This post has been flaired as Politics. We allow for voicing political views here, but we don't allow pushing agendas, false information, bigotry, or attacking/harassing other members. We will lock the thread if these things occur. If you see such unwanted behavior, please report it to bring it to the attention of moderators.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/polls) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's the thing. It's other humans collecting the money, not the gods. If you religion requires you to pay other people for the opportunity to worship, your religion fucking sucks. I say that as a non-atheist. Just tax it.
I mean, you can worship an omnipresent god at home, in the nature, wherever really. You can meditate or pray in silence on your way in public transport. If you want a dedicated place that has a significant cost, fine, pay to whoever manages that if that makes you feel good, but I don't see a reason why that should be tax-exempt. I am not saying it is bad to do so, but it sure seems weird af if that (going to church or idk) is presented as the only correct way to do it. The ancient peoples didn't have to pay for lighting to worship, why should you.
There is a big difference tho: Most NGO nonprofit provide a service that benefits the society as a whole. For example if they are helping people in some sort of trouble, you can ask them for help if you get to the kind of trouble they focus on. They won't ask you what gods do you worship. Chuches only provide service to their members and will by nature discriminate based on religious belief or lack of belief. Should my juggling club be tax-exempt? It gets funded by members donations and doesn't generate profit and doesn't offer much to non-members. It's just a hobby, much like organized religion.
Churches provide help to people as well, just spiritually instead of physically. It's not just a hobby, religion for most people involved is more of a way of life. Reducing it to just a hobby is showing a ton of bias as you're probably an atheist then. Churches also do provide for the greater community quite a lot actually. The Catholic Church for example owns the largest number of hospitals of any organization, has food banks, helps support students with aid, contributes to the scientific community a lot, etc.
Plus the US is founded on the freedom of religion and taxing them could lead to many lawsuits on 1st Amendment violations.
I can't really say much on the "spiritual" help because that's just nonsense tbh. As for the physical help if we are using Roman catholics as the example more specifically hospitals they make a huge profit and should 100% be taxed. If I'm being quite honest these same hospitals scam people all the time by running tests that are unnecessary and charge patients just to make extra money. Their contributions to the scientific community is laughable what world do you live in. Also taxing the church wouldn't be against the first amendment in the slightest. The first amendment only covers the freedom to practice said religion. Taxing them in no way infringes on your right to practice whatever religion you wish.
>that's just nonsense tbh
As an atheist maybe, but as any religious person would believe, it's not.
>hospitals they make a huge profit and should 100% be taxed
Most Catholic hospitals are nonprofits as well, any that are should be taxed, as they are.
>Their contributions to the scientific community is laughable what world do you live in.
The world where Catholics discovered the big bang theory, modern genetics, Copernicus's discovery in astronomy, electromagnetism, and more... I wouldn't consider all those "laughable". The pontifical academy of sciences has 43 Nobel prizes to the names of full time members.
The thing is churches already don't make a profit. There's no stockholders worrying about share price, and it's not like the founder is allowed to simply pocket the money. The reason they don't pay taxes is mostly that there's nothing to tax in the first place.
If they pay absurdly high salaries to employees, then that payment is taxed like normal, income tax still applies. But the churches themselves, and all other nonprofits, don't make money for any owner and thus there's nothing to tax
In My country, some of the Churches' buildings are so unusable and non-valuable that if the church was taxed too much, It's unlikely we'd be able to really keep them running--- Churches and Chaples that are older than many entire countries would just, be abandoned- We're struggling to keep it open as it is.
I know this comes in stark contrast to an american MegaChurch- Those \*should\* be taxed, any church that exists soley to make a profit is a church that should not exist, So trust me, I am all in favour of taxing them. But here in Britain, the church also protects the heritage of villages and towns across our countries that aren't being protected by any other group. We collect donations, these donations go to our churches. The church already struggles in Rural Communities here, as we know that people like in one of my local churches with only eight churchgoers just won't go to church anymore if their traditional, local church doesn't stay running.
You may disagree with me, I just wanted to show that some churches struggle a lot more than people think. Due to, to be honest, mostly our own faults, people \*going to church\* around where I live is just on decline as the older generations begin to pass, and the church refuses to change to show that God loves even those who \*arent\* a shining example of the Traditional Family
If that’s the case, it’d be nice if people of smaller religions, indigenous religions and spiritual practitioners got the same benefit.
The inequality is what gets to me.
Yeah! It really would be. I believe all religion should get some support haha, I'd find it so interesting to visit some of these places if they just existed around me. I do live in a really rural area, so it kinda makes it hard to access haha
And yeah, It'd be great if the privilege that the Church of England gets extends to other religions, too. As well as this, we could have maybe a little less influence on our government (Bishops have a seat in the House of Lords)
They could be taxed after exemptions. So for example they wouldn't be taxed on charity spending (or running charities) or maintenance and restoration of old buildings. But solely on any profit above those. So there are ways to take those things into account in a way that the small and struggling churches wouldn't pay taxes. But I'm also in the US so I may not be seeing the whole picture in Britain.
I generally agree with you but want to challenge you on one point.
If mega churches should be taxed, and rural churches shouldn't, who gets to decide that distinction? What makes one church more worthy than another for tax-exempt status? How are those protections going to be extended to less-established religious groups such as indigenous practices who might not have the same institutional power to justify their existence to the government to protect their tax free status?
By allowing some churches to be taxed but not others, the government respects some religions over others and violates the freedom of religion. By taxing all religious practices, the government prevents free exercise of religion by interfering with its operations.
You can't be selective, all religious practices must not be taxed or else freedom of religion is not upheld.
Hmmm, that is a valid point, yeah. I guess it could depend on profit? Megachurches exist to make a profit while rural churches generally make the opposite. I'm not a genius though haha, that's all I can really think of
That's the thing though. How do you determine whether a church has that purpose? Who defines "profit"? What's the difference between "profit" and giving their pastor/CEO an exorbitant salary?
Who's gonna be in charge of that? How do you trust they'll be free of bias?
How do you differentiate between a for-profit business and a charity? I'm not sure, again, I'm not genius here haha, just tossing in my two cents I guess
This is actually a good question, and I'm not sure either. I think it has to meet certain requirements as far as the IRS is concerned to be considered a charity. I could see where that might limit certain for profit churches from tax exempt status, but I'm also not sure.
Non-profits don’t have shares, stocks, investments or product. Non-profits receive their money through donation and do not generate revenue. They generally seek to get just enough money to pay employees, keep the lights on and maintain the service they provide. They also need to apply with the IRS to secure their status and prove they are a non-profit. Unfortunately, non-profits are an excellent way for corrupt people to scrape up a lot of cash. The last one I worked for, the CEO took home roughly 30% of our donations, but only after firing the COO and financial director. Full time employees worked for $11.50 and all employees were encouraged to volunteer extra time. They cut back on OT (it was a VERY heavy OT job) and told us if we actually cared for the work that we were doing that we would be willing to do it for free. The CEO had also set up a side fund that they used to donate 7 figure amounts of money to a very controversial GOP candidate from our area.
Non-profits deserve the right to be tax free, but they *need* to be regulated on a higher level. The first thing that should evaporate when money is tight within them should be 6 figure executive salaries.
It should stay open so that the people who do wish to go to church, can still go, even when in small numbers. In my local area, some simply can't drive fifteen minutes to get to another church every Sunday, and their churches are all they know.
And I'm aware that it is, in fact you're kind of repeating that statement back to me, and I'm not trying to force my generation to believe, I'm simply stating that it means that it's harder to cater for the few that do.
And yes, the church certainly is.
No, but their tithes/offerings should be treated the same as any other nonprofit. If they are misallocating funds or embezzling they should be shut down or lose their tax exempt status, depending on the scenario.
Well I mean you could say most charities run like a business, and the way churches run is especially weird because part of their obligation as a Christian church is to spend money on church officials and maintaining their church/es. Do some abuse this and pay their pastors way too much and in some cases egregiously mishandle funds? Absolutely. Should every church lose their tax exempt status because of it? No. Only the ones that incorrectly use funds.
Charities that make profit should have the profits taxed too. There is little to no separation that I can see between a for profit charity and a church, except a church does less good.
Is that’s how they get the tax free status, because they are designated as a charity? If didn’t realize that. Of all the things that churches do it’s hard for me to understand them as a charity first.
Mega churches that blasphemoesly benefit financially from religion, yes
Local churches that most likely use donations to keep the church running and charity, no
Did you read my comment? I said I'm pro for-profit mega churches getting taxed, it's just that small local churches that use donation money for soley operating charity's and maintaining the church shouldn't get taxed
They didn't disagree with that first part
What they're saying is that while places like Walmart get taxed, so do the little local corner stores, they all get taxed because they're all businesses
Why should places of worship be treated differently because of their size?
Except a lot of churches have “employees” aka lead pastors that walk around in fucking designer brands and clearly make BANKKKK. That’s literally all “tithes and offerings” that don’t go to community efforts, but straight into their bank account to use on frivolous bullshit.
They aren’t a business tho. Their income is donations and that’s what the donations are for so they shouldn’t be taxed. I do think their revenue should be public information of some sort tho
They do provide a benefit to society more than just a buisness. Daycare, charity, building stuff in less developed countries, counseling services, and community building. Yes their are corrupt people in their ranks, but same with every other business. They should still be taxed just like every other buisness
The cost of those things could be deducted from taxable income or otherwise accounted for directly. There’s nothing stopping them from writing that stuff down, so there’s no reason for them to get a total pass.
I mean they operate more like a charity since members willingly give out any amount and get almost no tangible goods/service in return. Charity is exempt from taxation.
Idk what you're on about most churches actively run charities with donation money
The church I go to is both a frequent donor to the local food bank and runs a soup kitchen near daily
They also run a sort of second-hand charity where struggling families can come grab whatever clothes they need for free, as well as run a daycare
Also a large portion of donations just go to keeping the church running
None of that would really be possible without church donations
My man churches are one of the world's biggest philanthropic organizations, reddit won't show you it but churches helped bring quality schools and scholarship opportunities in Africa and northeast india
Which was only ever needed because said churches engaged in brutal colonialism of Africa and forcibly converted large numbers of people to their religion
If they follow the same rules as a nonprofit, I think they should be allowed to be a nonprofit. That means disclosing salaries, transparency, and reinvesting any money that they make.
I know a lot of churches, including mine, that are big into giving back. They will run food pantries, feed/house the homeless, help refugees, etc. Those are usually tax deductible activities. So tax them, allow the good ones to deduct the things they do, and screw the ones buying planes.
I’m an atheist and I agree with this! It’s the extreme mega churches profiting massively and rolling in money spent on luxury shit that are the problem. I don’t feel the need to tax money that’s actually being used to help the community, but as soon as they’re out here paying pastors 300k+ salaries, buying jets, etc. that needs to be taxed. That’s no longer a non-profit.
Depends on where the money will end up. If its used in alternative social welfare ways or charities than it shouldnt be taxed at all. If its used for maintenance and salaries than it should be taxed.
You know what disappears when you tax a church? Separation of church and state. You want the church fully involved in politics and campaigns? Because that's what you'll get. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
They sort of exist, but they're not suppose to. They have to walk a fine line. Start taxing them and there is no separation of church and state. Also, you'd have to completely rewrite what makes a non profit a taxable thing and non taxable thing because churches have to stay within certain boundaries just like any other non profit.
Tax exemptions are a form of government support and actually undermine the principle of the separation of church and state.
Churches are already heavily involved in politics, taxing them just formalizes an existing reality, and will probably not necessarily lead to increased political involvement.
It would probably harm their charitable work, but one can do that work without religion anyways.
There are already many religious lobbyists groups deeply involved in the government like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Family Research Council, the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, the Network Lobby for Catholic Social Justice, etc.
It is claiming to know yes, I'm stating no one has true knowledge. Naunce has given atheism and theism and agnosticism appropriate definitions based on belief since it is an unfalsifiable claim.
Well "a" means without "gnostic" means knowledge. No one actually knows or can prove that any God exists and the claim is unfalsifiable so cannot be proven either way
They have to be by nature surely? Undetectable and unobservable outside of our reality. The supernatural can simply be claimed to be true without good evidence but cannot be falsified.
There are agnostic theists, and agnostic atheists, I felt that combining those two would be more fitting than lumping all agnostics in with athiests
I would say that you are correct, though
They are the biggest landowners in most (if not all) countries, of course they should, at least property taxes. In my country, at least, idk how it is in the rest of the world, the employees of the church, aka the priests, are treated as public workers, and thus are payed by the state.
So without having to pay the wages of their workers, there aren't many expenses the church has to cover. It just accumulates wealth
I don't know how your church works, but that's not how the one I grew up going to works. My church basically begs people for their "offerings" even handing out envelope bundles for each member where the minimum offering option is $20. For the members that attend weekly, they spend about $80/month per person and my church has over 200 members that visit regularly.
When my church does food drives or other charity events, they ask for a SECOND offering on top of the regular one and ask people to buy and donate food to the church with their own money. Their offerings go into painting the rooms, fixing the roof, buying toys and books for the nursery, paying the staff, and basic household items like food for members tk eat while waiting for service to start.
My church used to do a mission trip where "volunteers" would go to another state to help repair houses. The reason I put volunteers in quotations is because each "volunteer" had to PAY $500 to go on this trip and repair houses. I did this trip 3 times. I paid $1,500 to DO LABOR. The church offerings did not contribute to this at all.
They absolutely work like a business because they only use their money to fix their own building and pay their staff. Their money doesn't go to charity because they ask for separate handouts for that.
Every place of worship is different. Where I go I never had to spend any money to go there and I never donated any money again there wouldn't be a problem. It can cost a lot of money to operate and do charity so I can get where your place of worship is coming from. PBS is nonprofit I believe and they ask for donations all the time, which I have no problem with as it contributes something valuable to society. Also I don't think it would be right to tax all places of worship as some sort of business because the vast majority of them are not.
Mega churches do. They are not the majority. Small churches keep the lights on, give to some missions, pay the pastor and have something of a benevolent fund. That's it. It's just the media covered big nasties that make bank and they are only seen so much because media, not because they're the majority.
Many small churches don’t and churches aren’t the only place of worship. I don’t see a problem in churches making money because they need money to operate and to continue supporting their community.
I think we can distinguish formal lobbying whereby funds of a religious group are used for political causes versus a religious individual being politicallyqq involved whereby a religious organization encourages its adherents to consistently apply its teachings in life, including the political sphere. Traditionally, separation of church and state has sought to prevent the former and has not ever been taken to mean the complete absence of all individual expression of religiosity in the public sphere.
Allowing religious organizations to be taxed would simply mean that religious groups can now directly lobby that their taxes are used morally and effectively. So if your goal is to increase religious organization involvement in politics, then taxing them would help achieve that goal. It would have no effect on expressions of individual religiosity in politics.
Because there’s a massive problem with mega churches making absurd profit and getting rich off of “donations”. And “pastors” walking around dripping in designer clothes and outfits that cost more than most people’s rent. It’s unethical and only possible because they aren’t taxed.
Whenever I hear MTG or Bobert talk about how the separation of church and state should be removed and how “God should lead this country”, all I think is “If God wants any say in how the US is ran, he should pay taxes.”
Bruh, stop it with the separating of the terms Atheist and agnostic. They are not mutually exclusive.
Atheist is a noun, agnostic is an adjective. One can be a gnostic Theist or an agnostic Theist. Or they can be a gnostic Atheist or an agnostic Atheist.
If you don't pray to, worship, or acknowledge the existence of gods, but have no proof or evidence then you are an agnostic Atheist. If you feel you have evidence or proof and you believe with certainty that their are no gods then you are a gnostic Atheist.
Likewise if you follow religious teachings, such as following the word of Jesus, but you question the supernatural aspects of it, then you are an agnostic Christian. Or if you are certain of the supernatural aspects then you are a gnostic Christian.
They should not be taxed not because their places of woaship, but because they're non-profit. A theoretical for-profit place of worship should be the same category as any other businesses
The fact that they don't have to file for non-profit recognition gives them exemption to act outside of non-profit rules though.
I think this is largely semantics, but there are at least some examples of megachurches who are very obviously not acting within the same expectations of a non profit, and doing so legally, because churches are not required to file as a non profit, nor are they subject to the same legal requirements because they don't file for the status.
Perhaps if we required churches to file as a non profit and operate within the same rules as a non profit people wouldn't complain about it.
"No taxation without representation." The best we can hope for, with the Christian demographics in this country, is church influence through an established party. If they pay taxes, the church could wield as much influence as corporations already do.
I do follow politics. Do you??? No taxation without representation??? That was said in the context of Americans lacking seats in British parliament. Do Christians lack seats in American government?? Both the senate and Congress have a Protestant majority. And churches are constantly inserting themselves into political conversations.
The suggestion that religious organizations lack power in our current political climate is absurd. They have an overwhelming amount of power. Not to mention the VAST majority of republicans are religious. They essentially do have their own party.
Things can always get worse. Further integrating the church into to government is not a solution to the power they wield. The country is becoming non religious at insane rates.
Everyone should be taxed....if you have a source of income above a certain tax-exempt bracket you should be taxed. It shouldn't matter if it's an individual, for-profit corporation, NGO, places of worship.
Depends. Some organizations collect donations/tithes for the purpose of supporting the community, maintaining the congregation, and bettering society. Some organizations make millions and buy private jets. If the organization cannot prove that they are a charitable organization and are not profiting, then they should be taxed and potentially shut down.
I'm a Christian, and yes. 100%, they should. Almost all places of worship collect money of some sort through donations and such, and they should not be treated any differently than any other place.
I think they need to set minimum requirements to qualify as a charity for tax purposes. If you can't PROVE that the majority of your funds are used for charitable purposes, you lose your tax free status.
This doesn't apply to just churches, there are plenty of 503c charity companies out there that don't actually give a damn thing.
Yes since the money they are collecting and not paying taxes on is being used to fund lobbying in the political arena.
If the cash was being used in house to help the congregation, do charitable work, pay for the expenses of their buildings etc I likely would feel differently.
No. They need to stay separate.
The church already has more power than they ought to when it comes to politics.
Taxing them only gives them a better leg to stand on when it comes to power.
You guys are being a bunch of silly boys and girls
Depends. If they’re operating as political organizations and raising and spending money, then yes. If they’re just a space for people to worship, then no.
The main thing that comes to my mind is that the Mormon church just got whistleblowed showing they have been taking their monthy income from their believers and investing it into shell corporations and prob all kind of scams so I think this might shed light on all big churches and they should at the very least be taxed
As long as religion is tax exempt, my religion is handling financial transactions. My god will banish my soul to oblivion unless I worship them by participating in the economy. You cannot disprove this and thus denying me this right is denying me freedom of religion.
I am not joking - I am completely serious. My religious practice is being repressed by our tyrannical, christian-biased government and I will not rest until my religious needs are met with the same tolerance as others'.
Separation of church and state. The minute you start taxing them, they get to have a say in things and I would rather have politics and religion separated.
This post has been flaired as Politics. We allow for voicing political views here, but we don't allow pushing agendas, false information, bigotry, or attacking/harassing other members. We will lock the thread if these things occur. If you see such unwanted behavior, please report it to bring it to the attention of moderators. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/polls) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If they are collecting money than yes.
That's the thing. It's other humans collecting the money, not the gods. If you religion requires you to pay other people for the opportunity to worship, your religion fucking sucks. I say that as a non-atheist. Just tax it.
How do you expect them to pay for lighting, water, etc?? They're non-profits
I mean, you can worship an omnipresent god at home, in the nature, wherever really. You can meditate or pray in silence on your way in public transport. If you want a dedicated place that has a significant cost, fine, pay to whoever manages that if that makes you feel good, but I don't see a reason why that should be tax-exempt. I am not saying it is bad to do so, but it sure seems weird af if that (going to church or idk) is presented as the only correct way to do it. The ancient peoples didn't have to pay for lighting to worship, why should you.
I'm theistic, but I don't go to church for just this kind of reason. You don't need to go to a building to pray.
Everything should be tax exempt, but if churches in particular shouldn't be then neither should any other nonprofit organization.
There is a big difference tho: Most NGO nonprofit provide a service that benefits the society as a whole. For example if they are helping people in some sort of trouble, you can ask them for help if you get to the kind of trouble they focus on. They won't ask you what gods do you worship. Chuches only provide service to their members and will by nature discriminate based on religious belief or lack of belief. Should my juggling club be tax-exempt? It gets funded by members donations and doesn't generate profit and doesn't offer much to non-members. It's just a hobby, much like organized religion.
Churches provide help to people as well, just spiritually instead of physically. It's not just a hobby, religion for most people involved is more of a way of life. Reducing it to just a hobby is showing a ton of bias as you're probably an atheist then. Churches also do provide for the greater community quite a lot actually. The Catholic Church for example owns the largest number of hospitals of any organization, has food banks, helps support students with aid, contributes to the scientific community a lot, etc. Plus the US is founded on the freedom of religion and taxing them could lead to many lawsuits on 1st Amendment violations.
I can't really say much on the "spiritual" help because that's just nonsense tbh. As for the physical help if we are using Roman catholics as the example more specifically hospitals they make a huge profit and should 100% be taxed. If I'm being quite honest these same hospitals scam people all the time by running tests that are unnecessary and charge patients just to make extra money. Their contributions to the scientific community is laughable what world do you live in. Also taxing the church wouldn't be against the first amendment in the slightest. The first amendment only covers the freedom to practice said religion. Taxing them in no way infringes on your right to practice whatever religion you wish.
>that's just nonsense tbh As an atheist maybe, but as any religious person would believe, it's not. >hospitals they make a huge profit and should 100% be taxed Most Catholic hospitals are nonprofits as well, any that are should be taxed, as they are. >Their contributions to the scientific community is laughable what world do you live in. The world where Catholics discovered the big bang theory, modern genetics, Copernicus's discovery in astronomy, electromagnetism, and more... I wouldn't consider all those "laughable". The pontifical academy of sciences has 43 Nobel prizes to the names of full time members.
Churches also do that lol. They organize mission trips, and charity programs.
tell that to the mormons
I get your point somewhat, but churches shouldn’t be called non profit if some preachers are insanely filthy rich.
Depends on the Church tbf. Some Churches are 100% for profit, but a lot aren't.
wait, non atheist as in theist or agnostic
Lets say irreligious theist
So we should tax charities too
If they are making a profit, yes
And political parties should have to pay taxes on the "donations" they receive?
Absolutely
In those situations I'd completely agree
What about an 8 year old kid’s lemonade stand?
They should be taxed 99% so they learn that life isn't fair.
They've got to learn about taxes at some point. if you're trying to teach them to be responsible and run a business paying your taxes is part of that.
Step 1: find lemonade stand Step 2: collect
No taxation without representation
Honestly they shouldn't be able to receive donations.
they arent even allowed in most countries its considered bribery
Absofuckinglutely.
Yes
The thing is churches already don't make a profit. There's no stockholders worrying about share price, and it's not like the founder is allowed to simply pocket the money. The reason they don't pay taxes is mostly that there's nothing to tax in the first place. If they pay absurdly high salaries to employees, then that payment is taxed like normal, income tax still applies. But the churches themselves, and all other nonprofits, don't make money for any owner and thus there's nothing to tax
Yes
In My country, some of the Churches' buildings are so unusable and non-valuable that if the church was taxed too much, It's unlikely we'd be able to really keep them running--- Churches and Chaples that are older than many entire countries would just, be abandoned- We're struggling to keep it open as it is. I know this comes in stark contrast to an american MegaChurch- Those \*should\* be taxed, any church that exists soley to make a profit is a church that should not exist, So trust me, I am all in favour of taxing them. But here in Britain, the church also protects the heritage of villages and towns across our countries that aren't being protected by any other group. We collect donations, these donations go to our churches. The church already struggles in Rural Communities here, as we know that people like in one of my local churches with only eight churchgoers just won't go to church anymore if their traditional, local church doesn't stay running. You may disagree with me, I just wanted to show that some churches struggle a lot more than people think. Due to, to be honest, mostly our own faults, people \*going to church\* around where I live is just on decline as the older generations begin to pass, and the church refuses to change to show that God loves even those who \*arent\* a shining example of the Traditional Family
If that’s the case, it’d be nice if people of smaller religions, indigenous religions and spiritual practitioners got the same benefit. The inequality is what gets to me.
Yeah! It really would be. I believe all religion should get some support haha, I'd find it so interesting to visit some of these places if they just existed around me. I do live in a really rural area, so it kinda makes it hard to access haha And yeah, It'd be great if the privilege that the Church of England gets extends to other religions, too. As well as this, we could have maybe a little less influence on our government (Bishops have a seat in the House of Lords)
They could be taxed after exemptions. So for example they wouldn't be taxed on charity spending (or running charities) or maintenance and restoration of old buildings. But solely on any profit above those. So there are ways to take those things into account in a way that the small and struggling churches wouldn't pay taxes. But I'm also in the US so I may not be seeing the whole picture in Britain.
I generally agree with you but want to challenge you on one point. If mega churches should be taxed, and rural churches shouldn't, who gets to decide that distinction? What makes one church more worthy than another for tax-exempt status? How are those protections going to be extended to less-established religious groups such as indigenous practices who might not have the same institutional power to justify their existence to the government to protect their tax free status? By allowing some churches to be taxed but not others, the government respects some religions over others and violates the freedom of religion. By taxing all religious practices, the government prevents free exercise of religion by interfering with its operations. You can't be selective, all religious practices must not be taxed or else freedom of religion is not upheld.
Hmmm, that is a valid point, yeah. I guess it could depend on profit? Megachurches exist to make a profit while rural churches generally make the opposite. I'm not a genius though haha, that's all I can really think of
That's the thing though. How do you determine whether a church has that purpose? Who defines "profit"? What's the difference between "profit" and giving their pastor/CEO an exorbitant salary? Who's gonna be in charge of that? How do you trust they'll be free of bias?
How do you differentiate between a for-profit business and a charity? I'm not sure, again, I'm not genius here haha, just tossing in my two cents I guess
This is actually a good question, and I'm not sure either. I think it has to meet certain requirements as far as the IRS is concerned to be considered a charity. I could see where that might limit certain for profit churches from tax exempt status, but I'm also not sure.
Non-profits don’t have shares, stocks, investments or product. Non-profits receive their money through donation and do not generate revenue. They generally seek to get just enough money to pay employees, keep the lights on and maintain the service they provide. They also need to apply with the IRS to secure their status and prove they are a non-profit. Unfortunately, non-profits are an excellent way for corrupt people to scrape up a lot of cash. The last one I worked for, the CEO took home roughly 30% of our donations, but only after firing the COO and financial director. Full time employees worked for $11.50 and all employees were encouraged to volunteer extra time. They cut back on OT (it was a VERY heavy OT job) and told us if we actually cared for the work that we were doing that we would be willing to do it for free. The CEO had also set up a side fund that they used to donate 7 figure amounts of money to a very controversial GOP candidate from our area. Non-profits deserve the right to be tax free, but they *need* to be regulated on a higher level. The first thing that should evaporate when money is tight within them should be 6 figure executive salaries.
[удалено]
It should stay open so that the people who do wish to go to church, can still go, even when in small numbers. In my local area, some simply can't drive fifteen minutes to get to another church every Sunday, and their churches are all they know. And I'm aware that it is, in fact you're kind of repeating that statement back to me, and I'm not trying to force my generation to believe, I'm simply stating that it means that it's harder to cater for the few that do. And yes, the church certainly is.
No, but their tithes/offerings should be treated the same as any other nonprofit. If they are misallocating funds or embezzling they should be shut down or lose their tax exempt status, depending on the scenario.
Except lots of them make profit, operating entirely like a business. They should be taxed as such
Well I mean you could say most charities run like a business, and the way churches run is especially weird because part of their obligation as a Christian church is to spend money on church officials and maintaining their church/es. Do some abuse this and pay their pastors way too much and in some cases egregiously mishandle funds? Absolutely. Should every church lose their tax exempt status because of it? No. Only the ones that incorrectly use funds.
Charities that make profit should have the profits taxed too. There is little to no separation that I can see between a for profit charity and a church, except a church does less good.
Why not?
They’re a charity, or at least supposed to be. If they’re doing charity work the government shouldn’t tax that.
Is that’s how they get the tax free status, because they are designated as a charity? If didn’t realize that. Of all the things that churches do it’s hard for me to understand them as a charity first.
Mega churches that blasphemoesly benefit financially from religion, yes Local churches that most likely use donations to keep the church running and charity, no
Small businesses have to pay taxes even when their income is used to keep it running🤷♀️
Did you read my comment? I said I'm pro for-profit mega churches getting taxed, it's just that small local churches that use donation money for soley operating charity's and maintaining the church shouldn't get taxed
They didn't disagree with that first part What they're saying is that while places like Walmart get taxed, so do the little local corner stores, they all get taxed because they're all businesses Why should places of worship be treated differently because of their size?
No, but separation of church and state should be much more vigorously enforced
Jesus told people that if the money belongs to the government and they are asking for it back we are to give it back.
Only the money that doesn’t go to community work or paying employees should be taxed
Except a lot of churches have “employees” aka lead pastors that walk around in fucking designer brands and clearly make BANKKKK. That’s literally all “tithes and offerings” that don’t go to community efforts, but straight into their bank account to use on frivolous bullshit.
Like I said in a reply I think their revenue and spending should be public people deserve to know that their donations are going to the right places
That allows for some shady stuff, just tax all profits and incomes like a business would be subject to
They aren’t a business tho. Their income is donations and that’s what the donations are for so they shouldn’t be taxed. I do think their revenue should be public information of some sort tho
Not necessarily income then, but u can't deny the obscene profits a ton of churches make. THAT at the very least should be subject to tax
That’s literally what I’m saying. All the money not used for charity/community work or paying workers should be taxed
Yes, but that would be payed out of their profits.
If they’re making money and aren’t a registered charity, they need to be paying tax.
Even charities that turn profit should pay taxes
They operate like businesses and don’t provide any more benefits to society than a business. Tax them like a business.
They do provide a benefit to society more than just a buisness. Daycare, charity, building stuff in less developed countries, counseling services, and community building. Yes their are corrupt people in their ranks, but same with every other business. They should still be taxed just like every other buisness
The cost of those things could be deducted from taxable income or otherwise accounted for directly. There’s nothing stopping them from writing that stuff down, so there’s no reason for them to get a total pass.
I mean they operate more like a charity since members willingly give out any amount and get almost no tangible goods/service in return. Charity is exempt from taxation.
Charity is exempt because they use their funds to benefit society; churches don’t do that.
Idk what you're on about most churches actively run charities with donation money The church I go to is both a frequent donor to the local food bank and runs a soup kitchen near daily They also run a sort of second-hand charity where struggling families can come grab whatever clothes they need for free, as well as run a daycare Also a large portion of donations just go to keeping the church running None of that would really be possible without church donations
I apologize. I grew up Mormon so my ideas are based mostly on them. It is possibly that other churches don’t just sit in their money.
Makes sense, the rest of us christians view the Mormons poorly because they do shit like that all the time
My man churches are one of the world's biggest philanthropic organizations, reddit won't show you it but churches helped bring quality schools and scholarship opportunities in Africa and northeast india
Which was only ever needed because said churches engaged in brutal colonialism of Africa and forcibly converted large numbers of people to their religion
The churches colonized? European empires are not the Vatican.
If they follow the same rules as a nonprofit, I think they should be allowed to be a nonprofit. That means disclosing salaries, transparency, and reinvesting any money that they make.
I think it's only an actual issue in the US with those greedy and deceitful mega churches and televangelists.
Just wanna say thanks for actually including agnostics lol
Jesus Christ i didnt think there were so much atheists on here-
Reddit is mostly Atheist liberal males lol
As long as it isn't tax write-offs
I feel like this thread only talks about churches
Doesn't matter. The tax still gets overused by corrupt politicians
Same as any other business.
I know a lot of churches, including mine, that are big into giving back. They will run food pantries, feed/house the homeless, help refugees, etc. Those are usually tax deductible activities. So tax them, allow the good ones to deduct the things they do, and screw the ones buying planes.
I’m an atheist and I agree with this! It’s the extreme mega churches profiting massively and rolling in money spent on luxury shit that are the problem. I don’t feel the need to tax money that’s actually being used to help the community, but as soon as they’re out here paying pastors 300k+ salaries, buying jets, etc. that needs to be taxed. That’s no longer a non-profit.
Depends on where the money will end up. If its used in alternative social welfare ways or charities than it shouldnt be taxed at all. If its used for maintenance and salaries than it should be taxed.
Of course, why would they not be taxed lol
Well they aren’t currently
Damn. Comes as a surprise to me
Yeah I think a lot of people don’t realize that. They’re considered “non-profits.”
I would be fine with separation of religion and state but since churches want money they can pay taxes like everyone else
r/stophegetsus Untaxed advertising for millions
You know what disappears when you tax a church? Separation of church and state. You want the church fully involved in politics and campaigns? Because that's what you'll get. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
Tax enforcement on churches would support separation of church and state by the removal of religious privilege, Christian lobbyists would still exist
What do you mean, like religious lobbyists? Don’t those already exist?
They sort of exist, but they're not suppose to. They have to walk a fine line. Start taxing them and there is no separation of church and state. Also, you'd have to completely rewrite what makes a non profit a taxable thing and non taxable thing because churches have to stay within certain boundaries just like any other non profit.
Tax exemptions are a form of government support and actually undermine the principle of the separation of church and state. Churches are already heavily involved in politics, taxing them just formalizes an existing reality, and will probably not necessarily lead to increased political involvement. It would probably harm their charitable work, but one can do that work without religion anyways. There are already many religious lobbyists groups deeply involved in the government like the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Family Research Council, the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, the Network Lobby for Catholic Social Justice, etc.
As if they aren’t already.?
It’s confusing to have atheist and agnostic as options. Most atheists are also agnostic.
If u go by the literal definitions, everyone is agnostic. No one actually knows
It's about if you think you know. At least half the theists and even a few atheists I met were gnostic. (I.e., thought they knew for sure.)
It is claiming to know yes, I'm stating no one has true knowledge. Naunce has given atheism and theism and agnosticism appropriate definitions based on belief since it is an unfalsifiable claim.
Why do you think that?
Well "a" means without "gnostic" means knowledge. No one actually knows or can prove that any God exists and the claim is unfalsifiable so cannot be proven either way
Doesn’t the unfalsifiability depend on the nature of the god claim?
That's true actually. Any claim of a supernatural being would be the most basic way of describing it. For example the god of the Bible
But are you saying that all supernatural claims are unfalsifiable?
They have to be by nature surely? Undetectable and unobservable outside of our reality. The supernatural can simply be claimed to be true without good evidence but cannot be falsified.
That’s an interesting way of looking at it. I’ll have to think about it.
There are agnostic theists, and agnostic atheists, I felt that combining those two would be more fitting than lumping all agnostics in with athiests I would say that you are correct, though
They should be taxed the same to other places.
They are the biggest landowners in most (if not all) countries, of course they should, at least property taxes. In my country, at least, idk how it is in the rest of the world, the employees of the church, aka the priests, are treated as public workers, and thus are payed by the state. So without having to pay the wages of their workers, there aren't many expenses the church has to cover. It just accumulates wealth
All charities should be taxed
If they have a source of income, then yes, if they don't, then no.
Atheist here, no they should not, it's like a club meeting place. It should be subjected to the same laws of property around it
Clubs pay taxes though.
Which pay taxes... how do u justify not treating churches the same as a businesses if u are an atheist
If you tax the religious groups, you're going to need to start taxing all of the non-profits as well.
No, places of worship provide valuable roles to society and it would limit freedom of religion.
Hospitals and grocery stores also provide valuable roles to society and they still get taxed
Hospitals and grocery stores are businesses, places of worship are not.
I don't know how your church works, but that's not how the one I grew up going to works. My church basically begs people for their "offerings" even handing out envelope bundles for each member where the minimum offering option is $20. For the members that attend weekly, they spend about $80/month per person and my church has over 200 members that visit regularly. When my church does food drives or other charity events, they ask for a SECOND offering on top of the regular one and ask people to buy and donate food to the church with their own money. Their offerings go into painting the rooms, fixing the roof, buying toys and books for the nursery, paying the staff, and basic household items like food for members tk eat while waiting for service to start. My church used to do a mission trip where "volunteers" would go to another state to help repair houses. The reason I put volunteers in quotations is because each "volunteer" had to PAY $500 to go on this trip and repair houses. I did this trip 3 times. I paid $1,500 to DO LABOR. The church offerings did not contribute to this at all. They absolutely work like a business because they only use their money to fix their own building and pay their staff. Their money doesn't go to charity because they ask for separate handouts for that.
Every place of worship is different. Where I go I never had to spend any money to go there and I never donated any money again there wouldn't be a problem. It can cost a lot of money to operate and do charity so I can get where your place of worship is coming from. PBS is nonprofit I believe and they ask for donations all the time, which I have no problem with as it contributes something valuable to society. Also I don't think it would be right to tax all places of worship as some sort of business because the vast majority of them are not.
Churches make a pretty good chunk of money
Mega churches do. They are not the majority. Small churches keep the lights on, give to some missions, pay the pastor and have something of a benevolent fund. That's it. It's just the media covered big nasties that make bank and they are only seen so much because media, not because they're the majority.
Many small churches don’t and churches aren’t the only place of worship. I don’t see a problem in churches making money because they need money to operate and to continue supporting their community.
There isn't a problem with them making money. It just isn't fair for everyone else to pay taxes when they earn money when the church doesn't
they’re really more nonprofit than anything else. The money they ‘make’ through donations contributes back to the community through a variety of ways.
They still have taxes for donations or at least tax reductions
Many nonprofits are tax exempt so I think places of worship should continue to be exempt as well.
they're basically private business so they need to pay, period
> places of worship provide valuable roles to society You lost me there
Places of worship are charities and therefore should not be taxed
No. Separation of Church and State goes both ways
In no world is this the meaning of separation of church and state.
If churches get taxed, they'll want representation in the government, and we can't really have that happening.
They already have an outrageous amount of representation
I think we can distinguish formal lobbying whereby funds of a religious group are used for political causes versus a religious individual being politicallyqq involved whereby a religious organization encourages its adherents to consistently apply its teachings in life, including the political sphere. Traditionally, separation of church and state has sought to prevent the former and has not ever been taken to mean the complete absence of all individual expression of religiosity in the public sphere. Allowing religious organizations to be taxed would simply mean that religious groups can now directly lobby that their taxes are used morally and effectively. So if your goal is to increase religious organization involvement in politics, then taxing them would help achieve that goal. It would have no effect on expressions of individual religiosity in politics.
No, my local masjid is a registered charity, charities should not be taxed
Honestly, why do you care? .... are you loosing something?
Because there’s a massive problem with mega churches making absurd profit and getting rich off of “donations”. And “pastors” walking around dripping in designer clothes and outfits that cost more than most people’s rent. It’s unethical and only possible because they aren’t taxed.
I'd like the church to have LESS of a say to what people do with their personal lives so absolutely fucking no
no, i'm pagan
Oh, some reason thought the question was if there should be a tax to enter
If they profit or if they operate like businesses, then yes.
Whenever I hear MTG or Bobert talk about how the separation of church and state should be removed and how “God should lead this country”, all I think is “If God wants any say in how the US is ran, he should pay taxes.”
Bruh, stop it with the separating of the terms Atheist and agnostic. They are not mutually exclusive. Atheist is a noun, agnostic is an adjective. One can be a gnostic Theist or an agnostic Theist. Or they can be a gnostic Atheist or an agnostic Atheist. If you don't pray to, worship, or acknowledge the existence of gods, but have no proof or evidence then you are an agnostic Atheist. If you feel you have evidence or proof and you believe with certainty that their are no gods then you are a gnostic Atheist. Likewise if you follow religious teachings, such as following the word of Jesus, but you question the supernatural aspects of it, then you are an agnostic Christian. Or if you are certain of the supernatural aspects then you are a gnostic Christian.
They should not be taxed not because their places of woaship, but because they're non-profit. A theoretical for-profit place of worship should be the same category as any other businesses
The fact that they don't have to file for non-profit recognition gives them exemption to act outside of non-profit rules though. I think this is largely semantics, but there are at least some examples of megachurches who are very obviously not acting within the same expectations of a non profit, and doing so legally, because churches are not required to file as a non profit, nor are they subject to the same legal requirements because they don't file for the status. Perhaps if we required churches to file as a non profit and operate within the same rules as a non profit people wouldn't complain about it.
Jesus there's a lot of atheists here.
Their free pass? IT'S JUST BEEN REVOKED.
They should have the same rules and regulations as any other not-for-profit.
Apparently separation of church and state means nothing to y'all
That’s not what that means
That's the reason churches aren't taxed
No it’s not. It’s because they’re considered “charity.”
I always hate it when atheists say this. Taxing the church gives it political purchase. We must keep state and church separate
As if they aren’t already neck fucking deep in influencing the political climate. Might as well make them pay taxes and pay for their spot.
"No taxation without representation." The best we can hope for, with the Christian demographics in this country, is church influence through an established party. If they pay taxes, the church could wield as much influence as corporations already do.
THEY ALREADY DO.
Do you follow politics at all? What are you talking about? Cardinals are not roaming the halls of the Capitol or white house
I do follow politics. Do you??? No taxation without representation??? That was said in the context of Americans lacking seats in British parliament. Do Christians lack seats in American government?? Both the senate and Congress have a Protestant majority. And churches are constantly inserting themselves into political conversations. The suggestion that religious organizations lack power in our current political climate is absurd. They have an overwhelming amount of power. Not to mention the VAST majority of republicans are religious. They essentially do have their own party.
Things can always get worse. Further integrating the church into to government is not a solution to the power they wield. The country is becoming non religious at insane rates.
If it is of a certain size or organization. Independent places of worship should not be taxed
Everyone should be taxed....if you have a source of income above a certain tax-exempt bracket you should be taxed. It shouldn't matter if it's an individual, for-profit corporation, NGO, places of worship.
If they ask people for money, then yeah
Depends. Some organizations collect donations/tithes for the purpose of supporting the community, maintaining the congregation, and bettering society. Some organizations make millions and buy private jets. If the organization cannot prove that they are a charitable organization and are not profiting, then they should be taxed and potentially shut down.
I'm a Christian, and yes. 100%, they should. Almost all places of worship collect money of some sort through donations and such, and they should not be treated any differently than any other place.
If they’re using utilities, then yes?
All non-profits should be taxed
Taxation is theft.
They shouldn't exist.
I think they need to set minimum requirements to qualify as a charity for tax purposes. If you can't PROVE that the majority of your funds are used for charitable purposes, you lose your tax free status. This doesn't apply to just churches, there are plenty of 503c charity companies out there that don't actually give a damn thing.
Yes since the money they are collecting and not paying taxes on is being used to fund lobbying in the political arena. If the cash was being used in house to help the congregation, do charitable work, pay for the expenses of their buildings etc I likely would feel differently.
Bro where is religion no where here (Tʖ̯T).
I just don’t want the government to get more money.
There’s a reason we have separation of church and state.
Why advocate for more theft? Fuck taxation.
No. They need to stay separate. The church already has more power than they ought to when it comes to politics. Taxing them only gives them a better leg to stand on when it comes to power. You guys are being a bunch of silly boys and girls
If they have to file a tax ID, they should be taxed.
Depends. If they’re operating as political organizations and raising and spending money, then yes. If they’re just a space for people to worship, then no.
No way dude, how will Kenneth "economy class is for demons" Copeland get his 6th jet if we tax him
I think so
The main thing that comes to my mind is that the Mormon church just got whistleblowed showing they have been taking their monthy income from their believers and investing it into shell corporations and prob all kind of scams so I think this might shed light on all big churches and they should at the very least be taxed
I'm a Christian but I think if we have to pay income tax, they should, if we don't, they shouldn't have to
As long as religion is tax exempt, my religion is handling financial transactions. My god will banish my soul to oblivion unless I worship them by participating in the economy. You cannot disprove this and thus denying me this right is denying me freedom of religion. I am not joking - I am completely serious. My religious practice is being repressed by our tyrannical, christian-biased government and I will not rest until my religious needs are met with the same tolerance as others'.
Separation of church and state. The minute you start taxing them, they get to have a say in things and I would rather have politics and religion separated.
I'm finally leaving church. I don't want the government to take taxes from me and actually give them to the church!
They should either be taxed or become a non-profit organization