Deductions to churches should not be 100% deductible.

[LiberalFighter]

If the money is used to pay the salaries of the clergy. No it is not a charity
If the money is used to pay the salaries of other employees. No it is not a charity
If the money is used to pay the rent or mortgage of the place of worship. No it is not a charity
If the money is used to pay the utilities or maintenance of the place of worship. No it is not a charity
If the money is used to pay for worship items such as hymals, pews, crosses. No it is not a charity
If the money is used to pay property taxes as they should. No it is not a charity

If the money is used to provide services that does not include proselytizing to those in need both local and foreign. Yes it is a charity
If the money is used to provide food and clothing that does not include proselytizing. Yes it is a charity

[Jackpine Radical]

1. Slight edit:

Deductions to churches should not be deductible.

[Angry Dragon]

2. Churches should be required to open their books

if they have nothing to hide

'And the Bible tells me so'

[Igel]

8. In the 1980s they were.

We had a copy of the books available for public inspection. One requirement of being a 501(c)(3) corporation.

The level of detail wasn't all that impressive. Income, categories of expenses. If people asked about employee income, it was available but not in the summary made public. They had to ask. Several categories were only available as summary figures.

I'm not aware that this bit of the law's been changed.

[Hydra]

3. I was SO pissed when they released the doctored tax forms for Romney

And listed the tithe to the LDS church as $ 4 million in "charity"

1. That isn't "charity." The LDS church uses that money to hurt people.

2. The required tithe is 10%. If he gave $4 Mill to the LDS church, that means his income was $40 mill, not $13 mill.

[Igel]

11. The required tithe is 10%.

Whether that's on gross or net is probably a matter of choice.

But nothing says that anything above the required tithe is prohibited.

The church I was in had 4 kinds of "income":
-- a tithe for the church and its work, whatever that was at the time
-- a tithe for the poor, usually channelled through the church
-- a tithe for church retreat attendance, often shared with those less well off and
with access given to the church for distribution
-- "offerings" and other voluntary contributions, where a person might turn in $5 or $300k.

[Hydra]

13. I think I'll stay comfortably on the side of "Mitt gave what was required, and not more"

But I also have his people confirming that for me. They admitted almost the same day that they doctored the numbers to get the "13%" he gave off the cuff, and various journals asked how much of the rest he had hidden using Bain and other tax havens.

So...Mitt paid his tithe, and it was billed as "Charity" that he hadn't taken his full deduction for.

Cute little angel there, isn't he?

[unblock]

4. umm, what about contributions to a non-profit library, open to the public?

what if the money is used to pay the salary of the librarian?
what if the money is used to pay the salary of the workers?
what if the money is used to pay for rent and storage of the books?
what if the money is used to pay for utilities so people can read the books?
what if the money is used to pay for chairs so people can sit while they read?
what if the money is used to pay for property taxes for the building?

what money, exactly, can a non-profit library spend, exactly, by your standards?

[Armin-A]

10. a library is public by all means

Not every one is the same denomination yet alone religion.

Anyone who is against books and public knowledge...well I don't know what to say.

That being said I do agree with you on some points, but not all. Just wanted to point out a huge difference IMO of service provided.

[unblock]

16. point is, religion isn't particularly "special" in getting non-profit status.

libraries, social clubs, fraternities, etc., are treated similarly.

from a tax perspective, it's not objectionable that churches use tax-deductible contributions to pay salaries or rent, any more than a fraternity that does the same.

what's objectionable is if they use tax-deductible contributions to promote political views, as political organizations are NOT treated similarly.

[Tigress DEM]

5. THIS is as against the Spirit of the Law as the CHURCH using the pulpit to bully voters.

Without the clergy in many small churches, there is NO charity.
Many clergy themselves are trained in counseling and provide the real kind that heals both emotionally and spiritual is addressed as well. For those that need/want this kind of help WhoTF are YOU to tell them they can't have it?

Maybe a better idea would be the $250,000 mark because I'm sure a lot of you are looking at the big DOLLAR churches who have millions to throw at campaigns or the Catholic Church that has lost it's collective mind and is crossing the line and telling parishioners that they can't vote for Obama and be good Catholics. Same shit they pulled when Kerry was running.

Looking at the salaries of other employees should see how it contributes to the members and the community, but just because you don't agree with someone's religion does NOT mean you get to decide if it's tax deductible.

I'm PERSONALLY SICK AND TIRED OF THIS HATE FEST going on here.

Ever HEARD of the concept of tolerance?

EXCEPT when a church starts mixing it up and uses the pulpit to tell people how to vote, I think how a church uses it's money, whether for the rent or mortgage of the place of worship, utilities or maintenance of the place of worship. Be it for hymals, pews, crosses or property taxes or to provide food and clothing to those who seek out a church for help IT IS appropriate use of their tax exempt status.

THERE are plenty of "charities" that don't get this kind of scrutiny AND I will agree upon the argument that ANY charity that uses it's TAX FREE dollars to PROMOTE a political agenda should LOSE it's tax exempt status for a year and be on "probation where they are watched for similar offenses for 10 years". Whatever it takes to get the law to be correctly obeyed.

[jberryhill]

6. How is "money used to provide food and clothing"

I gather that you can't hire people to do the providing, nor can you pay to rent or build a space in which you are going to do that providing, and if you do, then you can't hold religious services in that space.

Am I correct so far?

[BlueStreak]

7. This is absolutely right

Food kitchens, give them a 150% deduction -- I'd be OK with that.

But beyond that, there just isn't much that churches do that is significantly different from a book club, model airplane club, knitting circle, gardening club, tour of homes, or any other "clubby" activity that is not charitable.

And if that rules means that donations to the symphony or library are not allowed a deduction, then so be it.

[Igel]

9. Churches were considered educational.

There's book learning, secular education.

Then there's moral education.

A lot of really famous universities started out as religious-educational and shifted to secular-education.

Values vary as to what "moral education" means. For some, it includes being progressive, anti-racism, pro-tolerance. For others it means something else. To decide would involve the government's deciding what set of moral strictures is the one true proper one.

I guess as long as they agree with me, it's not just okay, it's appropriate and just.

[SoapBox]

12. Ditto!

[Warpy]

14. I'll draw a different line

If they make any attempt whatsoever to insert their dogma into civil law, tax them like any other political institution.

I am a heathen but I made my peace with the existence of religion a very long time ago. I simply don't want any of it in my government without financial consequences that would clip their wings severely.

[cbayer]

15. Do you think this should apply to all 501(3)c's or just churches?

[unblock]

17. the only real problem is when they push political views while claiming preferred tax treatment.

other non-profits don't have to be particularly charitable (fraternities, book clubs, etc.) to get the tax advantages.

being charitable isn't what gets the churches favorable tax treatment.

being non-profit and apolitical is.

[midnight armadillo]

18. Tax the FUCK out of the churches!