Taxes And Religious Institutions


Recommended Posts

I would like to have a conversation about religious institutions and taxes.

Do you think churches should start to pay taxes?

Some churches are very wealthy.

Also they have real estate and other assets that is often not exclusively used for religious purposes and sometimes even for commercial purposes.

A first step has been taken in Italy where it is proposed to limit the tax free status of the Catholic church.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-italy-church-taxestre81f1j3-20120216,0,6636380.story

Opinions?

Link to comment
  • Replies 45
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Administrator

I would like to have a conversation about religious institutions and taxes.

Do you think churches should start to pay taxes?

No.

Some churches are very wealthy.

Irrelevant

Also they have real estate and other assets that is often not exclusively used for religious purposes and sometimes even for commercial purposes.

How could you possibly know this. You would have to be their account or lawyer to really know this.

A first step has been taken in Italy where it is proposed to limit the tax free status of the Catholic church.

http://www.chicagotr...0,6636380.story

Opinions?

The US formed the basis of its laws to specifically not follow other countries laws for good reason. Why change that now?

Link to comment

I am not convinced one way or the other at this point. I would say that many churches do have commercial interests. It is widely reported. For example the LDS church (Mormons) are building a $3 Billion mall in downtown Salt Lake City. They also own the largest cattle ranch in the US and many other properties. Their finances are kept secret, even to the members. Members are required to give 10% of their income to be considered in good standing.

Link to comment
  • Administrator

Just because a church has income producing properties that does not mean they would be violating any 501c status rule. If the income derived from those 'investments' are not distributed to shareholders, and the funds are used in the furtherance of the stated purposes of the corporation then what they are doing is perfectly legal.

Many people may not like it, but that is mainly because they do not understand the law.

Link to comment

Just because a church has income producing properties that does not mean they would be violating any 501c status rule. If the income derived from those 'investments' are not distributed to shareholders, and the funds are used in the furtherance of the stated purposes of the corporation then what they are doing is perfectly legal.

Many people may not like it, but that is mainly because they do not understand the law.

Actually this topic was not intended to argue if it is lawful or not but to talk about what is right and wrong, and entertaining the idea on changing the laws.

But of course you may argue it is lawful so end of story, but I go beyond that.

Slavery was once lawful as well, would any discussion at that time be fruitless?

Edited by hyperreal
Link to comment
  • Administrator

I may have read your statement:

Also they have real estate and other assets that is often not exclusively used for religious purposes and sometimes even for commercial purposes.

as suggesting that income producing properties should not be free from tax. So I will say this: I believe that however a church wants to invest their surplus moneys is not the business of the IRS, until the proceeds jump out of bounds of the stated purposes of the corporation or, are distributed. That is INCOME tax.

I can assure you that property taxes by states/counties are not allowing church owned properties not used for religious purposes to go untaxed.

I believe the INCOME on investments or DONATIONS should be non taxed, as they are.

I believe that properties used exclusively for religious purposes should be non taxed.

I believe that income producing properties should be taxed by the state and counties as regular commercial property tax.

Does that make it clear?

Link to comment

So I will say this: I believe that however a church wants to invest their surplus moneys is not the business of the IRS, until the proceeds jump out of bounds of the stated purposes of the corporation or, are distributed. That is INCOME tax.

OK I completely understand your position.

However, I do not exactly share your position.

I believe the INCOME on investments or DONATIONS should be non taxed, as they are.

Income on donations I can come a long way with you.

But investments? Churches investing money?

No, I think that ought to be taxed.

I believe that properties used exclusively for religious purposes should be non taxed.

I find that reasonable.

I believe that income producing properties should be taxed by the state and counties as regular commercial property tax.

I agree with that but I think the income should also be federally taxed.

Furthermore another big problem I think is ministers using all kind of goodies and they are accounted in such a way that it is not income. I am talking about things like mansions, jets etc. For instance ministers like those who frequently appear in Trinity Broadcasting Network programs.

Edited by hyperreal
Link to comment
Do you think churches should start to pay taxes?

Yes, except on thier legitimate parts that are true charities.

IE. St. Someone AME not tax exempt

St Someone AME's soup kitchen...tax exempt if they meet all the other normal criteria

Some churches are very wealthy.

Yeah, we know, you hate wealthy people....

Also they have real estate and other assets that is often not exclusively used for religious purposes and sometimes even for commercial purposes.

Generally the things that are not used exclusively (under the current laws) for relgious purposes are taxable.

Link to comment

I would like to have a conversation about religious institutions and taxes.

Do you think churches should start to pay taxes?

Some churches are very wealthy.

Also they have real estate and other assets that (are) often not exclusively used

for religious purposes and sometimes even for commercial purposes...Opinions?

Actually, hyper, I think it would be a good thing for churches to start paying taxes under certain circumstances..

For example, I am not adverse toward establishing rules to govern "commercial property" and similar "investments",

which I think should be taxed just as they would be, if a non-religious (commercial) establishment were realizing those profits.

Link to comment

Yeah, we know, you hate wealthy people....

I do not, I simply voice that they should pay a lot more taxes than they currently do.

A lot of people want to cut benefits for the poor, I do not assume they have that opinion out of hate for the poor, some might, but certainly not all. If you agree with that then why can you not understand that I do not necessarily have to hate the rich if I want them to pay more taxes?

Do you see the logic?

Furthermore I personally find it illogical for Christian churches to amass a large wealth, I can understand they need money to operate but I do not see why they need to wallow in wealth.

Did not Jesus say to the rich man he should give all he has to the poor?

Then why would you want it to be different for the Church?

Was Jesus' ministry focused on acquiring wealth by buying buildings or investing?

Did he not invest in God's word and spiritual things instead of material things?

Edited by hyperreal
Link to comment

A simple search produced this.

Churches are often referred to as tax-exempt organizations; however, it is a misnomer to say a church does not pay taxes. Churches typically are required to pay many types of taxes, including but not limited to a variety of payroll taxes, sales taxes, property taxes on non-worship facilities, and even Unrelated Business Income Taxes (UBIT) paid on activities that are similar to those carried on by commercial, taxable entities. The only taxes that churches are generally exempt from paying are federal and state income taxes on their profits, some employer-paid payroll taxes such as Unemployment and the Employment Training Tax (ETT), and property taxes on worship facilities. http://www.protectthechurch.com/cpaarticle1.html

From this article it seems that the things that most seem to agree should be taxed Already Are Taxed.

Furthermore another big problem I think is ministers using all kind of goodies and they are accounted in such a way that it is not income. I am talking about things like mansions, jets etc. For instance ministers like those who frequently appear in Trinity Broadcasting Network programs.

Most ministers, particularly those you insinuate, most likely own their own home. Although the IRS does make some allowances for the church to provide a "parsonage" excessive amounts must be claimed.

If you own your home, you may still claim deductions for mortgage interest and real property taxes. If your housing allowance exceeds the lesser of your reasonable salary, the fair rental value of the home, or your actual expenses, you must include the amount of the excess as other income.

A minister who receives a housing allowance may exclude the allowance from gross income to the extent it is used to pay expenses in providing a home. Generally, those expenses include rent, mortgage interest, utilities, repairs, and other expenses directly relating to providing a home. The amount excluded cannot be more than the reasonable pay for the minister's services. http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc417.html

Having several practicing Ministers in my family I would have to say parsonages offered by a church generally reflect an average income of the congregation. Most of those also have other jobs. They save. They invest. They run businesses. They pay taxes. They do the same things with their money that anyone else would do with their money. If they are Blessed in everything they put their hand to, it seems to me, you would then put additional tax burdens on their shoulders. Having the government then "redistribute" that money however it sees fit. What makes you think even $1.00 in additional taxes the government collected would ever make it to the poor. Yet the Ministers you speak of, organize and donate to charities for the poor. Millions of dollars go to poor around the world because of these very men. You would begrudge them a jet to get to various speaking engagements or meetings with people who can help to make these things happen. It seems to me you feel they should stay at the Motel 6 instead of La Quinta. Eat at Long John Silvers instead of Red Lobster. These men are Blessed by God. If they live a good life I feel it is because they deserve it. The good they do around the world could never be achieved by the government with the same impact per dollar. While you would have the government take care of the poor, I would rather see the Church.

Furthermore I personally find it illogical for Christian churches to amass a large wealth, I can understand they need money to operate but I do not see why they need to wallow in wealth.

What do you call "wallowing in wealth" ? Because they have nice furniture? Big screen TV's so the people in the back can see? Padded seats for the congregation? Stained glass windows?

The tithing members (not all members tithe) of a church put 10% of their income into the church every year. That money helps pay for those things. The members should be able to see the benefit of this. Not only the Minister is blessed by God. So is the congregation to be blessed. If then, a group of members feel they deserve a level of comfort that they have achieved through success in life at their church then they deserve it.

Did not Jesus say to the rich man he should give all he has to the poor?

Then why would you want it to be different for the Church?

Ahhh, but that was not the moral of the story. What did the rich young man ask, that he received that instruction? He asked "what must I do to inherit eternal life?" And after Jesus told him to sell everything he told him to follow him. The man left depressed because he had more Faith in his wealth than in Jesus. Jesus knew this.

Now if you read a little further in the story you'll find the promise given to those who put their Faith in Jesus rather than in their wealth.

AMP Mark 10:29Jesus said, Truly I tell you, there is no one who has given up and left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands for My sake and for the Gospel's

30Who will not receive a hundred times as much now in this time--houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions--and in the age to come, eternal life.

So I see your persecutions of television ministers and their being "richley blessed and highly favored of the Lord" as nothing more than the fufilment of this scripture.

Link to comment

Many preach the "prosperity Gospel" and use Mark 10:30 as their "guidance".

Basically the idea is: Give money because when you do God makes sure you get even more money.

Here is a nice article about it:

http://bible.org/art...ological-ethics

Some excerpts:

"I believe that it is anti-Christian and unholy for any Christian to live with the object of accumulating wealth. You will say, “Are we not to strive all we can to get all the money we can?” You may do so. I cannot doubt but what, in so doing, you may do service to the cause of God. But what I said was that to live with the object of accumulating wealth is anti-Christian"

Charles Spurgeon.

"As Gloria Copeland put it, “Give $10 and receive $1,000; give $1,000 and receive $100,000;... in short, Mark 10:30 is a very good deal It is evident, then, that the prosperity gospel’s doctrine of giving is built upon faulty motives. Whereas Jesus taught His disciples to “give, hoping for nothing in return,” prosperity theologians teach their disciples to give because they will get a great return. One cannot help but agree with author Edward Pousson’s observation that the stewardship of “the prosperity message is in captivity to the American dream."

Edited by hyperreal
Link to comment

IMHO

We understand. You are anti wealth. We get it. You don't care who has the money. If they have more than you believe they should have you feel they are wrong. Now these uppity Christians think they should be blessed. Well if their God blesses them then let's show them. Let's take as much as we can, and tell them what they are to believe. They are to believe that God wants them to be the poor!

Sorry to have to be the one to tell you but, you don't get to tell Christians what the Gospel is or how we should believe. Your quote from Charles Spurgeon does not go against the Faith message in the least. It simply reinforces the point of not trusting in wealth or trusting in Jesus. We are taught to be a blessing to those less fortunate than ourselves. Yet it seems to me you would have Christians be the less fortunate. How then, can we be a blessing to the world unless we ourselves have been blessed.

NIV John 123 Then Mary took a twelve-ounce jarof expensive perfume made from essence of nard, and she anointed Jesus’ feet with it, wiping his feet with her hair. The house was filled with the fragrance.

4 But Judas Iscariot, the disciple who would soon betray him, said, 5 “That perfume was worth a year’s wages. It should have been sold and the money given to the poor.6 Not that he cared for the poor—he was a thief, and since he was in charge of the disciples’ money, he often stole some for himself.

7 Jesus replied, “Leave her alone.

AMP Mathew 24:45Who then is the faithful, thoughtful, and wise servant, whom his master has put in charge of his household to give to the others the food and supplies at the proper time?

46Blessed (happy, fortunate, and to be envied) is that servant whom, when his master comes, he will find so doing.

Please direct me the scripture to which you refer to where "Jesus taught His disciples to “give, hoping for nothing in return,” as I am unfamiliar with such a verse. Without scriptural reference I have no idea where you get that.

Since it seems to me you you are against the message of Christians be blessed, here, now, in this life, let me reference a few scriptures for you.

Mathew 6:3But when you give to charity, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing,

4So that your deeds of charity may be in secret; and your Father Who sees in secret will reward you openly.

Luke 6: 38Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.

Mathew 6:33But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

AMP Mathew 7:7 Keep on asking and it will be given you; keep on seeking and you will find; keep on knocking [reverently] and [the door] will be opened to you.

AMP Mathew 7:11 If you then, evil as you are, know how to give good and advantageous gifts to your children, how much more will your Father Who is in heaven [perfect as He is] give good and advantageous things to those who keep on asking Him!

AMP Mathew 10:42 And whoever gives to one of these little ones [in rank or influence] even a cup of cold water because he is My disciple, surely I declare to you, he shall not lose his reward.

The Bible is full of scriptures telling us that God wants to bless us.

Proverbs 10:22 The blessing of the LORD, it maketh rich, and he addeth no sorrow with it.

Proverbs 3:9 Honor the Lord with your wealth.

Give him the first share of all your crops.

10 Then your storerooms will be so full they can't hold everything.

Your huge jars will spill over with fresh wine.

Edited by Pastor Dave
Link to comment
Please direct me the scripture to which you refer to where "Jesus taught His disciples to “give, hoping for nothing in return,” as I am unfamiliar with such a verse. Without scriptural reference I have no idea where you get that.

Sorry Hyper, on re reading that statement I see that you were still quoting the article you were citing.

Let me rephrase that to read; I find no scriptural backing for the statement "Jesus taught His disciples to “give, hoping for nothing in return,” . Without scriptural backing I would say his assumption is "not Biblical" more so than one that is supported throughout the Bible.

Fawzo, thanks for getting us back on topic.

No I don't think we should add more taxes to religious institutions. I believe the ones we have in place are sufficient.

Link to comment

Frankly I no longer believe that charitable donations should be deductable on income tax returns. I believe it has created too many distortions. A lot of money gets donated without a lot of attention paid to whether the money is actually doing good or not. If you or I want to support our church or other charity, in my view we ought to be glad to support it with our own hard-earned money, not subsidized by Uncle Sam.

Furthermore, church owned real estate in my view should at least be subject to enough property taxes to support the cost of providing city services to that property. Churches require police and fire protection just like all other buildings. Paying for that has become burdensome to many communities.

By the way, I once bought some real estate from the Catholic Archdiocese in my area. I was very favorably impressed with how they conducted their real estate management.

The Archdiocese had a huge real estate management operation, because they had a huge amount of real estate. The Archdiocese holds some real estate for investment purposes, and some for religious purposes. People often donate real estate to the church, and it has to be managed. The Archdiocese was quite scrupulous about property taxes. They paid property taxes on all the lands they held for investment purposes. They obtained tax-free status only on the properties they used for religious purposes. No funny business, unlike some other charity-owned investment real estate I have seen over the years.

If real estate owned by a charitable institution is owned and used for business purposes, it is supposed to pay property taxes. That's the law. And profits from the business are supposed to be subject to the same taxes as any other business. Some charities abuse that.

Among other things, when charities use their tax-free status in their business operations, they gain a huge advantage over their competitors who have to pay taxes.

Edited by Carl Harry Carlson
Link to comment

While I do not oppose the taxation of moneys collected or earned by religious organizations, I also do not see why any organization should be exempt. This includes unions and all other political organizations. Both of which only function to enhance the material existence of their constituents and officers at the expense of others. Their peddling of freedom and rights is equivalent to the churches peddling of salvation and heaven. Donations mainly serve to put their leaders into expensive suits, limosines, mansions and power.

Why not tax the money collected by politicians and political organizations and make these funds available for the political needs those who do not have the big organizations or big money behind them.

Link to comment
  • Amulet locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.