets that sell food or phycholical help, which competition would take away from the national profits which are otherwise taxable? I guess they could ( or should for reasons of compassion ) but if they use only 10 percent for that purpose and keep the rest of the money to spend on self-growth of the organization then we need to re-think making the whole operation a non-profit and taxable insitution.

Note: This is a poltical philosophy about religion and so I posted it here reather then in the "politics and government" forum. And because it would be of most concern to people posting in this forum.



Whatcha' think?

[Simonius]

No... we should pay tax to pay for specific services provided to us by the Government.

If I want to give my hard earned cash to a Priest because I believe he is the earthly agent of a divine being then that is my own concern, and not the Governments. It is a private arrangement between two people.

All people and institutions should be taxed according to what the Government provides to them (plus a small profit).

[Kuldeep]

I agree with Techno in totality. People spending their valuable time listening to proofless dogma of God's men. While; those holy men enjoy all worldly comforts with no physical labour and contributing no help help to Govt./Society.

Particularly those groups who only collect funds in name of religions, build estates, enjoy their life on that money should be heavily taxed. However, those who really are reducing the Govt. responsibility of providing meaningful support to the society might get partial rebate for the tax.

[Marconius]

Quote by: Simonius No... we should pay tax to pay for specific services provided to us by the Government. If I want to give my hard earned cash to a Priest because I believe he is the earthly agent of a divine being then that is my own concern, and not the Governments. It is a private arrangement between two people. All people and institutions should be taxed according to what the Government provides to them (plus a small profit).

So when the church catches on fire I assume you would be okay with letting it burn? Firefighters are not free and if there is a crime police arent free either. Also the roads that lead to the church must be payed for somehow.

Perhaps government should be blind to religion and treat it like every other group.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: Kuldeep I agree with Techno in totality. People spending their valuable time listening to proofless dogma of God's men. While; those holy men enjoy all worldly comforts with no physical labour and contributing no help help to Govt./Society. Particularly those groups who only collect funds in name of religions, build estates, enjoy their life on that money should be heavily taxed. However, those who really are reducing the Govt. responsibility of providing meaningful support to the society might get partial rebate for the tax.

A great amount of clerics do contribute a lot to society. Plus, in the catholic church's case, most of them don't make much to tax anyway, their income is in the form of accomodation. They can accumulate wealth, simply because they have few expenses, and taxing that at the end of their lives, provided they have no dependents, would seem more reasonable. I could see taxing a diocese, but you'd often end up taxing charities, since it's run with the same money as the diocese. Perhaps you could set a level of income for clerics that would get taxed, since I'm sure some ministers and church fat cats make abhorrent amounts of money (the preachers in the ghetto who drive caddy's come to mind), but there's also a question of church and state, if religion is a tax base, will govt. owe something to religion? At any rate, I don't think there's enough actual profit being made in this business to make a difference.

[Simonius]

Quote by: Marconius So when the church catches on fire I assume you would be okay with letting it burn? Firefighters are not free and if there is a crime police arent free either. Also the roads that lead to the church must be payed for somehow. Perhaps government should be blind to religion and treat it like every other group.

Sorry, I would address the issues you raise but they have no relevance to what I actually posted. I never argued that there should be no tax or that public services are free. I said that every tax should be specifically tied to a service, there is for instance no intrinsic service tied to income tax, I therefore regard it as fraud.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary A great amount of clerics do contribute a lot to society. Plus, in the catholic church's case, most of them don't make much to tax anyway, their income is in the form of accomodation. They can accumulate wealth, simply because they have few expenses, and taxing that at the end of their lives, provided they have no dependents, would seem more reasonable. I could see taxing a diocese, but you'd often end up taxing charities, since it's run with the same money as the diocese. Perhaps you could set a level of income for clerics that would get taxed, since I'm sure some ministers and church fat cats make abhorrent amounts of money (the preachers in the ghetto who drive caddy's come to mind), but there's also a question of church and state, if religion is a tax base, will govt. owe something to religion? At any rate, I don't think there's enough actual profit being made in this business to make a difference.

Well, it would be up to the tax collector to find out, rather then depending on your guesswork. How much property tax would be due for those fancy churches in rich neighborhoods?

As it is now a phychologist is not getting any speical favors from the government, nor other such busnesses that are supposed to help people overcome their guilts or worldly problems. Heck, people can go to a nightclub and dance to the music and start to feel great and yet those social clubs at taxed, and so a chruch which acts like a place to socialize and to be entertained should also be taxed. Lots of churches make people feel good but that does not mean those people are being good, because Monday morning they are back doing the same things they need to confess about next Sunday, via that addictive cycle.

Now the Salvation Army might be an exception to what I am talking about, and everyone knows that.

Perhaps a tire company makes a nice profit (meaning more money then they invested) and yet they do not get any speical representation form the government relative to some return. Paying taxes is not about getting something profitable from the government, other then roads, and other the other perks that everyone else is getting (as outlined by another poster ahead of me).

Big churches operate like a business, the preachers learn business managment at their religious collage. True, a small church might just be making ends meet, but not our mega-chruches, who might spend millions to buy air time on radio and TV stations, and who pull in millions in donations. Millions of dollars that then slip outside of the mainstream economy. They tie up the roadways on Sunday morning and for speical church events, and then they turn around at tell you not to get into the spirit of a materialistic Christmass as thousands of stores depend on that season to simulate our economy. So if they think that the love of money is the root of all evil then we should help relieve them of some of those roots by taxing them, it is a moral thing to do. We need the money for pratical solutions and that would answer their prayers for a better living environment that has less poverty and so forth.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Where l live there are very few mega churches and most have trouble making ends meet. I have encountered very few religious organizations that would be considered anything besides a failure in the business world. Now, I live in an area where this is the norm, so obviously you may have a different experience, but that still evidences that they can't be blindly taxed.

[SoylentGreen]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary Where l live there are very few mega churches and most have trouble making ends meet. I have encountered very few religious organizations that would be considered anything besides a failure in the business world. Now, I live in an area where this is the norm, so obviously you may have a different experience, but that still evidences that they can't be blindly taxed.

No one should be blindly taxed.
However the church does make money through donations and tithes and therefore should be taxed like any one else.
Money that goes towards charity is tax deductible like in any business.
The church has no right to claim charity as an excuse for not paying taxes.

again if a business can show no profit in there account books then there should be no tax.
But one only needs to look at all the combined wealth that churches own and realise some one is making a profit.

[Kuldeep]

@SoylentGreen

Good we think alike, at least in this regard of taxing lathargic preasts.

[Gods_Mercenary]

Quote by: SoylentGreen No one should be blindly taxed. However the church does make money through donations and tithes and therefore should be taxed like any one else. Money that goes towards charity is tax deductible like in any business. The church has no right to claim charity as an excuse for not paying taxes. again if a business can show no profit in there account books then there should be no tax. But one only needs to look at all the combined wealth that churches own and realise some one is making a profit.

They own buildings that were built in many cases hundreds of years ago, hardly proof of significatn wealth.

[SoylentGreen]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary They own buildings that were built in many cases hundreds of years ago, hardly proof of significatn wealth.

And they stuff them with gold. The property alone is worth a fortune. They have computers, cars . houses to live in, all the trappings of someone earning an income.

The Roman catholic church just paid out over 6 million if I remember correctly has hush money to the victims of there pedophilic priests, where did that come from.

[Jack]

The Roman Catholic Church owns an entire country! Bill Gates doesn't own a country. Warren Buffett doesn't own a country. Even Catholics must realize how wealthy the RCC is. Those TV evangelists with their cathedrals only differ in degree, not kind. They aspire to wealth like that.

Here's a blog that adds another opinion on this topic.