Churches and Taxes

If the infrastructure and services are already in place and funded, how does it benefit the local church to have the added burden imposed?

Some may consider it an issue of fairness, and I'll concede that from the viewpoint of a nonattending taxpayer it may be legitimate. What I don't understand is why those here who have stakes in their churches think it would be a benefit to have taxes imposed that would take funds from other areas that may better support the work. Why would it be a good thing?

 

Just because something's not prohibited in the Constitution doesn't mean it's beneficial.

 

What are the benifits to the nation for the church not paying taxes?

 

The Free Exercise clause prevents this. Religion cannot be taxed. The members of the church have ALREADY paid taxes on the money they are giving to the church, they have ALREADY paid personal property taxes, etc. To tax the church would be a direct violation.

This is why, for example, the IRS states in its publications that Churches DO NOT need to file for 501C3 status. Churches are automatically "tax exempt" by lieu of the Constitution.

As far as roads, bridges, etc., taxes should be directed at those who use those roads, instead of the general population. How is it fair to tax Amish folk, for instance, living in a self sustaining commune, and do not use those services?

Property taxes do nothing but deprive the private citizenry of ownership rights. It makes you rent your property from the government. Instead, tax the roads (toll booths). Tax the person sending their kid to school, not the guy who chose not to have kids.

Anything more than a few percent income tax on individuals, and a steep tariff on imports, should be completely done away with.

 

Are you implying the nation is harmed by churches not paying taxes? If so, then how?

 

Has anyone considered that tax policy can be used as a tool by the state to do harm to entities that run counter to its wishes?

 

I asked first.

 

No. That will be the result of political correctness, not taxes.

 

How? Please explain.

 

I see no financial benefits, nor do I see any harm. One benefit I do see, however, is that by keeping the power to tax out of the hands of the government another tool that can be used to do harm to the church is denied, should it become antagonistic. In my mind, should it have this power, it could potentially be harmful to the notion of religious liberty.

Now your turn to answer mine.

 

No I am not.

 

Glad to hear.

 

When real estate is removed from the tax rolls the tax rate of the remaining properties is increased.

 

>Since 50% of all property in Syracuse is Tax exempt - that means everyone else is paying double the tax

In one sense, yes. But there are different kind of exempt property. One extreme would be if ALL the exempt properties were roads and public parks. It would not make sense to try to add THAT property back onto the tax rolls because apportioning the cost would probably cost more than half the tax revenue. The only person who would cole out ahead would be the guy who slept in his car and showered at work.

The other extreme would be if ALL the exempt property were Baptist Churches. Then all Baptists would subsidized by all non-Baptists.

The existing system is probably equitable because almost every person gets some kind of advantage from the existence of some sort of exempt property.

 

So lets eliminate ALL property tax, and instead tax road usage. Common sense. It is sickening that we are not allowed to own property in this country.

 

If churches were to be subjected to property and income tax, the burden on the church and its contributing members would be increased.

 

So how is that an argument? Putting property taxes on my property increases the burden on me.
Some are calling for no property taxes at all on anyone. The issue of this discussion based on the OP is not about how to or not to tax the public but should the church be taxed?
I would say this. The church is the people, not a building or a piece of property. If I have a piece of property and I am required to pay taxes by law then why should not the church also have to pay the same taxes? If ten people go together and buy a piece of property and build a building to play cards in they collectively will have to pay property taxes. If the same people go together and buy a piece of property and build a building and call it a church they are excused from paying property taxes. WHY? Why should the unbelieving world be held responsible for carrying the responsibility of the church?

 

Look, I'd guess most here on this site are burdened with the obligation of property taxes. Services and infrastructure need to be paid for. No dispute about that. I doubt many write the check with joyous celebration. Most folks would rather use moneys paid in taxes for other things. The payment of obligation A means the sacrifice of B.

Why would a contributing member of a church want to add another burden (that would not further the Gospel) to their local ministry? The payment of the assessment needs to come from somewhere.

As to the question of the unbelieving world carrying the church's responsibility in this matter, presently it is not the church's responsibility; and in my opinion, it's a shame some would make it one.