Churches Paying Taxes

• ernest_t_bass

  

  OK, sleeper... her you go. Hopefully the political memes thread can get back on track:
  
  
  
• dlazz

  It's too bad we don't have a politics forum.
• ernest_t_bass

  

  dlazz;1585218 wrote:It's too bad we don't have a politics forum.

  Good addition!
• sleeper

  

  Look its pretty simple; churches are a business that should pay taxes like every other business. The argument that churches shouldn't have to pay tax since the money donated(paid) has already been taxed is probably the dumbest thing I've ever wasted my team reading. Should the dentist start offering free teeth cleanings and then merely taking the payment as a donation?
• sleeper

  

  What services are being produced? So if my parents want to spend their AFTER-TAX donations for charity it should be taxed again? If you want to donate to a 501(c)(3) charity that provides for free dentistry, you can be my guest. It isn't a for-profit endeavor.

  I don't think really any value added service is being produced but then again I think religion is complete bullshit anyway. But for the underclass that actually buys the snake oil, the service provided is similar to that of other service industries like therapists and legal advice.
  
  As far as the "AFTER-TAX" comment please grow up. If I buy a candy bar at the store with my AFTER-TAX income, should I have to pay sales tax? Should the company in which I paid for the candy bar with AFTER-TAX income have to pay taxes on any profits they earn?
• jmog

  sleeper;1585232 wrote:Look its pretty simple; churches are a business that should pay taxes like every other business. The argument that churches shouldn't have to pay tax since the money donated(paid) has already been taxed is probably the dumbest thing I've ever wasted my team reading. Should the dentist start offering free teeth cleanings and then merely taking the payment as a donation?

  Fine, tax churches on profits just like a business.
  
  What would that change? They would still pay zero taxes since they have zero profits.
  
  Just like you don't tax a corporation on total sales, you only tax them on profits, you couldn't tax a church on total donations, you would have to tax them on profits.
  
  You lose based on reality.
• BoatShoes

  Manhattan Buckeye;1585227 wrote:What services are being produced? So if my parents want to spend their AFTER-TAX donations for charity it should be taxed again? If you want to donate to a 501(c)(3) charity that provides for free dentistry, you can be my guest. It isn't a for-profit endeavor.

  It's like everybody misunderstands the "it's already been taxed" aspect of the income tax. Definition of income according to Eisner v. McComber is "All Accessions to Wealth Clearly Realized over which the taxpayer has complete dominion." Income should not be taxed to the same person more than once. That income has not been taxed to the legal person that is the organized 501(c)(3) yet.
  
  Gifts are clearly accessions to wealth and it is a fluke of early income tax law that gifts are excluded from gross income.
  
  Moreover, as Sleeper points out, it is probably erroneous that donations are considered a "gift" anyways. A Gift requires a "Detached and disinterested generosity". People giving money to their church do not have a detached and disinterested generosity. In reality, it is compensation to church for the services rendered onto the parishioner by the church. You get community, a weekly sermon, fellowship with the Lord, etc. all for a small $5 "donation". It's more like group psychotherapy paid for with "donations".
  
  
  But, for what it's worth, I would rather keep churches free from taxation. They already get too involved in public policy as it is. If they were paying taxes they would be even worse.
  
  Would much rather let the tax shelter of religion slowly die out. In 100 years when most of the world has removed the veil of ignorance we can auction off these old buildings to businesses that don't peddle myths.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1585245 wrote:Fine, tax churches on profits just like a business.
  
  What would that change? They would still pay zero taxes since they have zero profits.
  
  Just like you don't tax a corporation on total sales, you only tax them on profits, you couldn't tax a church on total donations, you would have to tax them on profits.
  
  You lose based on reality.

  I'm okay if a church doesn't make any profit and therefore doesn't pay taxes based on that. I know how to read an income statement. The reality is a lot of them do make a profit and they should be taxed on that profit at whatever the prevailing corporate tax rate is.
• ernest_t_bass

  

  OK, BoatShoes is here...
  
  Mod, plz move to politics forum.
• jmog

  sleeper;1585252 wrote:I'm okay if a church doesn't make any profit and therefore doesn't pay taxes based on that. I know how to read an income statement. The reality is a lot of them do make a profit and they should be taxed on that profit at whatever the prevailing corporate tax rate is.

  Find me one non-centralized church (Cathlicism is obviously one centralized) that has a profit.
  
  I have worked on the board of a few churches, since I understood finances, and they literally donate 100% of their money not used for upkeep of the church and pay/benefits for the couple (literally 3) employees, to other charities, missionaries, etc.
  
  They are not banking money year in and year out.
• jmog

  BoatShoes;1585250 wrote:It's like everybody misunderstands the "it's already been taxed" aspect of the income tax. Definition of income according to Eisner v. McComber is "All Accessions to Wealth Clearly Realized over which the taxpayer has complete dominion." Income should not be taxed to the same person more than once. That income has not been taxed to the legal person that is the organized 501(c)(3) yet.
  
  Gifts are clearly accessions to wealth and it is a fluke of early income tax law that gifts are excluded from gross income.
  
  Moreover, as Sleeper points out, it is probably erroneous that donations are considered a "gift" anyways. A Gift requires a "Detached and disinterested generosity". People giving money to their church do not have a detached and disinterested generosity. In reality, it is compensation to church for the services rendered onto the parishioner by the church. You get community, a weekly sermon, fellowship with the Lord, etc. all for a small $5 "donation". It's more like group psychotherapy paid for with "donations".
  
  
  But, for what it's worth, I would rather keep churches free from taxation. They already get too involved in public policy as it is. If they were paying taxes they would be even worse.
  
  Would much rather let the tax shelter of religion slowly die out. In 100 years when most of the world has removed the veil of ignorance we can auction off these old buildings to businesses that don't peddle myths.

  So Christianity has been around for 2000 years and you truly believe that inside of 100 years it will be gone?
  
  You can't be seriously that naïve.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1585255 wrote:Find me one non-centralized church (Cathlicism is obviously one centralized) that has a profit.
  
  I have worked on the board of a few churches, since I understood finances, and they literally donate 100% of their money not used for upkeep of the church and pay/benefits for the couple (literally 3) employees, to other charities, missionaries, etc.
  
  They are not banking money year in and year out.

  The Church of Scientology.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1585258 wrote:So Christianity has been around for 2000 years and you truly believe that inside of 100 years it will be gone?
  
  You can't be seriously that naïve.

  The internet(read: information) has damaged ignorance which is the fundamental basis of all religion. That is why a lot of countries are trying to suppress the internet because they want to keep their population ignorant of reality. The United States doesn't have these protections that other countries do so you are seeing a rapid decline in religious based beliefs and an increased of atheists. I don't feel like looking up statistics but I do know my anecdotal evidence of having a lot of friends who went to private catholic school with me are no longer believers. I also went to church last year with my dad and there were only a handful of people under 30 at my church. The base is eroding and we can only thank ignorance being expunged at a rapidly decreasing pace.
• BoatShoes

  jmog;1585258 wrote:So Christianity has been around for 2000 years and you truly believe that inside of 100 years it will be gone?
  
  You can't be seriously that naïve.

  It survived that long due to ignorance. Within 100 years humans are going to be cyborgs while computers will be way smarter than us. Maybe it will be around in primitive parts of the world and Evangelicals with chips in their brains might hold on out of fear or desperation but the God of Abraham, Isaac and Joseph will essentially be dead in the Western World within 100 years.
• Heretic

  

  ernest_t_bass;1585254 wrote:OK, BoatShoes is here...
  
  Mod, plz move to politics forum.

  GFY, bro. GFY.
• ernest_t_bass

  

  Heretic;1585281 wrote:GFY, bro. GFY.

  Bro, do you even lift!?
• OSH

  

  BoatShoes;1585250 wrote:Would much rather let the tax shelter of religion slowly die out. In 100 years when most of the world has removed the veil of ignorance we can auction off these old buildings to businesses that don't peddle myths.

  All that needs to be said about this statement has already been said...
  

  jmog;1585258 wrote:So Christianity has been around for 2000 years and you truly believe that inside of 100 years it will be gone?
  
  You can't be seriously that naïve.

  
  
  I believe I've said it before on threads like this, and I'll say it again...why have 501(c)(3)'s anyway? Organized religion is no different in their philanthropy than World Wildlife Foundation, PETA, Planned Parenthood, Arbor Day Foundation, Goodwill, and all other nonprofits. They all have their ways they want to help people, places, and things. You tax one, you tax them all. None should be treated differently. There are all kinds of people who don't prefer, like, or agree with other nonprofits. Let's just do away with that, and treat them all the same.
  
  Or...we can allow them to do their service as they please without raising a fuss. I'm no PETA guy, but I'm not calling for their nonprofit to be revoked. I don't have anything to do with Goodwill, unless I need a costume of some sort, but I don't think their nonprofit status should be removed.
  
  Infographics like the one posted refuse to show the positive aspects that organized religion do for the homeless and hungry. Remove the good that organized religion does for the homeless and hungry, those figures would be much, much higher. I don't expect them to do something like this though, there is an agenda that needs addressed. And, it's much easier to tackle that agenda than fixing the problems that need addressed in this country politically that can make a bigger difference than this.
• WebFire

  BoatShoes;1585250 wrote:It's like everybody misunderstands the "it's already been taxed" aspect of the income tax. Definition of income according to Eisner v. McComber is "All Accessions to Wealth Clearly Realized over which the taxpayer has complete dominion." Income should not be taxed to the same person more than once. That income has not been taxed to the legal person that is the organized 501(c)(3) yet.
  
  Gifts are clearly accessions to wealth and it is a fluke of early income tax law that gifts are excluded from gross income.
  
  Moreover, as Sleeper points out, it is probably erroneous that donations are considered a "gift" anyways. A Gift requires a "Detached and disinterested generosity". People giving money to their church do not have a detached and disinterested generosity. In reality, it is compensation to church for the services rendered onto the parishioner by the church. You get community, a weekly sermon, fellowship with the Lord, etc. all for a small $5 "donation". It's more like group psychotherapy paid for with "donations".
  
  
  But, for what it's worth, I would rather keep churches free from taxation. They already get too involved in public policy as it is. If they were paying taxes they would be even worse.
  
  Would much rather let the tax shelter of religion slowly die out. In 100 years when most of the world has removed the veil of ignorance we can auction off these old buildings to businesses that don't peddle myths.

  Holy shit (pun intended)! Sleeper and Boatshoes agree on something!
• WebFire

  jmog;1585245 wrote:Fine, tax churches on profits just like a business.
  
  What would that change? They would still pay zero taxes since they have zero profits.
  
  Just like you don't tax a corporation on total sales, you only tax them on profits, you couldn't tax a church on total donations, you would have to tax them on profits.
  
  You lose based on reality.

  So when my church takes in more tithes in a month than the expenses, what do you call that?
• OSH

  

  WebFire;1585360 wrote:So when my church takes in more tithes in a month than the expenses, what do you call that?

  Do taxes take place on a month-by-month basis, or do they revolve around the whole year?
• Devils Advocate

  

  
• sleeper

  

  WebFire;1585359 wrote:Holy shit (pun intended)! Sleeper and Boatshoes agree on something!

  We actually agree on a lot of things except he likes black people more than I do.
• WebFire

  OSH;1585361 wrote:Do taxes take place on a month-by-month basis, or do they revolve around the whole year?

  One would assume a surplus each month equals a surplus after 12 of them.
• OSH

  

  WebFire;1585367 wrote:One would assume a surplus each month equals a surplus after 12 of them.

  Which could also mean that after 12 months then they donate the money...
• OSH

  

  Devils Advocate;1585363 wrote:

  Nothing like biblical inaccuracies in memes to prove a point...