Certainly the issue regarding pastors flouting the tax law against political sermons1 is raising some attention. Should churches be allowed to preach politics and still get tax breaks? What about free speech? Etc. Valid arguments all around.
Well, valid if you still think the rubber-stamp tax break to churches is, in any way, valid in itself. If, on the other hand, you’re like me, and you think that no religious entity should get a tax break merely because it’s a religious entity, then why are we even belaboring the point of whether pastors can use the pulpit as a political soap box?
Here’s what I want to know:
1. How much money would the government receive in taxes if it nixed the tax exempt status for all religious organizations?
2. Would there be any negative consequences of nixing the tax exemption that would exceed the benefit of the extra tax taken in?
3. What would be the harm, say, in testing it for a few years?
4. If we took the “okay, I’m overreaching here in my pipe dream hopes” mask off, is this something we could realistically hope to see in the next ten, twenty years?
5. If, instead of raising taxes for the general public, we nixed the tax exemption for religious organizations, could we get to the point where the personal income tax could actually be lowered as a result of the extra taxes received from religious organizations?
6. What is the reason religious organizations received tax exempt status in the first place? Was it a valid reason when it was instituted? Is it a valid reason now? Doesn’t it violate the First Amendment?
7. When non-believers ask “What can I do to be active?”, can we eventually get to the point where we can answer, “Join this huge non-believer movement to end tax breaks for all churches!”?
If you can answer any of these questions, or have some of your own, please share! I’ll be amending this article as I receive input (from others or my own research). I think it’s about time we make an impact, and this is one serious impact that would benefit everyone.
Better than a bailout?
Tags: Amendment, church, First Amendment, free speech, Government, Law, political, tax, Washington
I am a Christian and I attend a local Nazarene Church in Chandler, AZ. I do not think should have tax exemptions for churches. I believe that churches should pay taxes on “profits” they may have at the end of the tax year, if any. The object of churches is NOT to make money, so why would it be a big deal? THEN, and only then will churches be able to preach what they want to preach and support what they want to support (including specific political figures) without it being a big problem overall. I do NOT have any problem with tithing (10% of my income) to a church where I will not get a tax exemption from that tithe because my church would not be tax exempt. I tithe because I believe that is what I am supposed to do in order to support the belief system I have made a part of my life. I would not stop paying my tithe just because I wouldn’t save a few bucks on my taxes. I think it’s about character and we are missing a lot of it these days in America, especially when it comes to money and how it’s mistreated and abused in all aspects of our society.
You raise questions that I’ve often wondered myself, especially #6 (What is the reason religious organizations received tax exempt status in the first place?)
Though, if a religious organization were non-tax-exempt would be that they could more fully participate in the politics. Just think about some rather large church congregations putting their godbucks into the political process. *shudder*
Here’s an excerpt from the Pew Forum http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=285
“All organizations that are recognized as exempt from federal income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code are subject to the prohibition against political campaign intervention. Thus religious organizations are not treated more harshly than schools, hospitals, social services agencies, colleges and universities, scientific organizations, museums or other charitable organizations exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Code. None of these organizations may intervene in political campaigns.”
Although this is an old post, I can answer #6.
Supposedly, the tax-exempt status of churches is intended to ensure continued religious freedom and enforce church/state separation. If a government with dictatorial tendencies was allowed to raise taxes on churches, only the richest churches could afford to exist, and people belonging to less wealthy ones would have their right to religious assembly violated. There are operating costs involved in maintaining a physical church, after all.
Secondly, since this financially divorces the government from compliant churches and guarantees freedom of religion, I imagine that there would no longer be any justifiable reason for churches to be involved in politics – if the state does not meddle in the daily affairs of churches, why should churches meddle in the affairs of state?
A concern I'd like to raise in response to the idea that granting tax exemption promote freedom of religion. Consider this, a friend and I develop a religious system based on a combination of other religions. We develop a following and such, and we declare ourselves a non-denominational version of Christianity, and buy a church. Our 'religion' so to speak probably will not get tax exempt status.
This example bring me to my concern. Granting tax exempt status is technically the government's way of acknowledging a religion and discriminates against smaller organizations. If the tax exempt status was removed, and religious groups were taxed as if they were businesses, that'd increase the amount of revenue for the government, while also removing that possibility of discrimination. Furthermore, if a church continues charitable activities, those activities are capable of being tax write offs. So basically we'd be removing the profitability for religions, without ruining the charity.
1. How much money would the government receive in taxes if it nixed the tax exempt status for all religious organizations?
Likely not very much. All in all churches don’t own much property in comparison to what for-profit corporations own. (McDonald’s owns more land than any other landlord in the country). And taxing churches certainly would not raise more revenue than the liberals in government would want to spend. No government in America has a revenue problem, only spending problems.
And if you say it is OK to tax churches, why not eliminate tax exemptions for things like schools, colleges and universities, or non-profit hospitals, or political parties. I just heard that the Obama campaign raised something like $800,000,000 last year. A 30% tax on his campaign revenue would pay my mother’s monthly Social Security disability pension for 160,000 Americans.
But I am illuminating absurdity with absurdity. We don’t tax non-profit political organizations because they raise revenue to pay for their constitutionally protected activities (freedom of speech, press, assembly and petition for redress). We don’t tax certain religious organizations because they likewise engage in constitutionally protection activities, i.e., exercising religion. So why is it that an organization that combines these constitutionally protected activities must pay taxes? Could it be that liberals (starting with Lyndon Baines Johnson) cannot risk the criticism that churches could level against them if they didn’t have to pay for the privilege?
2. Would there be any negative consequences of nixing the tax exemption that would exceed the benefit of the extra tax taken in?
You mean other than violating the Constitution? As Chief Justice John Marshall once said the power to tax is the power to destroy. Taxing churches is the first step towards destroying them.
3. What would be the harm, say, in testing it for a few years?
You mean other than violating the Constitution?
4. If we took the “okay, I’m overreaching here in my pipe dream hopes” mask off, is this something we could realistically hope to see in the next ten, twenty years?
Why the emphasis on new sources of government revenue instead of advocating that the American People get off the government teat?
5. If, instead of raising taxes for the general public, we nixed the tax exemption for religious organizations, could we get to the point where the personal income tax could actually be lowered as a result of the extra taxes received from religious organizations?
No. Taxing churches will never produce more revenue than the liberals in government want to spend. All else being equal, taxing churches will simply mean more government spending.
6. What is the reason religious organizations received tax exempt status in the first place? Was it a valid reason when it was instituted? Is it a valid reason now? Doesn’t it violate the First Amendment?
The power to tax is the power to destroy. Before there was a federal income tax the taxation of churches wasn’t much of an issue. But now churches, and any other organization, could be taxed out of existence and thus it was expected that churches should be tax exempt- taxing a church infringes on its free exercise of religion. And up until 1954 churches could engage in political activities and maintain their tax exempt status. But then some pastors in Texas took to criticizing Senator Lyndon Johnson so he attached a rider to a tax bill that negated the tax exempt status of any church that got involved in politics.
7. When non-believers ask “What can I do to be active?”, can we eventually get to the point where we can answer, “Join this huge non-believer movement to end tax breaks for all churches!”?
Not without violating the Constitution. Having to pay a fee to engage in a constitutional right means you no longer have that right because you can exercise it only at the discretion of the government.
Note: I am a Christian, but I was not raised in a Christian home and have never been a member of any church. I have never once asked a church for help, either for myself or on behalf of someone else, and had any help be forthcoming. Most churches where I live won’t even answer their phone except on Sunday morning and Wednesday night. In my view all existing organized churches are more or less corrupt and we would be better off without the lot of them. But at the same time I see nothing wrong with letting a sincere church take an active role in all aspects of society. To this end I would propose an amendment to the Constitution that would expressly give churches certain enumerated rights. I want the amendment to eliminate abusive churches while empowering the churches that are sincere. I don’t know yet what role taxation should play in this equation.