Would that go against separation of church and state? It would tax not only properties but school buildings and places that feed the poor.
Should churches be taxed?
- Thread starter mathinspiration
- Start date
- Jul 21, 2016
- 4,636
- 2,875
- 72
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Melkite Catholic
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
Any property a church has that is not directly used for spiritual, educational, or charitable activities is taxed.
I know of a large Baptist church in a southern city that was willed a hotel. Until it was sold, the church had to pay real estate taxes on it.
Upvote
0
98cwitr
Lord forgive me
- Apr 20, 2006
- 20,020
- 3,473
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Constitution
Give to Caesar what is Caesar's? I think some megachurches are going to get their 503c's revoked here sooner or later. The notion of "separation of church and state" is truly derived from the idea that the state cannot and should not tell others what church they must attend, what they must believe, or how to worship God. Beyond that (ie: paying taxes), I think can go either way. Churches need to get back into the charity business; hard and fast. Otherwise, we're not doing our first duty of caring for the poor, widows, and orphans.
Upvote
0
Money that is given to a church shouldn't be taxed because it basically means the donor is being taxed twice...when they earn the money and when they give it away (the amount they are wanting to give isn't all going to where they want it to go. If the church is running a business and providing a service or product for pay, then it should be taxed at a non-profit level because the money earned should be used to expand the services of the church. That's my opinion.
Upvote
0
jayem
Naturalist
- Jun 24, 2003
- 15,271
- 6,959
- 72
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Married
I'm OK with churches not being taxed. But they should at least pay a "user" fee to their municipalities for fire/police/EMS services that they may utilize, but don't pay for through property taxes. And this should apply to all non-profits, including non-religious hospitals/colleges/charities/etc. that are exempt from local taxes.
Upvote
0
- Apr 30, 2013
- 30,633
- 18,533
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- United Ch. of Christ
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Upvote
0
zephcom
Well-Known Member
- Jul 9, 2017
- 2,396
- 1,650
- 76
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Married
I think churches should be taxed.
They benefit from all the things taxes provide for everyone else. They should pay their own fair share of keeping things working.
However, if it helps, I don't think that of just churches. I think everyone should pay their fair share of keeping things up around here. And that includes wealthy people, corporations and non-profits. I get tired of carrying the load for all three of those groups.
Upvote
0
Taxed on what? What people donate to them? The government taxes on products and services that people are paid for. We don't pay to go to church...what we give has already been taxed when WE earned it.
If a church makes or sells a product, then that might deserved to be taxed ... but again, it would have to be made and sold by paid employees and not by volunteers...
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
zephcom
Well-Known Member
- Jul 9, 2017
- 2,396
- 1,650
- 76
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Married
Yeah, they should be taxed on what people donate to them, what they own, and what they sell. Value isn't based on whether one's possessions are purchased or gifted. Value is based on what they are worth on the open market.
Upvote
0
Why should donations be taxed? They are taxed when the donator earns them. He shouldn't be double taxed because he/she gave them to the church. (If they are taxed at donation then the value of the gift gets reduces which does harm the person doing the donation).
And value is not always based on the value in the open market...most property has a cap on how much taxes can be increased each year which may or may not be the actual value of the property. Personally, taxing someone on what they were taxed on when they bought it doesn't sound very fair either.
Upvote
0
zephcom
Well-Known Member
- Jul 9, 2017
- 2,396
- 1,650
- 76
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Married
First of all, I would say that if one is giving to their church just for taxation benefits, they are doing it for all the wrong reasons.
But taxes are not based on whether something (be it money or product) has been taxed already or not. Taxes are based on transfers of ownership. For instance, your employer pays taxes on the money he earns by selling product or services. He uses the money -he- paid taxes on to pay you for the work you do for him. And YOU pay taxes on the money you get from him that he paid taxes on.
That is the way taxes work. Government would go broke (broker?) if money and products were only taxed once.
When a transfer of ownership of money or product occurs, it -should- always trigger a new round of taxation. Sadly, government sometimes think that certain situations (ie. wealthy people, religious institutions and charitable groups) warrants a forgiveness of taxation.
I disagree with that stance. Those classes use the services provided by government and should pay their share of the cost for those services. Taxes should include everyone instead of just the working poor and middle class.
Upvote
0
yeshuaslavejeff
simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Did Jesus pay the tax for Himself and for Peter ? (yes)
He is our example, right ? (for some, not for all)
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
It would require some major constitutional changes, so it's unlikely to happen.
I would be OK with it if those constitutional changes included a few other things as well.
I would be OK with it if those constitutional changes included a few other things as well.
Upvote
0
zephcom
Well-Known Member
- Jul 9, 2017
- 2,396
- 1,650
- 76
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Married
<frown> Which part of the Constitution prohibits taxing churches? The Constitution prohibits the government from establishing a 'state church' but as long as the government taxes all religions equally (and it SHOULD) there is no violation of the Constitution.
Upvote
0
Daniel C
Well-Known Member
- Nov 22, 2018
- 1,147
- 426
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Single
"Taxes are based on transfers of ownership" umm, no actually tax is based off of business transactions of sales or services.
Unconditional transfer from one party to another is not a business transaction, it's charity. A non-profit gift is not a business transaction,it does not make a profit. If it does not make a profit, how can it be taxed. The tax was paid prior.
Your statement about government going broke is telling. It's not about what is fair, it's about keeping the regime alive.
So what if the government collapses, a new one will rise up. No excuse for extorting the church.
Upvote
0
zephcom
Well-Known Member
- Jul 9, 2017
- 2,396
- 1,650
- 76
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- Married
If taxes are based only on 'business transactions' why do I pay a property tax every year on my house? A transfer of something to another person/organization -is- the same thing even if the 'cost' is zero. Moving the cost to more than zero doesn't change what the transaction is.
And any 'new' government which crops up will still have the requirement to provide services and those services will need to be paid for. Taxation never goes away just by changing government. So charging me with wanting to preserve a 'regime' is baseless.
And requiring a church to pay their share of government is NOT extortion. Churches are protected and served by government just like the rest of us. Paying their share for those services rises only to the level of 'fair'.
It is the churches who think they are so special they should not have to pay for the services government provides for them.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
It's considered an infringement of the "free exercise" clause.
There is a lot of history behind why the first amendment was written the way it was. Most people think in terms of the abuses of the extreme Roman Catholic popes (church against the state), but there were also events such as Henry VIII seizing church property (state against the church).
Another thing people don't realize is that by the time of the American Revolution, the English Constitution already had the most liberal religious freedom laws in the world. Many of the FFs thought that was good enough, and didn't see a need for an amendment about religious freedom. So, it was largely a political move to aid ratification, and not given as much thought as it should have. The way the first amendment has played out has largely made churches a ward of the state.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
