And I find it hard to see how taxing churches is appropriate given the constitution and current federal law.
Under federal law, churches get tax exemptions under 501(c) rules:
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=96099,00.html
This is an important constitutional issue - government can't disadvantage churches compared to other charitable/public purpose nonprofit organizations, nor can it advantage churches.
Churches and other religious/charitable organizations are exempt from taxation if they are deemed to have an exempt purpose, which is not restricted to churches:
The exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3) are charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or international amateur sports competition, and preventing cruelty to children or animals. The term charitable is used in its generally accepted legal sense and includes relief of the poor, the distressed, or the underprivileged; advancement of religion; advancement of education or science; erecting or maintaining public buildings, monuments, or works; lessening the burdens of government; lessening neighborhood tensions; eliminating prejudice and discrimination; defending human and civil rights secured by law; and combating community deterioration and juvenile delinquency.
Any organization has a right, without penalty, to appeal to the government for a redress of grievances. That right cannot be financially penalized under law because of that knotty difficulty known as the First Amendment:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
First Amendment rights are both individual and corporate (adhere when people act in a group). Congress could not pass a law saying a Catholic was debarred from petitioning his/her legislative representatives, or do the same thing to the Catholic Church. Nor could it do the same to one of the kazillion Harvard Foundations, etc.
If Congress passes a minimum wage law and fails to realize that this will cause a number of handicapped persons working under special legal provisions to lose their jobs, the organizations employing them have every right to appeal to Congress to reconsider (this is a real example). These organizations also have the right to appeal to the public on the issue and to all those using their facilities.
Anyway, here is a summary from the first link above to Findlaw about the case history on religious exemptions:
Tax Exemptions of Religious Property .--Every State and the District of Columbia provide for tax exemptions for religious institutions, and the history of such exemptions goes back to the time of our establishment as a polity. The only expression by a Supreme Court Justice prior to 1970 was by Justice Brennan, who deemed tax exemptions constitutional because the benefit conferred was incidental to the religious character of the institutions concerned. 131 Then, in 1970, a nearly unanimous Court sustained a state exemption from real or personal property taxation of ''property used exclusively for religious, educational or charitable purposes'' owned by a corporation or association which was conducted exclusively for one or more of these purposes and did not operate for profit. 132 The first prong of a two-prong argument saw the Court adopting Justice Brennan's rationale. Using the secular purpose and effect test, Chief Justice Burger noted that the purpose of the exemption was not to single out churches for special favor; instead, the exemption applied to a broad category of associations having many common features and all dedicated to social betterment. Thus, churches as well as museums, hospitals, libraries, charitable organizations, professional associations, and the like, all non-profit, and all having a beneficial and stabilizing influence in community life, were to be encouraged by being treated specially in the tax laws. The primary effect of the exemptions was not to aid religion; the primary effect was secular and any assistance to religion was merely incidental. 133
For the second prong, the Court created a new test, the entanglement test, 134 by which to judge the program. There was some entanglement whether there were exemptions or not, Chief Justice Burger continued, but with exemptions there was minimal involvement. But termination of exemptions would deeply involve government in the internal affairs of religious bodies, because evaluation of religious properties for tax purposes would be required and there would be tax liens and foreclosures and litigation concerning such matters. 135
= new reply since forum marked as read
