Atheist group files lawsuit over church tax status

[rug]

By Associated Press
Dec. 28, 2012 3:54 p.m.

Madison - The Wisconsin-based Freedom from Religion Foundation has filed a federal lawsuit alleging the Internal Revenue Service is giving unconstitutional preferential treatment to churches and other religious organizations.

The lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Madison says the IRS is violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment as well as constitutional equal protection rights by exempting churches from having to file a detailed application form, fee and annual information form to receive and maintain tax-exempt status.

The lawsuit says that preferential treatment gives churches an exclusive and discriminatory benefit not afforded other secular nonprofits such as the Freedom from Religion Foundation.

An IRS spokesman did not immediately return a message seeking comment.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/atheist-group-files-lawsuit-over-church-tax-status-ub86k98-185090301.html

Good luck with that.

[cbayer]

1. I was unaware that churches did not have to follow the same protocol

as other non-profits.

This should be interesting and, if successful, might really address the problems with these clearly for-profit megachurches that are masquerading as non-profits.

Do you know more about the paperwork exemption this addresses?

[spooky3]

6. Here's a little more info, with links to the lawsuit/complaint itself:

http://ffrf.org/news/news-releases/item/16419-ffrf-sues-irs-over-990-form

[cbayer]

7. Thanks for that. Not sure how the exemption came about, but

I can see no valid reason for it. As the PR says, why would churches not want to be held accountable? Unless they are the kinds of churches that wouldn't fit the classification.

From what I have seen, I support this move by the FFRF.

[Leontius]

8. Well there is that pesky little First Amendment to the Constitution.

[spooky3]

9. did you read the lawsuit?

Why should the First Amendment allow for non-religious charitable groups to have to take time and money to file certain forms and to meet standards that religious groups are spared? The point of the First Amendment was to separate church and state, not to give government-sponsored advantages to churches in general or to certain churches.

[cbayer]

10. I don't see how that applies here.

Churches and other religious organizations have the same tax status as other non-profit organizations, right? But why should they have an exemption for the paperwork the others have to do to obtain this status? How would that be a first amendment infringement?

[Leontius]

11. No laws in respect to establishment or free exercise.

[cbayer]

13. I still don't see how it applies.

It's about tax status. How does this impinge on establishment or free exercise?

If anything, I would see it as clarifying what is and is not an organization to which the first amendment applies.

It bothers me a great deal that some organizations which are clearly for profit can gain a tax advantage just by claiming they are religious.

[Leontius]

15. Well it bothers me that corporations in the US can make billions in profit

and pay no taxes. The tax code has the same effect of law as statutes passed by Congress. The IRS is a government agency established by Congress to enforce the tax code. By not having religious institutions exempt from most if not all IRS rule you are entangling the state directly in the free exercise of religion by economic pressure and possible sanction.

[cbayer]

17. Agree about corporations, but that's a separate issue.

Churches have to comply with fire codes, building codes and other municipal codes.

I don't think the intent was to exempt them from all government. Ministers still have to file tax forms. Individuals deduct deductions to religious institutions.

I still don't see how meeting the tax exempt status requirements would interfere with free exercise of religion.

[Leontius]

19. Consider this the VA AG is using building codes to make abortion virtualy

impossible in this state. You cool with that?

[cbayer]

20. I don't see the comparison.

No one is suggesting that their tax status be abolished, only that they comply with IRS rules for the exemptions they enjoy.

Since most religious institutions are in fact non profit, their existence should not be threatened at all by this.

It's not a new rule and it applies equally to all.

How do you see that it would make religious groups virtually impossible?

[Leontius]

23. Evidently the IRS has less of a problem than you do with their standard of compliance now.

Since you seem to have no problem with using building codes to prevent the ability to obtain an abortion I guess you would have no problem with tweaking the tax code to prevent churches operating without government pressure and interference.

[cbayer]

24. I think that prior to so many mega churches and churches where it's not

clear whether it's really a religion or not, this was not such an issue.

I would have a big problem using building codes to prohibit abortion, but I don't think the comparison is accurate.

It's a matter of forms that establish that you are what you say you are. In doing so, churches and religious organizations may end up with even great protections.

[Leontius]

26. Do you honestly think that the intention of this action

is to provide greater protection to religious organizations? I'm sorry I did live on a farm as a kid but I didn't just arrive in the 'big city' yesterday. The comparison is absolutely accurate in showing how manipulation of the letter of law can violate the spirit of law. Roe v Wade is still the standard but Va regulations may make it null in this state by closing most clinics it's not that great of a stretch to use the tax code to skirt the first Amendment.

[cbayer]

27. Whether that is their intent or not, I think the outcome could in fact

give further protections to legitimate religious organizations by forcing the hands of ones that are not legitimate.

This isn't an attempt to take away their tax status, just to have them establish that they meet the criteria.

I can't see how a legitimate religious organization would be threatened by this. It's a hassle, but not a threat....

unless they really are for profit institutions.

[Leontius]

28. Either way, Good night to you I'm off to bed it's been a long day.

[DavidWD72]

22. Not by a long shot

Religious organizations are getting their own set of rules to play by. They are getting special exemptions as well as interfering in the process of our government. If religious organizations wish to keep their freedom they need to stay out of government. That is the basic definition outlined in the wall of separation penned by Thomas Jefferson. Last note, it is estimated we loose 71 billion dollars in organized money laundering through church coffers every year.

[alfredo]

25. There is no attempt at eroding the free exercise, just that they want to make sure the

churches are not buying hookers and beer with that tax free money. Homeless shelters and environmental groups have to account for every dollar it receives and spends.

[Gore1FL]

21. The first Amendment doesn't promise freedom from paperwork. n/t

[MotherPetrie]

2. GOOD.

[loyalkydem]

3. is it wrong for me hoping that they succeed

[madrchsod]

4. well that won`t get anywhere

the freedom foundation should go after the preachers who violate the federal law.

[spooky3]

5. Isn't that the IRS' job? FFRF is not a legal authority.

If you want to know more about the MANY actions that FFRF takes on multiple fronts, as its resources allow, check out their website.

[oldhippydude]

12. whens somebody going to call bull shit on Bush's faith based initiative..

we not only give them a break, we subsidize them....

[cbayer]

14. Probably when more non-religious organizations step up to the plate

and start supplying those most in need with necessary services.

[Politicalboi]

16. I hope this works

It's about time they paid their taxes. Pay or leave should be their choice.

[cbayer]

18. It's not about that. It's about them doing the paperwork required by other

non-profits on a yearly basis.