Wisconsin Supreme Court: Religious Charities Are Not Tax Exempt

[SKKY]

Source: Crooks and Liars

On Thursday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court issued a ruling that the religious motivation of a group does not exempt it from paying into unemployment insurance:
In a 4-3 opinion issued Thursday, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that a Wisconsin Catholic Charities organization and four nonprofits affiliated
with the agency can’t bow out of the Wisconsin unemployment insurance system on religious grounds.
The 50-page opinion rejects the argument made by Catholic Charities Bureau Inc. (CCB) for the Superior Diocese of the Catholic Church that the charity
and its subsidiary nonprofits provide social services as a fundamentally religious act.
That would make their employees exempt from coverage under the Wisconsin unemployment compensation law, CCB asserted.
“An objective examination of the actual activities of CCB and the sub-entities reveals that their activities are secular in nature,” wrote Justice Ann Walsh
Bradley for the four-member majority, all from the Court’s liberal wing. That evaluation, she added, results from “a neutral and secular inquiry based on
objective criteria.”
In other words, they might say that they were inspired to provide social services from their religious beliefs, but the services they are actually providing is strictly secular.

Read more: https://crooksandliars.com/2024/03/wisconsin-supreme-court-religious

[SunSeeker]

1. Good.

[SKKY]

2. Right?! Could this be the start of a trend???

[SunSeeker]

3. Hope so. nt

[jimfields33]

8. All nonprofits have to pay unemployment insurance

They are just ensuring all do. They are exempt from federal and state taxes.

[euphorb]

4. Misleading Headline

The charities are still exempt from federal and state income taxes, just like all nonprofits. All this ruling says is that they are not exempt from state unemployment taxes--which is already true in most states.

[cstanleytech]

5. The 3 dissents are wrong as nothing in the Constitution grants tax exceptions to any religious organizations at all.

[GregariousGroundhog]

6. Technically two of the dissents

Justice Hagedorn rejected the constitutional claims made by the other two. His argument is that the legislature has historically given wide latitude around religious exemption and so the definition of "religious purposes" shouldn't be interpreted as narrowly as the majority did.

[JoseBalow]

7. "unemployment insurance"

[republianmushroom]

9. Sounds like the Wisconsin Supreme Court has got it right.

[Grins]

10. Key words: "... all from the Court's liberal wing."

Every Republican justice was on the side of the church over state.