Should Churches be Taxed?

[elperromagico]

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

1. Absolutely.

If they're going to discuss candidates and political issues with members, then they absolutely should be taxed like any other political entity.

[Sandpiper]

2. No, unless they venture into the political arena

Keep church and state separate.


No taxation of churches, no giving of tax revenues to churches/faith based organizations.

[seventythree]

6. if we are only talking property tax,

it is not the church, but rather the property, which is being taxed.

[Sandpiper]

8. I could live with that

n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

25. "unless they venture into the political arena"

A little late for that. Let's see- looking at the politcal situation currently in America, 2005?

Sounds to me like, "Yes, they should be taxed".

[kliljedahl]

3. Yes

And especially those TV evangelists, they're the worst.


http://www.kliljedahl.net

[tinanator]

4. should we?

considering how the money is wasted wasting humans Id rather not be a part of the system that differs little in practice from Hitler's shower stalls. And if you think I'm over the edge, imagine how you would feel if your precious "journalists" were actually reporting the death tolls and broadcasting the carnage you are paying for?

[seventythree]

5. since they use services,

like police and fire, they need to pay property tax, just like any other property owner. Heck, in this state, we exempt all sorts of entities from property tax like veteran's organizations and non-profit corps -- it's ridiculous. At least they need to contribute to the services they use!

[Book Lover]

7. Entities that own physical buildings that use city services should

pay a below-50%-percentage of what that land use would pay if it were used by an income-generating business, in my opinion. I think they really do need to contribute fiscally to the municipality they are located in, again, if there is a building in use.

[Fenris]

24. An excellent point.

[UdoKier]

9. For profit "churches" like 700 Club or megachurches should

Any church with employees making 6 figure compensation is a for-profit venture, IMO.

[malmapus]

31. growing up in GA, I would call some of the Baptist churches

Fortune 500 churches

[pnorman]

10. Despite my agnostic beliefs, I voted NO.

But"no" up to a point. It isn't easy to separate property & assets that are properly part of the religious establishment and it's followers, and the tax-free scams, But there should be a good faith effort to set up some guidelines. And then TAX what's clearly out of the scope of that outfit.

Likewise, with religious establishments which become overtly political. The Radical Religious Right is already threatening NAACP, environmental groups, etc, for really flimsy reasons. They deserve a taste of their own medicine.

pnorman

[Zenlitened]

16. Well said. :)

:thumbsup:

[bklyncowgirl]

11. Churches should be treated like other non-profits

If, however, they endorse candidates and become political they should lose tax exempt status.

[mitchum]

12. ABSOLUTELY!

[Democrats_win]

13. Grey Areas and religon don't mix. Tax'em like alcohol: excise tax

[H2O Man]

14. No. We have a constitution.

It doesn't allow the government to intrude on religious institutions. It will never happen. Ever.

[Katarina]

20. But we have

that wonderful thing called the faith based initiative. So really government does intrude or vice versa...Don't know about the rest of the US but down here in Florida they allow church services in the schools on Sundays. I'm not sure if the church is charged a rental fee or what but again...that doesn't seem to be a seperation of church and state to me.

[Warren DeMontague]

28. So why can't that logic work both ways?

In case you haven't noticed, those same religious institutions (and some of their longtime defenders here) have no compunction about intruding on government institutions, as well as the private lives of unaffiliated citizens.

[noonwitch]

15. The Tax the Churches League? (from "Foul Play")

Beware of the dwarf! And the albino, too, he's in on it.

[Arugula Latte]

17. Make my vote a "HELL YES!"

As my mother always says, churches and religion are big business.

[goodhue]

18. Perhaps property tax.

Particularly megachurches.

[elperromagico]

19. This is not nearly as close as I thought it would be.

[CrispyQ]

21. A few years ago I would have voted no,

but now that they advocate candidates from the pulpit & the federal government is giving them taxpayer dollars for their faith based garbage, yes, absolutely they should be taxed!

[Pushed To The Left]

22. The ones that behave like 527s

for the right wing should be treated as such.

[elfin]

23. No, but they should pay for services

snow removal, street stuff, sewer etc. Also, their books should be vetted (at their expense) by reputable organizations to prove they are not making a profit. Also, any products or services they provide to customers should be sale taxed, if not already - books, DVD's, concessions etc.

If they are raking in money and just spending it on luxurious salaries/ memberships etc., or flipping property to make more money that should be reported widely and cause closer scrutiny.

I would love to tax them, but I still believe in separation of Church and State

[kliljedahl]

30. A lot of them own other property too

Apartment buildings, business buildings etc. currently tax-exempt.
It all should be taxed.


http://www.kliljedahl.net

[RaleighNCDUer]

26. The amendment states "no law respecting the establishment

of religion" not "no law respecting religious establishments." All religious establishments should be taxed on an equal basis, for property and income, with proper deductions for charitable enterprises. The church that is funding a water project in Mali would get a good break -- the one that is funding gold-plated water fixtures in the pastor's 6 million dollar home would pay through the nose.

The point is to be non-discriminatory in doing it.

Besides, it would really piss off the scientologists.

[Warren DeMontague]

27. What I wonder is why some of them are exempt from child molestation laws

that would have any other organization so complicit in the covering up of serial abuse and protection of abusers run out of town on a rail or brought up on federal conspiracy charges.

[New Dealer]

29. I voted no

Tiny neighborhood churches usually don't have a lot of money, and I think that they are overall good organizations. However, the only way they should be able to maintain their tax-exempt status is if they avoid politics and don't show signs of having large amounts of money (megachurches come to mind).

[damntexdem]

32. No 'it depends' option:

The deal is supposed to be that churches aren't taxed and they stay out of politics. Rightwing churches don't obey the rule, but they are not stripped of their tax-free status. This is what should happen. If that cannot happen, it would be better to simply tax all churches, and put no impediment in the way of their political involvement.