It it time to charge the churches?

[thør]

Is it time to charge the churches?

The Nome City Council is moving forward with a plan to end tax exemptions for churches, making it the first American town to tax the church.

Is this a good thing?

A bad thing?

 

[HellBenttoo]

Long overdue.

 

[Jennifer]

It certainly couldn't hurt.

 

[neci]

I think it's a good thing. I'm all for taxing churches.

 

[chillywilly2]

Its a good thing, and at higher rates

 

[unregistered]

 

[Que]

Sure!

Take money that has already been taxed...have people give it up for charitable purposes, tax it, yet again, then give it away for charitable purposes to causes that those that originally donated it for charitable purposes disapprove of. Sounds like democracy at it's finest.

I feel the same about this as I do about taxing just cigarettes. Why do non-smokers get to vote to tax smokers? Why do non-church-goers get to tax church-goers.

You want to remove the deductibility of charitable contributions? Fine. But why is it that income earned by conservatives is taxed twice since we know we are not talking about liberal charitable dollars here. Liberal charitable dollars come from taxing others.

Why not tax all charities? Lets tax Bloomberg's "mayors against guns"

In phoenix goods that have already had sales tax levied, are donated to a charitable thrift are taxed again at the same rate when re-purchased.

In Tucson if the charity runs it there is no sales tax.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

All for it.

 

[chillywilly2]

Churches are not charities.

People pay to go there and listen to whatever crap they want.
The person spouting the crap is paid by the church members, same as you pay a guy to shingle your roof, or a church roof.

If they actually give money to needy individuals then they can deduct that from their tax assesment same as I can

 

[HellBenttoo]

Sure!

Take money that has already been taxed...have people give it up for charitable purposes, tax it, yet again, then give it away for charitable purposes to causes that those that originally donated it for charitable purposes disapprove of. Sounds like democracy at it's finest.

I feel the same about this as I do about taxing just cigarettes. Why do non-smokers get to vote to tax smokers? Why do non-church-goers get to tax church-goers.

You want to remove the deductibility of charitable contributions? Fine. But why is it that income earned by conservatives is taxed twice since we know we are not talking about liberal charitable dollars here. Liberal charitable dollars come from taxing others.

Why not tax all charities? Lets tax Bloomberg's "mayors against guns"

In phoenix goods that have already had sales tax levied, are donated to a charitable thrift are taxed again at the same rate when re-purchased.

In Tucson if the charity runs it there is no sales tax.

Why would you assume those in favor of taxing churches are not church goers? Here in the so called "Bible Belt" charitable donations are being used to purchase property and build monuments to the egos of the preachers. Religion is a business. If the churches were actually charitable organizations I would support their tax exempt status. Sadly they are not.

 

[Stewart_Pidd]

tax churches and make them pay back taxes too bro!

Stew

 

[Adre]

Let's tax churches like we would tax any profitable social club.

 

[neci]

Sure!

Take money that has already been taxed...have people give it up for charitable purposes, tax it, yet again, then give it away for charitable purposes to causes that those that originally donated it for charitable purposes disapprove of. Sounds like democracy at it's finest.

I feel the same about this as I do about taxing just cigarettes. Why do non-smokers get to vote to tax smokers? Why do non-church-goers get to tax church-goers.

You want to remove the deductibility of charitable contributions? Fine. But why is it that income earned by conservatives is taxed twice since we know we are not talking about liberal charitable dollars here. Liberal charitable dollars come from taxing others.

Why not tax all charities? Lets tax Bloomberg's "mayors against guns"

In phoenix goods that have already had sales tax levied, are donated to a charitable thrift are taxed again at the same rate when re-purchased.

In Tucson if the charity runs it there is no sales tax.

read the article.

After much debate, the council agreed to move forward with a draft ordinance removing sales tax exemptions from nonprofits and churches.

 

[patient1]

That depends.
Tax donations? Never!
Free Soup Kitchen? No problem.
Are they in the daycare business?
Do they run a private school, for example?
Do they have a store?

In other words, is the church using it's tax-exempt status to operate profitable enterprises in competition with legitimate small businesses, or are they entirely spiritual and charitable in nature?

 

[RjThoughts]

tax church property and income not earmarked and proven for charity, especially those freaking super churches in the South!

 

[RjThoughts]

That depends.
Tax donations? Never!
Free Soup Kitchen? No problem.
Are they in the daycare business?
Do they run a private school, for example?
Do they have a store?

In other words, is the church using it's tax-exempt status to operate profitable enterprises in competition with legitimate small businesses, or are they entirely spiritual and charitable in nature?

These are never meant to be for profit and usually never are, at least, not the Catholic ones in NY state.

 

[doctor_insanus]

http://ct.politicomments.com/ol/pc/sw/i60/2/4/12/pc_48ffd1bbf9b943ddf0806a39fefeb48b.jpg

 

[RobDownSouth]

Sadly, it's needed nowadays.

For many decades, the tradeoff was churches enjoy a tax-exemption with the caveat that they do not engage in politics.

Well about a decade ago, many conservative churches started going "full Ishmael", i.e. convinced themselves that the rules don't apply to THEM, and they wanted their tax exemption AND the right to politic for wingnuts.

 

[unregistered]

 

[RobDownSouth]

These are never meant to be for profit and usually never are, at least, not the Catholic ones in NY state.

True, but they're working tirelessly to game the school voucher system to channel taxpayer dollars to religious "schools".

 

[IrezumiKiss]

http://ct.politicomments.com/ol/pc/sw/i60/2/4/12/pc_48ffd1bbf9b943ddf0806a39fefeb48b.jpg

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9wofiCO961qa6g1m.gif

 

[RobDownSouth]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof

Subjecting churches to taxation will violate the "free exercise" clause.

Subjecting churches to taxation will violate the separation of church and state, by demanding the church support the state.

Churches unable to pay escalating taxes could be shut down by the government. The SCOTUS in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) stated: "the power to tax involves the power to destroy."

Churches have been tax exempt for 200 years and have not established a theocracy in the United States.

Citizens already taxed on their individual incomes would be taxed again on the basis of an association they are guaranteed they can freely exercise under the Bill of Rights, A form of hypocritical double taxation.

The principle of equal protection would demand that all non-profits be subject to taxation, that kind of public pressure would no doubt diminish the good works of all.

The SCOTUS has ruled:

Chief Justice Warren E. Burger in his majority opinion in Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York (1970), "The grant of a tax exemption is not sponsorship, since the government does not transfer part of its revenue to churches, but simply abstains from demanding that the church support the state. No one has ever suggested that tax exemption has converted libraries, art galleries, or hospitals into arms of the state or put employees 'on the public payroll.' There is no genuine nexus between tax exemption and establishment of religion."

Chief Justice Warren E. Burger in Walz v. Tax Commission of the City of New York, decided May 4, 1970, stated: "The exemption creates only a minimal and remote involvement between church and state, and far less than taxation of churches. It restricts the fiscal relationship between church and state, and tends to complement and reinforce the desired separation insulating each from the other."

Taxes place the government above religion. No founder ever advocated that citizens and their personal faith be subordinate to government. Americans for two centuries have sworn allegiance to "God and country," not the other way around.

If EVERYONE is being taxed, there's NO "discrimination" because NO favoritism is being shown.

You certainly are one stupid son of a whore.

 

[Que]

Sadly, it's needed nowadays.

For many decades, the tradeoff was churches enjoy a tax-exemption with the caveat that they do not engage in politics.

Well about a decade ago, many conservative churches started going "full Ishmael", i.e. convinced themselves that the rules don't apply to THEM, and they wanted their tax exemption AND the right to politic for wingnuts.

Bullshit.

Churches have been swaying opinion from the pulpit since before this country was founded. You give ZERO fucks about about black churches "get out the vote" Hispanic churches "safe haven " activities..

Liberals are butt-hurt because few liberals give to churches so liberals have little influence there.

Lets tax UNION dues, then.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Stewart_Pidd]

Lets tax UNION dues, then.

that sounds like a good trade. taxing churches in exchange for taxing union dues bro!

Stew