Individuals endangering others by exercising their faith

'for the first time, pastors to receive unemployment compensation from gov bailout bill'

 

A tiny organization isn't going to be looking for big bucks from the government. If they did, and got it, they wouldn't be under $50k anymore.

 

Many people do seem to forget that the tax exempt status of churches is not forced by the First Amendment religion clause, but is instead a common 'courtesy' that comes with strings attached. Or chains, in some folk's view, possibly including you. Churches could cut those strings simply by choosing to file and pay the same taxes as ordinary businesses.

The First Amendment effectively requires that the churches cannot be subject to extra taxes not owed by other entities, but does not force reduced or no taxes.

 

isn't it a simple non profit determination?

 

There are multiple categories for tax exempt entities.
Types of Tax Exempt Organizations – Support

Churches fall under 501(c)(3) that cover charitable organizations. Though there seem to be some differences. It might be more difficult for the IRS to start an audit of a church. They also seem, unofficially, to get more slack in regards to the political speech limits on other 501(c)(3) organizations.
Special Rules Limiting IRS Authority to Audit a Church | Internal Revenue Service

 

And I do not understand why churches are exempted from property taxes -- at least that part of the property taxes that go to pay for upkeep of the roads and sidewalks that serve the church property, and for police and fire and paramedic services. Others? I know of one city that refused to allow a church to take over a former department store building because that would have taken the property off the tax rolls; maybe the church could have fought it and won (RFRA), but it might have cost them a fortune in lawyer's fees.

 

Frank Zappa was right. Tax the Churches.

 

Well, naturally.

Right, to be 501(c)(3) you promise certain things, like you will use your income to support the mission stated in your articles rather than taking it out in profit, and you'll abstain from some kinds of political activity.

Conceivably, it could occur to somebody to apply for that status, saying "I will not divert the income of this organization into profit for myself or my buddies or, ahem, undeclared purposes" and then do it anyway. Shocking, I know, but it may happen now and then.

If your budget is $50k, you can probably hide some modest amount of that on your books, but maybe not enough to be worth the effort (yours, or an auditor's).

If your budget is $500k, they might want you to fill out some lines on a form and show how the numbers add up.

If your budget is $5m, they might want somebody with a green eyeshade to check the numbers on the form.

$50m and they might involve multiple people with the eyeshades.

 

Valley girl lol...love it.

She's still alive. His kid Dweezil is great saw them about 6-7 years ago. They were awesome. Great band Zappa does Zappa if he comes around go see him. I'm a big fan but Dweezil. I saw them on this tour only sans Steve Vai.

 

... because state legislatures decide to do so.

This is something that could be reversed, but only by the legislatures themselves.

 

I suspect for the same reason that PITA, the NRA,PP, NPR et al. are exempt.....

Don't like the laws?
Elect different lawmakers.

Like I said....I personally would be DELIGHTED if churches unshackled themselves from tax-exempt status....but that's me being me again.

 

The government sets tax rates, ideally with the approval of the tax payers, at a level that should cover expenses. If churches paid taxes, too, the rate for everyone else should drop a little, but then those who give to keep the church running would need to pay extra to cover that additional cost. It would amount to a financial penalty on church attendance.

Yup. All non-profits would need to be subject to taxation which would make them less able to carry out their purposes and could even put many out of business. The whole idea of not taxing non-profits or the money given to them is to encourage generosity. Last I knew, generosity was a good thing.

 

It is, and I'm not completely against the whole 501(c)(3) thing....but...Matthew 6:3
....But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth.
( and no, I didn't have it memorized.)

 

The concern some people have with the tax status of churches is with the limits on political speech for non-profits not apperantly being applied to the same standard for them. The NRA and others stay within the lines of their issue and being non-partisan with their speech. Or they try too, as they risk that tax exempt status if not. Churches get more leeway. Even if reported for violating that limitation, IRS may not be as free to investigate them as other organizations.

 

Politics is a part of life. And our faith, if it's genuine, will affect all parts of our life. Even so, every church I've been involved with has been super careful to stay clear of endorsing any party or candidate. On the other hand, the NRA and others of a more liberal bent, make lots of noise about candidates. The purpose of the church, according to scripture is to equip Christ followers for living lives that honor and glorify Jesus. How we vote is supposed to be a small part of how we express that desire to honor Christ, not an extension of the pastor's political views. When pastors get political (and I know that lots of them do) it's like a brain surgeon or a concert pianist resigning to become a ditch digger. Digging ditches is honorable work, but anyone with a strong back can do that. The real church is the bride of Christ bought with His blood and meant for grander things.

 

Yet some do get political. Friend left his church over the preacher talking politics in the sermon.

One of the links I posted shows that the IRS has less power when it comes from auditing churches; it requires a high ranking Treasury official to start one. So if a complaint is filed against a church over political speech, it is less likely to see action than one against a secular non-profit organization.

 

Absolutely, generosity is a good thing, and should be encouraged through tax incentives for charitable work. But I'm not sure we'd agree on what those charitable works are...I'd say they include soup kitchens and any other programs for homeless and disadvantaged people, and specifically exclude ministering to a congregation. There's no reason what's essentially a private club can't cover it's own expenses without expecting public subsidies. The other side of what you describe as 'a financial penalty on church attendance' is asking everyone else to pay a share of your Sunday morning activites. That's not right.

 

if that's the case, i would have to have final approval over every non profit

 

You mean you don't?

I wonder who's been turning mine down then.