• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

IRS threatens churches non tax status

U

Uhtrinity

Platinum Member
LOS ANGELES, California (AP) -- The Internal Revenue Service has warned a prominent liberal church it could lose its tax-exempt status because of an anti-war sermon a guest preacher gave on the eve of the 2004 presidential election, church officials say.


I do agree that churches should stick with religion and stay out of politics or lose their tax-free status, but enforcement needs to be consistant. Where was the IRS last year when a minister booted Kerry supporters out of his church? I'm sure P/N members can point out alot of other examples where nothing was done.

CNN Link
 
Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
I do agree that churches should stick with religion and stay out of politics or lose their tax-free status, but enforcement needs to be consistant. Where was the IRS last year when a minister booted Kerry supporters out of his church? I'm sure P/N members can point out alot of other examples where nothing was done.
Click to expand...
Actually in fairness to the IRS I believe they were investigating the Church where the minister pulled that stunt. Having said that, the details of this case are troubling given the minister did not simply criticize just one of the politicians in his sermon, and concluded by not endorsing one candidate over the other.
 
This doesn't really make sense, I'm sure there were plenty of churches that were pro-Bush that aren't getting threatened.
 
There was a story on NPR Monday evening about this case. The preacher apparently said something to the effect that "There are good grounds for supporting either candidate in this [the 2004 Presidential] election. But if Jesus were alive today, he would oppose the war in Iraq."

That gets awfully cose to advocating one candidate over another, and I do agree that religious congregations should not be, in effect, tax-free political advocacy groups. On the other hand, sermonizing on how a prophet would respond to particular contemporary moral issues seems exactly like what religion should be doing.

So my own feeling is that religions shouldn't be tax-exempt at all. That would free them to preach whatever message they wanted - political or otherwise. Under the current system, the "gray area" is just too darn wide.
 
In what way is a church a business?

A business is run for the profit of an individual.
A corporation is run for the profit of it's shareholders.

Who does a church profit? It's existence is like that of any non-profit organization. It can be corrupt, perhaps, and those in charge of it may (and often do) abuse its position in order to enrich themselves, but it is no different then MADD, or greenpeace.
 
Originally posted by: BarneyFife
I think that all churches should pay taxes since they all are a business.
Click to expand...

QFT. That goes for the Indian Casinos as well.

Churches get all this tax-free money and then become tools of politics and they're shocked to learn the IRS might put an end to it?
 
I think that this latest wave of multimillion dollar, lavish facility, evangelical churches, should pay taxes. Anyone ever seen one of those edifices? It becomes readily evident that they are a "for profit" organization. Where do you think most of that money from all their rally's is going? Well, for those who have blind faith, maybe it's time to look at where your pastor lives, as well as what he drives. 😉

A pastor or church, who truely is in the business of doing God's work, civid duty, etc, should be exempt. They probably give more money and clothes to the homeless and their own, making them less on the profit side.

Maybe it's time to categorize churches, then tax or not tax accordingly.
 
Weren't many of the catholic churches telling their CONgregations not to vote for Kerry because he was Pro-Choice?
 
I don't think politicians should be able to use chuch pulpits while campaigning which IMO is worse than a preacher talking about issues. It's done by both sides and should be a violation. It seems we always had one of the candidates(primaries included) in a church pulpit last election cycle. Sorry, but I don't want politics in my spiritualiy so they should stay out.
 
Churches are raking in the profits, they keep building huge mega-churches in Wal Mart superstore style.

They should pay taxes, their tax exempt status is BS.
 
Originally posted by: Bumrush99
Churches are raking in the profits, they keep building huge mega-churches in Wal Mart superstore style.

They should pay taxes, their tax exempt status is BS.
Click to expand...

This isn't true either. Many small churches don't get enough money to make ends meet. How many hundred thousand dollar preachers do you think there are?

LOL at the "experts" in church finance.
 
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
This isn't true either. Many small churches don't get enough money to make ends meet. How many hundred thousand dollar preachers do you think there are?

LOL at the "experts" in church finance.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. The problem is that those small churches aren't the ones becoming bully pulpits for politics. It is the larger congregrations with the big bucks to throw around. And they ought to be taxed, just like anyone and anything else.

I can think of an example of both "types" of churches right here in my local area. One isn't too far from me and pays their pastor about $28,000 a year. Another is a few miles down the road and pays their "pastor" nearly $120,000 per year. Not coincidentally, one is far more concerned with the people they're supposed to be helping as well.
 
This is pretty outrageous. Routinely people like Sen. Frist prepare videos that are shown at churches during services which are blatantly political yet those churches are not threatened with losing their tax exempt status.
 
Originally posted by: techs
This is pretty outrageous. Routinely people like Sen. Frist prepare videos that are shown at churches during services which are blatantly political yet those churches are not threatened with losing their tax exempt status.
Click to expand...

So are you outraged because it was the your "side" that is being investigated instead of Frist? Or are you intellectually honest enough to be outraged at the fact that it's done period?
 
By all appearances, this is misuse of the IRS for political attack purposes.

But given the extensive involvement of so-called religious institutions in the political arena today, especially those on the right, I have no objection at all to pulling ALL of their tax exemptions. This loophole is being abused far too much.
 
Originally posted by: ShadesOfGrey
Originally posted by: techs
This is pretty outrageous. Routinely people like Sen. Frist prepare videos that are shown at churches during services which are blatantly political yet those churches are not threatened with losing their tax exempt status.
Click to expand...

So are you outraged because it was the your "side" that is being investigated instead of Frist? Or are you intellectually honest enough to be outraged at the fact that it's done period?
Click to expand...


I am more outraged at the Frist/right wing stuff just because the instance cited in this post is that of a general anti-war sermon which seems pretty much non political and withing the realm of religion versus Frists talks on why we need a certain type of judge that his party supports.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top