Should the US Catholic Church be stripped of its tax-exempt status?

Guinan said:

What are your thoughts on this story?

Do you think these bishops are politically weaponizing the Eucharist?

Article excerpt: California Democrat suggests Catholic church should be stripped of tax-exempt status if it denies Biden communion:

A Democratic congressman from California has said that the Catholic church should have their tax-free status revoked if they decide President Joe Biden should not be able to take Communion.

The comment from Rep Jared Huffman comes after a recent US Conference of Catholic Bishops vote on 18 June to begin the process to deny Mr. Biden the ability to take Communion. 73% of US bishops voted for the motion, which was to share a full description of the sacrament of the Eucharist.

Mr. Huffman wrote on Twitter,
“If they’re going to politically weaponize religion by ‘rebuking’ Democrats who support women’s reproductive choice, then a ‘rebuke’ of their tax-exempt status may be in order.”

<<<end of excerpt>>>

For the record, the Vatican warned these US Bishops about denying Biden communion.

According to this Pew Research Poll, 67% of US Catholics think that Biden's abortion views should not disqualify him from communion. So, what are your thoughts on this issue? Please be civil.

Click to expand...

The Catholic Church, along with other Churches should retain the right to determine what religious facilities it will extend to its members.

On a separate note, I believe churches should be treated with complete equality compared to other businesses within society.

This means being subject to all normal taxes and charges imposed on other businesses. It also includes defining all workers within the Church, receiving a fee for service, as bona fide employees who are subject to the same anti-discrimination rules and employment laws and conditions which apply to paid workers in other organisations. This includes priests, pastors and Church hierarchy.

"Laws and conditions" include those outlawing religious discrimination in employment unless it can be shown that membership in a particular faith is an essential qualification for the job.

OB

I have an issue with what the Catholics are doing, because I don't like how blatantly partisan it is. That being said, it is a matter of internal discipline and as such I feel that it is not something that the government should be concerned about.

Churches are totally allowed to take positions on issues that are part of the public square of debate, including issues that are politicized without violating the conditions of being tax exempt. However, according the IRS publications:

they must not devote a substantial part of their activities to attempting to influence legislation;
they must not participate in, or intervene in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office

Click to expand...

.

Denying communion to a politician who goes against one of their beliefs does not fit either of those. The legislator is certainly trying to make a political point but he is wrong in the lever he is suggesting using.

Former President Trump was trying to eliminate the Johnson rule altogether.

I believe churches should proclaim their beliefs without commenting on candidates.

I believe no American politicians are pro-abortion. Some prefer to prevent unplanned pregnancies. Some prefer to address the social and economic challenges in raising children. Some prefer to pass punitive laws and restrict access.

Three groups who would like to minimize abortions. Three different ways they approach it.

Everyone wants a solution.

There is a similar situation in crime prevention. Some want to build more jails. Others want to stress restorative justice and rehabilitation.

No one us pro-crime.

durangodawood said:

The donor intent problem can easily be solved by just announcing up front which charities would get operational surpluses. Then expectations are clear.
...

Click to expand...

Before I retired was CEO of a faith-based NFP. My operating budget came from 85% fees for services and 15% philanthropy. It's obvious that without donors my NFP couldn't survive, much less meet it's mission. My donors were largely members of the denomination who supported (a) mental health issues, (b) particularly for children, (c) provided by their denomination, (d) in the name of Jesus. I think your idea is good in theorey, but in practicality those folks simply weren't going to give if I passed a surplus on to another cause that wasn't associated with their church and wasn't associated with their passion.

As for passing on an annual surplus if I was lucky in any year to achieve one, how did I know I wasn't going to need it the next year if I couldn't raise the money necessary to cover my budget in an upcoming year?

I always found it interesting that my agency got soliciation requests from other NFP's ... sponsor our fundraising banquet, support our walk to stamp our this or that, etc. Most often I didn't have the money to give, but if I did it was because of donors who wanted it applied to what we were doing. I never gave my agency's resources to help other NFP's for that reason -- donor intent.

seeking.IAM said:

Before I retired was CEO of a faith-based NFP. My operating budget came from 85% fees for services and 15% philanthropy. It's obvious that without donors my NFP couldn't survive, much less meet it's mission. My donors were largely members of the denomination who supported (a) mental health issues, (b) particularly for children, (c) provided by their denomination, (d) in the name of Jesus. I think your idea is good in theorey, but in practicality those folks simply weren't going to give if I passed a surplus on to another cause that wasn't associated with their church and wasn't associated with their passion.

As for passing on an annual surplus if I was lucky in any year to achieve one, how did I know I wasn't going to need it the next year if I couldn't raise the money necessary to cover my budget in an upcoming year?

I always found it interesting that my agency got soliciation requests from other NFP's ... sponsor our fundraising banquet, support our walk to stamp our this or that, etc. Most often I didn't have the money to give, but if I did it was because of donors who wanted it applied to what we were doing. I never gave my agency's resources to help other NFP's for that reason -- donor intent.

Click to expand...

Interesting. Im not sure where the line gets drawn between a faith based NFP and a proper church. I would think your organization would be the beneficiary of church surplus distribution. But I'm talking about things I dont really know much about here.

Guinan said:

What are your thoughts on this story?

Do you think these bishops are politically weaponizing the Eucharist?

Article excerpt: California Democrat suggests Catholic church should be stripped of tax-exempt status if it denies Biden communion:

A Democratic congressman from California has said that the Catholic church should have their tax-free status revoked if they decide President Joe Biden should not be able to take Communion.

The comment from Rep Jared Huffman comes after a recent US Conference of Catholic Bishops vote on 18 June to begin the process to deny Mr. Biden the ability to take Communion. 73% of US bishops voted for the motion, which was to share a full description of the sacrament of the Eucharist.

Mr. Huffman wrote on Twitter,
“If they’re going to politically weaponize religion by ‘rebuking’ Democrats who support women’s reproductive choice, then a ‘rebuke’ of their tax-exempt status may be in order.”

<<<end of excerpt>>>

For the record, the Vatican warned these US Bishops about denying Biden communion.

According to this Pew Research Poll, 67% of US Catholics think that Biden's abortion views should not disqualify him from communion. So, what are your thoughts on this issue? Please be civil.

Click to expand...

I'd hate to see it happen, but since they seem more interested in secular politics than the true meaning of the Eucharist, they've got it coming.

In NH, the state once threatened to get rid of the tax-exempt status of the Roman Catholic Church, since so much property didn't pay property taxes, the primary source of income in NH.

The Church had a straightforward response. They said that the day the law was put in effect, all Catholic schools and social programs would close, since they could no longer afford to run them. Since the MAJORITY of money spent on social programs in NH was Church money, the state quickly reversed its position.

mark46 said:

In NH, the state once threatened to get rid of the tax-exempt status of the Roman Catholic Church, since so much property didn't pay property taxes, the primary source of income in NH.

The Church had a straightforward response. They said that the day the law was put in effect, all Catholic schools and social programs would close, since they could no longer afford to run them. Since the MAJORITY of money spent on social programs in NH was Church money, the state quickly reversed its position.

Click to expand...

Nothing like a little extortion... Bernie Sanders once said that "too big to fail" means too big to exist. The Church is no exception.

TLK Valentine said:

Nothing like a little extortion... Bernie Sanders once said that "too big to fail" means too big to exist. The Church is no exception.

Click to expand...

Many legislators wanted to end tax free status for the Church. Yes, the Church helped them understand the consequences. The state was fine with the Church providing more social services than the state. They just want the Church to pay for the privilege.

As my favorite coaches have said over the years "it is what it is". The federal government is in a similar situation. Anyone can campaign on that issue if they wish. The are districts where they might win on this issue. Of course, their influence in either party would be virtually nil.

durangodawood said:

Why are churches making a net profit anyway?

Seems like their gross receipts should match gross outlays, and if there's a surplus, give it away.

Click to expand...

Churches are not making a profit, churches are classified as non-profits.

Valletta said:

Churches are not making a profit, churches are classified as non-profits.

Click to expand...

Wow.

durangodawood said:

The donor intent problem can easily be solved by just announcing up front which charities would get operational surpluses. Then expectations are clear.

My main concern is that for all the individual vows of poverty, the institution has a long long history of ostentatious displays of wealth and power. Its made for some pretty things for tourists to look at. But I cant help notice that the institution seems exceeding self-serving, which was only reinforced by the scandalous covering up of abusive clergy.

Click to expand...

Very few Catholics take a vow of poverty. However, many poor Catholics donated to have churches for a house for God. Our cathedral is most impressive, the bishop wanted everyone to donate, even the smallest of amounts. He waited until there was enough money in order to pay the contractors for each phase of construction over the decades. The idea of creating beautiful insides to the churches began in the 300s, after Catholics were allowed to practice Catholicism freely it took maybe ten of fifteen years of thought before such churches began to be built. The idea is to also engage as many of the senses as possible, particularly at the mass. I think if Catholics wish to donate money to create a beautiful house for God where they can come to worship rather than fix their own leaky roof or broken door they should be allowed to contribute. As to individual priests involved in covering up sexual scandal, the vast majority of Catholics were horrified. In a poll the majority of Catholics, even though they had no idea the scandal was going on, thought that part of their donations should go to abuse victims. Because of this situation it has been a struggle to maintain Catholic churches and schools.

mark46 said:

Many legislators wanted to end tax free status for the Church. Yes, the Church helped them understand the consequences. The state was fine with the Church providing more social services than the state. They just want the Church to pay for the privilege.

Click to expand...

In the case of Communion, they want the church to pay for the privilege of influencing political policy.

As I said before, as they prefer politics to the Eucharist, they should be treated like any other political group.

TLK Valentine said:

Nothing like a little extortion... Bernie Sanders once said that "too big to fail" means too big to exist. The Church is no exception.

Click to expand...

It was a good reminder for Sanders that Catholics pay twice, paying taxes for schools yet typically receiving none of that back to educate their own children. You have to be a realist, Little Sisters of the Poor refuses to ask the religion of those at their soup kitchens, and rather than betray Jesus and what he stands for they will shut down rather than accept Obamacare rules. It just means the government will take over such programs and they do a much worse job at helping the poor.

TLK Valentine said:

In the case of Communion, they want the church to pay for the privilege of influencing political policy.

As I said before, as they prefer politics to the Eucharist, they should be treated like any other political group.

Click to expand...

The major media is a political group, the major networks should be required to register as political lobbyists.
Biden should not be made an exception to Catholic teaching because he is so powerful.

Churches are prohibited from supporting political candidates. Freedom of religion in the US is pretty strong. It would have to be a pretty direct violation. I don't think the proposed discipline against Biden is enough.

TLK Valentine said:

In the case of Communion, they want the church to pay for the privilege of influencing political policy.

As I said before, as they prefer politics to the Eucharist, they should be treated like any other political group.

Click to expand...

Ok, how many are OK with

no charitable deductions for religious groups
all church pay property taxes
all churches are corporations if incorporated; if not, the pastor is the income entity for tax purposes

As an aside, do you really think that if the Catholic Church filed as a corporation, that they would pay any federal or state income taxes? The real issue is property taxes, which as I have said is a tradeoff that would be replaced by the cities paying the Church for services rendered.
========
THE BOTTOM LINE OF COURSE
is that many of the far left just aren't comfortable with the various governments giving special treatments to religious groups, as if the Constitution prevents such preferences.

Valletta said:

The major media is a political group, the major networks should be required to register as political lobbyists.

Click to expand...

They already pay taxes.

Biden should not be made an exception to Catholic teaching because he is so powerful.

Click to expand...

Neither should the Bishops -- they're the ones who have forgotten their place.