Tax-exempt benefit disputed in Prop. 8 campaign

[cboy4]

Well isn't this a Debbie Downer article



Matthai Kuruvila, Chronicle Religion Writer
Friday, November 28, 2008

In the wake of Proposition 8's passage, opponents are railing that churches that supported the ballot measure violated their tax-exempt status.

It's a common accusation at the now-weekly protests, gaining enough traction that Geoff Kors, a member of the No on 8 executive committee, said lawyers are investigating the issue.

"The Mormon church overstepped its boundaries by being a tax-exempt organization," said Sharone Negev, 54, of San Francisco, who has gone to protests in San Francisco and the Mormon temple in Oakland. "They clearly are not supposed to be involved in political activities."

But interviews with experts and activists on the issue say Prop. 8 opponents should look elsewhere for reasons to criticize the measure's supporters.

"They almost certainly have not violated their tax exemption," said Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, the leading advocacy organization on the issue. "While the tax code has a zero tolerance for endorsements of candidates, the tax code gives wide latitude for churches to engage in discussions of policy matters and moral questions, including when posed as initiatives."

COME ON BARRY, MAKE A STINK ABOUT THIS!

Generally speaking, churches, schools, and nonprofits that are 501c(3) organizations are prohibited from spending more than 20 percent of their budgets on political activities, Lynn said, noting that his organization is held to the same standard.

The 20 percent threshold means that the Catholic or Mormon churches, whose organizations span the globe, would have had to spend hundreds of millions of dollars - if not billions - to violate their tax-exempt status.

Despite common perceptions, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints gave relatively small amounts of money to Prop. 8. The church's sole filing by Nov. 4 was for $2,864.21, according to the California secretary of state's office. The church said that was an in-kind donation to pay for plane fare for its members. More in-kind donation filings are expected from the church, though the total probably will still be far below the threshold.

MORE----------------> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/27/BAB214BA4E.DTL

[Hepburn]

1. Yes!!!!!

IMO, churches get involved in community activities by doing charity work, feeding the poor, promoting their particular brand of religion by getting converts, etc.

But....:grr:....when they engage in acts which are purely designed to discriminate against certain groups in our society and they spend tax free money to do it? Fuck them.

JMHO

[cboy4]

2. Well, practically everyone in this forum will obviously agree

about the need to lose tax exemption status.

There have been a number of stories posted about this subject already.

I just think it's a pessimistic sign to hear the executive director of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State say the Mormon Church did not violate this status.

I mean, if Barry Lynn isn't even on our side, that seems kinda grim, IMO.

[bluedawg12]

3. I want to fight battles we can win and that lead to change.

The tax exempt win, sounds remote.

[keepCAblue]

4. The amount the LDS church spent was grossly under-reported

That is why the Mormon church is being investigated by California's Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). In addition, the Mormons set up out-of-state phone banks in Idaho and elsewhere to make prop 8 calls and robo-calls to Californians which, I'm told, is also illegal.

Karger, a retired political consultant, alleged in his complaint that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints failed to report money invested to organize phone banks, send out direct mailers, provide transportation to California, mobilize a speakers bureau, send out satellite simulcasts and develop Web sites as well as numerous commercials and video broadcasts....

Karger, however, sees the fact that FPPC is moving forward as a good sign. He said his political attorney told him the commission looks into fewer than 5 percent of complaints, an indication in his mind that "when they do it, it's pretty serious."

[Hepburn]

7. Wouldn't there be a difference between contributions from individual Mormons and...

....whatever the "church" (read "cult") did?

So...maybe the "Mormon" factor would be under estimated because it seems very possible that the faith of an individual donor may not be evident?

:shrug:

[keepCAblue]

8. Except that it was the church leadership that COMMANDED members to contribute.

Individuals donated because of coercion by the church...I wouldn't necessarily call that "voluntary".

[GodlessBiker]

9. But the efforts of the church (read: fair market value of services) was used to solicit this money.

[Irishonly]

5. I hope they get nailed

IMO, I don't think churches should get involved with propositions period. I am so sick of the religious right and social conservative votes, I could:puke:

[Ian David]

6. I'm gonna guess they'll get nailed for under-reporting, but not for electioneering. n/t