Proposal for fair taxation

[Diderot]

Typical knee-jerk liberalism.  What happens when the government destroys the 1st Amendment by taxing churches into non-existence?

Let's look at the first Amendment "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Exempting religious organizations from paying taxes is a clear case of our government "respecting an establishment of religion," precisely what the framers intended to prohibit.

This is not to suggest that you abandon your church or your faith. For one thing, any religious organization that lives up to its commitments to its congregation and community would have nothing to fear from filing a tax return, just like every other non-profit. For another, when these institutions pay taxes like every other non-profit, each citizen's tax burden is significantly lessened and consequently he or she maybetter endow a worthy institution with individual support.

It is the flip side of the same coin: as your right to practice a religion must be respected by government, it may not support churches by tax subsidies or any other means.

Source:

http://taxthechurches.org/

[JeffreyS]

Taxing churches is not pragmatic they do more than their share of civic and charitable good.  Taxing them would just take away from that. It may not be how you feel things should be done but that is a simple truth.

[Diderot]

Tax the non profits, churches included and you'll double the effect of the next natural disaster in this country. As one who has worked in several 'national disasters' with the Red Cross I can tell you the efforts of the government alone is like pissing in the ocean.

OCKLAWAHA

If churches engage in charitable work that benefits the community, do all citizens have an interest in supporting such endeavors with, say, various tax exemptions? Of course. This is the sound basis for tax exemptions for non-profit organizations, whose activities and finances are subject to IRS audit and public scrutiny. In the case of religious organizations, however, the books are closed.

[Diderot]

Taxing churches is not pragmatic they do more than their share of civic and charitable good.  Taxing them would just take away from that. It may not be how you feel things should be done but that is a simple truth.

Non-church groups receiving tax exemptions must annually file a detailed 990 statement itemizing where the money has gone. The IRS automatically waives the 990 requirement for churches.

So what if churches do not engage in charitable work? Or do so far less efficiently, effectively - or charitably - than the many non-profits or government programs we do not subsidize in this way? Religious organizations can and do take great advantage of their tax-free status. Many amass great wealth and vast media empires - all of it off the tax rolls. The point is that religious organizations can and do espouse doctrines of intolerance and hatred, filter funds to foreign enemies, and cause far more harm than good in their communities. They are nevertheless entirely tax-exempt, their finances never scrutinized, because they qualify as "religious organizations."

[jax-native68]

The reason healthier diets are beyond the reach of many people is that such diets cost more.

This is a catch-22 situation.  If American consumers didn't demand so much junk food, junk food wouldn't be produced in so much abundance meaning junk food wouldn't be as cheap as it is.  And considering the fuel and fertilizer it takes to grow the corn that gets turned into high fructose corn syrup compared to the fuel and fertilizer it takes to grow a head of lettuce, production costs for an individual candy bar are likely higher than they are for a serving of salad.  But because we grow more corn than we do lettuce, the economy of scale means lettuce is more expensive than corn syrup.

The federal government determines poverty-level income by measuring how much money it costs to buy the food needed for an adequate diet.  I don’t know if the formula has been updated any in recent years, but when I researched the issue back in the 1990s the food costs used to determine poverty were based on prices from the 1960s- which were higher then they are now when adjusted for inflation because we didn’t have cheap high fructose corn syrup and palm kernel oil back then.

On a per calorie basis, diets composed of whole grains, fish, and fresh vegetables and fruit are far more expensive than refined grains, added sugars and added fats.

But that’s the problem.  The daily calorie intake for the average American is something like 1/3 higher now than it was 40 years ago.  Back in the 1960s the federal government recommended that fallout shelters be stocked with enough food to give every occupant a diet of 2000 calories a day and this is about what an average American ate at the time.  But today the average calorie consumption is anywhere from 3000 to 5000+ calories a day.  Food prices are high because Americans demand more food than they really need.

The Spirit Level: Why Greater Equality Makes Societies Stronger, uses data from the World Bank, the World Health Organization, and the U.S. Census to argue that disparities in income produce a wide range of social illsâ€"like obesity, teen pregnancy, mental illness, murder, and infant mortalityâ€"that could be addressed by shrinking the gap between the haves and the have-nots.

You couldn’t isolate income from the effects of other factors such as family structure or religion or lack thereof.  The Kennedy Family is one of the richest in the country, but it also has a high concentration of obesity, mental illness, murder and infant mortality, not to mention adultery and bootlegging and divorce.

[jax-native68]

Good healthy foods are expensive because of the massive amounts of sugars fats etc in our diets and are there because of the huge heavily subsidized food conglomerates that have taken over our food supply at the hands of CEO's who could care less about he human healthy system..all they care about is the goverment cash to grow corn and soy....we are all screwed.

Not entirely.  Anywhere from 1/3 to 1/2 of the fruits and vegetables that are grown in the U.S. end up being wasted.  They are either purchased and not eaten, or they rot during storage and transportation to markets that are thousands of miles away from where they are grown.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/01/from-farm-to-fridge-to-garbage-can/?ref=science

http://www.antropologi.info/blog/anthropology/2004/study_says_usa_wastes_nearly_half_its_fo

[jax-native68]

Typical knee-jerk liberalism.  What happens when the government destroys the 1st Amendment by taxing churches into non-existence?

Let's look at the first Amendment "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Exempting religious organizations from paying taxes is a clear case of our government "respecting an establishment of religion," precisely what the framers intended to prohibit.

This is not to suggest that you abandon your church or your faith. For one thing, any religious organization that lives up to its commitments to its congregation and community would have nothing to fear from filing a tax return, just like every other non-profit. For another, when these institutions pay taxes like every other non-profit, each citizen's tax burden is significantly lessened and consequently he or she maybetter endow a worthy institution with individual support.

It is the flip side of the same coin: as your right to practice a religion must be respected by government, it may not support churches by tax subsidies or any other means.

Source:

http://taxthechurches.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCulloch_v._Maryland

The State of Maryland passed a law that levied a tax on the currency that was issued by the Baltimore, Maryland branch of the Second National Bank of the United States, which had been chartered by Congress in order to exercise its power to coin money and regulate the value thereof.  James McCulloch, the manager of the bank branch in Baltimore, Maryland sued the state and the case went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously struck down the Maryland law as unconstitutional.  Chief Justice John Marshall wrote the decision for the Court and declared that the power to tax is the power to destroy. If the state of Maryland had the power to tax the federal government, then the state of Maryland had the power to destroy the federal government.

So if the government can tax a church, the government has the power to destroy a church and this would violate my right to freely exercise my religion so any taxation of churches clearly violates both the U.S. and Florida State constitutions.

[hillary supporter]

As i watch this thread over the past few days from a european country under fair tax ( 23.5% sales) im becoming convinced that for all the bad things of our tax legislation, there are plenty of good things such that when something of an economic illness hits the U.S. we sneeze and everyone else catches the cold.

[jax-native68]

Taxing churches is not pragmatic they do more than their share of civic and charitable good.  Taxing them would just take away from that. It may not be how you feel things should be done but that is a simple truth.

We have a lot of churches in Jacksonville that operate out of storefronts.  As long as these storefronts are not owned by the church the property involved is subject to property taxes.  These taxes would naturally be reflected in the rent which churches pay to use the storefronts so what they pay in taxes is just that much less that they have to do social welfare work.

But then most churches in Jacksonville don’t care about doing any social welfare work.  So, personally I would amend the Constitution so we could give churches power to take a more active role in society (economics and politics) without making them go through a bunch of court fights.  But I would also specify that church property could be taxed if it isn’t used for legitimate church functions- the church’s property would be taxed any day that the church isn’t open to the public with clergy on the premises.

One of the churches I contacted back when I was looking for space for my school had a congregation of about 20 people with 10 acres of land.  The church had an artesian well as its water supply, but since it didn’t have JEA the health department said the church either had to limit its congregation to 25 people or limit its use of the property to 60 days a year.  The pastor had no intention of getting a JEA water supply and a year or so after I talked to him the “church” sold the property to a real estate developer for a half-million.  I want a constitutional amendment that would put a stop to such fraud in the name of religion.

[jax-native68]

This is the sound basis for tax exemptions for non-profit organizations, whose activities and finances are subject to IRS audit and public scrutiny.

Since when?  Documentation?

And why don’t you tell us the whole story?

Any non-profit tax-exempt organization, PBS/NPR for example, is free to lobby the government and engage in politics- as long as the non-profit isn’t a church.  The minute a church takes a stand on a political issue it risks having its tax-exempt status revoked by the government.

Of course this wasn’t always the case.  Churches didn’t use to have to give up their right to lobby the government in order to exercise their right to practice their religion.  But then some churches in Texas criticized the lib Lyndon B. Johnson and he had the law changed.  http://hushmoney.org/501c3-facts.htm

[jax-native68]

Non-church groups receiving tax exemptions must annually file a detailed 990 statement itemizing where the money has gone. The IRS automatically waives the 990 requirement for churches.

So?

So what if churches do not engage in charitable work? Or do so far less efficiently, effectively - or charitably - than the many non-profits or government programs we do not subsidize in this way?

Do you have proof or documentation for any of these claims?

Religious organizations can and do take great advantage of their tax-free status.

Other tax-exempt organizations do not?  Do you remember about a decade or so ago where the local head of United Way was being paid a 6-digit annual salary?

[Diderot]

But because we grow more corn than we do lettuce, the economy of scale means lettuce is more expensive than corn syrup... we didn’t have cheap high fructose corn syrup and palm kernel oil back then.

In your first statement you agree that healthy food is more expensive than unhealthy food for the consumer.   Now let's turn back to your example of Denmark.  Denmark  is taxing unhealthy food with a higher content of sugar, fat and salt.  This serves to balance food prices so that healthier foods can be subsidized and poorer families can eat healthier.

Are we going to allow the food industry to continue to blame diet related health problems on overweight people? Or instead, are we going to place the blame where it most likely belongs â€" on the food system?

In addressing the issue of obesity, we are confronted with dueling hypotheses. The conventional hypothesis promoted by the food industry is that obesity is a problem of people, specifically fat people. They claim that people, in their quest for self-gratification, choose sedentary lifestyles and calorie-dense foods.

An equally logical alternative hypothesis, which remains largely unexamined, is that obesity is a problem of society, particularly the pervasiveness of unhealthy, calorie-dense foods. Certainly, many Americans have unhealthy lifestyles, but most Americans have also only very limited access to the nutrient-dense foods they need for good health.

Sources:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_9176000/9176897.stm
http://web.missouri.edu/~ikerdj/papers/Columbia%20--%20Plate-Palate-Ballot.htm

[KuroiKetsunoHana]

So, personally I would amend the Constitution so we could give churches power to take a more active role in society (economics and politics) without making them go through a bunch of court fights.

what?  are you blind to the fact that churches taking an active role in politics is slowly (hopefully not surely) turning this country into a theocracy?  are you implyïng that after sending thousands ov our soldiers to get whacked by theocrats in the middle east, we should let them take over our own country?

i may be exaggerating, but it angers me quite a bit that you just said it should be easiër for religious groups to affect politics--especially when our constitution (yeah, the one you want to change) specifically says they shouldn't.

[Diderot]

Non-church groups receiving tax exemptions must annually file a detailed 990 statement itemizing where the money has gone. The IRS automatically waives the 990 requirement for churches.

So?

So if a church is using money to do legitimate charitable work, such as feeding the hungry without requiring them to pray for their food, then it should be open for a tax exemption. However, they should have to file tax forms, be scrutinized and audited just like any other non-profit organization.

So what if churches do not engage in charitable work? Or do so far less efficiently, effectively - or charitably - than the many non-profits or government programs we do not subsidize in this way?

Do you have proof or documentation for any of these claims?

MinistryWatch.com produces a list of 30 ministries that engage in questionable practices that should cause donors to pause before giving.  They refer to this list as "Donor Alerts" as these organizations have various red flag issues including: revocation of tax-exempt status, government investigations of their practices, extremely high salaries, in short, improperly using their tax-exempt status to finance lavish lifestyles.

Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa, who wanted to know if these ministries improperly used their tax-exempt status to finance lavish lifestyles. He found that many of the churches had “multiple for-profit and non-profit entities” â€" though none had filed any tax forms â€" and that “the number and types of entities, including private airports and aircraft leasing companies, raises concerns about the use of the church‘s tax-exempt status to avoid taxation.”

When a church is building airports and buying airplanes, is it time for a reality check? Indeed, you can buy all sorts of goodies from the men and women of God.

Sources:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40960871/ns/politics-capitol_hill/t/televangelists-escape-penalty-senate-inquiry/
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/06/cbsnews_investigates/main3456977.shtml

Religious organizations can and do take great advantage of their tax-free status.

Other tax-exempt organizations do not?  Do you remember about a decade or so ago where the local head of United Way was being paid a 6-digit annual salary?

I believe you are referring to the national group's president  six-figure salary of William Aramony in 1992.

That's a great example.  Regular non-profit organizations enjoy a tax exemption, but they’re also open to public scrutiny and can be audited at any time.  How was it that William Aramony came under fire for spending the charity's money on Concorde jet tickets, chauffered limousines, and real estate?  They were audited.

Churches on the other hand are not audited because they’re deemed religious organizations. This also means that Churches can and do abuse their tax exempt status.

Source:
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930604&slug=1704775

[Diderot]

what?  are you blind to the fact that churches taking an active role in politics is slowly (hopefully not surely) turning this country into a theocracy? 

Slowly?

"Unique among the nations, America recognized the source of our character as being godly and eternal, not being civic and temporal. We have no king but Jesus."

-Fmr. Attorney General John Ashcroft

"Intentional governmental advancement of religion is sometimes required by the Free Exercise Clause."

-Supreme Court Justice Anton Scalia

Sources:

http://articles.latimes.com/2001/jan/13/news/mn-11936/2

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0482_0578_ZD.html