Churches Paying Taxes

• jmog

  sleeper;1585668 wrote:Stop calling sales "donations" and there you have it. Revenue minus expenses = profit. Tax the profit.

  Do you consider all 501(c)(3)'s the same? Meaning tax them all or just hell bent on taxing churches only?
• jmog

  sleeper;1585649 wrote:What about wages paid to the CEOs of churches? Since that money comes through donations that have already been taxed, should they have to pay taxes on their salary?
  
  Churches are businesses that sell eternal salvation as their product and they need to be taxed according. Just because churches occassionally give money to poor people doesn't mean they should be exempt from paying taxes like every other business out there. Exxon Mobile donates millions of dollars each year for education, should they have to pay taxes?

  Any employee of the church does pay taxes on their salary.
  
  Answer this question sleeper, churches (most) stay out of politics in order to keep their 501(c)(3) status (there are laws against religious institutions becoming political and backing certain candidates, etc). If you want to tax them would you be "ok" with churches then being able to donate large sums of money to politicians and feeding money into PACs to push legislation?
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1585670 wrote:Do you consider all 501(c)(3)'s the same? Meaning tax them all or just hell bent on taxing churches only?

  Taxing churches to balance the negative externality of deluding the masses and promoting ignorance.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1585672 wrote:Any employee of the church does pay taxes on their salary.
  
  Answer this question sleeper, churches (most) stay out of politics in order to keep their 501(c)(3) status (there are laws against religious institutions becoming political and backing certain candidates, etc). If you want to tax them would you be "ok" with churches then being able to donate large sums of money to politicians and feeding money into PACs to push legislation?

  Yes. It would certainly make life easier to vote against any candidate that the church supports.
• Devils Advocate

  

  OSH;1585371 wrote:Nothing like biblical inaccuracies in memes to prove a point...

  Biblical and inaccuracies in the same sentence proves my point exactly.
  
  Ironic is ironic
• dlazz

  They should just tax any entity (person/business) the same. Remove the possibility of wiggle room (and thus, loopholes)
• WebFire

  jmog;1585672 wrote:Any employee of the church does pay taxes on their salary.
  
  Answer this question sleeper, churches (most) stay out of politics in order to keep their 501(c)(3) status (there are laws against religious institutions becoming political and backing certain candidates, etc). If you want to tax them would you be "ok" with churches then being able to donate large sums of money to politicians and feeding money into PACs to push legislation?

  Well, I don't the businesses should be doing it, so that's an easy one to answer.
• TedSheckler

  

  thavoice;1585644 wrote:Exactly, and that is why I never write off my charital donations every year to The Human Fund.

  Reps for the Seinfeld reference.
• wkfan

  sleeper;1585680 wrote:Taxing churches to balance the negative externality of deluding the masses and promoting ignorance.

  Seems to me you are trying to punish a category of organizations just because you don't believe in what they do.
  
  Sounds pretty small minded of you.
• jmog

  sleeper;1585680 wrote:Taxing churches to balance the negative externality of deluding the masses and promoting ignorance.

  What about the negative externality of deluding the masses and promoting ignorance that comes from far left wing crazy 501(c)(3)s like ASPCA, Greenspeace, Sierra Club, etc. By your own logic shouldn't they be paying taxes then too?
• sleeper

  

  wkfan;1585708 wrote:Seems to me you are trying to punish a category of organizations just because you don't believe in what they do.
  
  Sounds pretty small minded of you.

  Not punishing; just trying to have them play by the same rules as other businesses.
• jmog

  sleeper;1585682 wrote:Yes. It would certainly make life easier to vote against any candidate that the church supports.

  So since most churches would probably be supporting conservative/republican candidates does that mean you will be an Obama/liberal supporter then?
  
  Sucks when you contradict yourself doesn't it?
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1585711 wrote:What about the negative externality of deluding the masses and promoting ignorance that comes from far left wing crazy 501(c)(3)s like ASPCA, Greenspeace, Sierra Club, etc. By your own logic shouldn't they be paying taxes then too?

  Wouldn't even scratch the surface of the damage done by religious organizations.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1585713 wrote:So since most churches would probably be supporting conservative/republican candidates does that mean you will be an Obama/liberal supporter then?
  
  Sucks when you contradict yourself doesn't it?

  Called the libertarian party bro.
• jmog

  sleeper;1585714 wrote:Wouldn't even scratch the surface of the damage done by religious organizations.

  So both (Greenspeace and churches) are "spreading ignorance" by sleeper logic, but since in sleeper's opinion one has done more damage it should be taxed and the other should not?
  
  You honestly can't believe your own crap that you spew can you?
• jmog

  sleeper;1585716 wrote:Called the libertarian party bro.

  You do know that many churches would support same libertarian right? Most church people I know are fed up with both parties and want the government out of their lives completely, sounds libertarian to me.
  
  Guess you'll have to find another party then huh sleeper?
  
  You would HATE to admit that politically you are actually very close to religious "idiots" huh?
  
  Most Christians I know would vote libertarian if they really had a shot, instead go republican as the lesser of 2 evils.
• wkfan

  sleeper;1585712 wrote:Not punishing; just trying to have them play by the same rules as other businesses.

  Those that are businesses should play by the same rules. Unfortunately, at least for your revengeful motives, not all churches are businesses but are very legitimately charities and should be treated as such.
• dlazz

  wkfan;1585721 wrote:Unfortunately, at least for your revengeful motives, not all churches are businesses but are very legitimately charities and should be treated as such.

  Like Westboro Baptist?
• ernest_t_bass

  

  dlazz;1585722 wrote:Like Westboro Baptist?

  Like every muslim is a terrorist?
• wkfan

  dlazz;1585722 wrote:Like Westboro Baptist?

  As I stated, those that are businesses should be treated as such. I do not view Westboro Baptist as a charity, although under the law they may be.....I just don't know enough about them to know for sure.
  
  However, I do not consider them to be a Church in the way that I view what a Church is.
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1585718 wrote:So both (Greenspeace and churches) are "spreading ignorance" by sleeper logic, but since in sleeper's opinion one has done more damage it should be taxed and the other should not?
  
  You honestly can't believe your own crap that you spew can you?

  When Greenpace collectively brings in billions of dollars a year and pays zero taxes on their profits; then you may have a point.
• sleeper

  

  wkfan;1585721 wrote:Those that are businesses should play by the same rules. Unfortunately, at least for your revengeful motives, not all churches are businesses but are very legitimately charities and should be treated as such.

  Is Exxon Mobile a charity? Can we call dividends "donations" and profits "surplus" or can we just stop playing games and tax churches like every other profit making scheme out there?
• sleeper

  

  jmog;1585719 wrote:You do know that many churches would support same libertarian right? Most church people I know are fed up with both parties and want the government out of their lives completely, sounds libertarian to me.
  
  Guess you'll have to find another party then huh sleeper?
  
  You would HATE to admit that politically you are actually very close to religious "idiots" huh?
  
  Most Christians I know would vote libertarian if they really had a shot, instead go republican as the lesser of 2 evils.

  You've only had sex with one woman. : thumbup:
• wkfan

  sleeper;1585726 wrote:Is Exxon Mobile a charity? Can we call dividends "donations" and profits "surplus" or can we just stop playing games and tax churches like every other profit making scheme out there?

  When you can't back up your point, you just re-state it?
  
  I see your game.
• jmog

  dlazz;1585722 wrote:Like Westboro Baptist?

  Nice straw man fallacy...any others you want to throw out there? Of course that could fall under anecdotal fallacy, sharpshooter fallacy, composition/division fallacy, etc.
  
  Idea is your argument is wrong asserting 1 bad apple means they all are.