General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Yearly Cost of Religious Tax Exemptions: $71,000,000,000
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2012/06/16/the-yearly-cost-of-religious-tax-exemptions-71000000000/The Yearly Cost of Religious Tax Exemptions: $71,000,000,000
We know churches get tax exemptions, but how much money does that actually come out to?
University of Tampa professor Ryan T. Cragun along with students Stephanie Yeager and Desmond Vega ran some calculations and figured out a number:
While some people may be bothered by the fact that there are pastors who live in multimillion dollar homes, this is old news to most. But here is what should bother you about these expensive homes: You are helping to pay for them! You pay for them indirectly, the same way local, state, and federal governments in the United States subsidize religion — to the tune of about $71 billion every year.
So… chump change.
Their article (with a defense of how they calculated the amount) appears in the June/July 2012 issue of Free Inquiry.
“The issue of religious tax preferment is especially relevant now because the number of Americans living outside any religious tradition continues to grow,” said Tom Flynn, Free Inquiry’s editor. “That underscores the unfairness of taxing all Americans to subsidize religious institutions that only some Americans utilize.”
more
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
xchrom
(108,903 posts)porphyrian
(18,530 posts)
RainDog
(28,784 posts)
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)Make churches pay taxes. If a church can't pay its taxes, then it will have to close. That will be "God's will" and the market's decision.
Around here, a new wacko "church" opens about every week. If they had to pay taxes, they'd think twice.
They'd also have less money to spend on getting involved in politics.
Generic Other
(29,078 posts)Like the Catholic church can't afford to pay their share of taxes.
Like the Phelps' family of Westboro Baptist deserve to pay nothing in taxes.
Like Rev. Moon and the enslaved Moonies should have been allowed to exploit armies of worshippers and pay nothing in taxes.
Like the Mormons deserve to suck up other Americans' tax monies to provide social services for quiverful families while paying no taxes themselves.
Sorry, but leeches are leeches.
txdemsftw
(461 posts)
WhaTHellsgoingonhere
(5,252 posts)sharkman25
(143 posts)The church I attend regulary helps a lot of people and if the money we recieved were taxed would have significantly less financial resources to serve the poor and needy. This is true of other church's and organizations as well. We've helped people with gas, food, electrical bills, moving expenses, etc. Some of these people are already on govt. assistance so we're helping them with the difference in their need. Do you want us to have less to operate with?
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)If the money I receive *weren't* taxed, I would have more financial resources to serve the poor and needy. Do you want me to have less to operate with?
Do you want the government to have less to opertae with? The help the poor pretty significantly.
Last edited Thu Oct 25, 2012, 09:52 PM - Edit history (1)
Your post reeks of incoherence.
D23MIURG23
(3,138 posts)Its a coherent position that churches who don't necessarily need to help the poor in order to be tax exempt do less good than the government, which has programs specifically enacted to help the poor. Its a reasonable to use that position to argue that the tax money from religious organizations would be put to better use operating medicade.
By contrast it doesn't follow that because some churches view themselves as part time charities, all of their activities should be tax exempt. The teaching and spread of religion are not necessarily a helpful practice, and profit made in the practice of religion is not different from profit made in other capacities. Religions in the US are given a special privilege which they haven't earned or justified, and IMO it should be revoked.
D23MIURG23
(3,138 posts)If your church is not a non-profit, then yes I do want you to have less to operate with, because I think those good deeds you are talking about are more of an afterthought than the actual mission of your church. If your church isn't non-profit then its mission is to make money for someone, and by that I don't mean the downtrodden.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)This just makes me sick. 
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)by the churches." - Frank Zappa
Initech
(107,957 posts)
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
Taxing churches would potentially violate the clause "...or prohibitimg the free exercise thereof" part of the amendment and would most likely not survive a constitutional challenge (especially in the SCOTUS we have now).
The founding fathers put that language in there for a reason: The power to tax is the power to destroy and they did not want the government to have that power. They were wise men.
By the same logic, the $71,000,000,000 is not a cost to the government. You can only make that statement if the government had a legitimate claim to that revenue. Absent the power to tax it, there is no claim to the money and no basis for calling it a cost to the government.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Last edited Thu Oct 25, 2012, 12:00 PM - Edit history (1)
Any law of general application that was not passed for the purpose of disadvantaging religion does not constitute an unconstitutional infringement of free exercise.
(Antonin Scalia, in the landmark ruling that drug laws trump the fact that some native American religions use peyote or mescaline.)
Saying that priests cannot drive drunk on communion wine is not an infringement of free exercise, it is a law against drunk driving that applies to everyone and was not designed to hassle Catholics in particular.
If owners of property generally pay taxes on their property then taxation of church property has no 1st Amendment implications.
If owners of property generally pay taxes on their property but churches are exempt from that tax, however, it is a facial violation of the 1st Amendment establishment clause.
American non-taxation of churches was not part of our constitutional system, it was a continuation of medieval European practice. (If it arose from the 1st Amendment then it would have been peculiar to America in 1800, but the opposite was true.)
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Tax exemption is a privilege, not a constitutional right. Not one thing in the Constitution prohibits the taxation of churches.
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)had no idea the churches would have the kind of influence they do. Yes they put that language in for a reason, they also created the document to be living, breathing and changeable.
Do you think the Founding Fathers ever heard of a "Mega Church"? Did they envision churches affiliating themselves with political parties? The whole point was to keep religion and politics separate. Now that there is very little separation and churches are endorsing candidates and policies I think it's time to revisit the tax laws.
txdemsftw
(461 posts)WHY do they get to build these Mega churches that look more like stadiums, college campuses, and 5-star hotels and get off tax free??? WHY do they get away with this crap?
Here in my neck of the woods, we have these stupid mega churches on every other damn street corner, and it is really sickening. The amount of money PROFITED off these compounds is nothing short of ridiculous!
Initech
(107,957 posts)The cost - $23 million.
And the church said they were planning an additional $20 million in improvements!!!
I'm thinking how does a church have this much money and why aren't they being taxed on it? 
Initech
(107,957 posts)Their heads would probably explode at the thought of not only religious institutions getting tax exempt status - but with that much money at stake...
And then you add those preachers who are intentionally trying to provoke the IRS - this is making a bad situation even worse.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)
yellowsubmarine
(3 posts)Churches have always had the kind of influence they do now. They have affiliated themselves with political parties for as long as political parties have existed. Separation of church and state has always been a struggle.
What IS different is that churches used to fully fund and operate many hospitals, homeless shelters, orphanages, etc. In small communities, they were often the only place to turn in times of hardship. Sure, they should get tax exemption for those things. They shouldn't get tax breaks for proselytizing, indoctrinating and overseas conversion "missions."
Selatius
(20,441 posts)Yet, here they are. A lot of things have changed in over two centuries.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)I shouldn't be taxed because it impinges on my right to the pursuit of happiness.
And no, the $71B is not a "cost" to government, I agree...rather, it is lost revenue
Autumn
(48,866 posts)It's time.
fifthoffive
(382 posts)Why should my neighbor should get a tax break for donating to his church? He donates to his church, the church gets a new recreation center, just for its members. He donates to the church and the choir gets a new sound system. He donates to the church, and the sanctuary gets air conditioning.
Why should any of those things be tax-exempt?
If a church collects donations that go directly to helping people in the community who are in need, that may be reasonably tax-exempt, but to make all donations to churches tax-exempt does not make sense.
StarryNite
(12,016 posts)Take those exemptions away! Seriously, that is crap!
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)However, I believe churches are exempt from taxes because they are non-profit organizations (yeah, right!), not because they are religious institutions per se. How do we separate them from, for example, a cancer charity or environmental organization?
libtodeath
(2,892 posts)so despite believing in fairy tales they should help pay for those services.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)You get that right? I mean do you see past your prejudices to figure out the consequences of what you're saying?
rug
(82,333 posts)Or 3,000 predator drones.
kentauros
(29,414 posts)
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)Lol.
sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)SmileyRose
(4,854 posts)I've said all along make them pay the same taxes as individuals and let them deduct charitable expenditures. And the for profit businesses some churches own they should follow the whatever rules corporations follow.