The delusioned in a bidding war

[freethefly 6]

http://news.yahoo.com/crystal-cathedral-bankruptcy-sale-sparks-bidding-war-013954680.html

It amazes me that a religion can take 50 million dollars of tax free money and use it to bid on a building. Money that should be used to feed and clothe the poor whom they claim to help. These people have no shame.

Quote from the article:

"I believe with every fiber of my being that God turned the eyes of the world on Crystal Cathedral because God wants to make a big bold statement," Sheila Coleman, director of ministry at the church and the daughter of Schuller, said during the service.

"He wants the world to know that he is a God who still does miracles," she said.

WOW, just WOW! This woman is in need of a psychiatrist. She is beyond delusional.

It is far beyond time to end the tax free status that these so called churches enjoy. They amount to nothing more than a scam and are bilking the fools who blindly follow them.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[CanuckInUSA 0]

The churches, synagogs and mosques should be like all other businesses. Count up your income, deduct some expenses and pay taxes on your profits. It's really not that hard.

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[captain_stan 0]

Quote

It amazes me that a religion can take 50 million dollars of tax free money and use it to bid on a building. Money that should be used to feed and clothe the poor whom they claim to help. These people have no shame.

The IRS doesn't require tax-exempt religions to help anybody--only tax-exempt charities have to do that.

Quote

It is far beyond time to end the tax free status that these so called churches enjoy.

Amen (pun intended)

[DougH 270]

Trade union in my town has several million dollars of property and buildings. I would estimate it around 50 million or so.

They don't pay a dime in property taxes to the town.

Neither do other non profits, private universities, etc etc.

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[JohnRich 4]

If you want to tax religion, perhaps you would also like to tax the exercise of freedrom of speech, the right to own guns, the right to vote, and the right to peaceably assemble also. And if you haven't kept your 4th Amendment taxes up to date, then the police will be free to search your home any time they feel like it, without a warrant. Deal?

[DanG 1]

Quote

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

What part of that sentance states that churches should be exempt from taxes? If they should be, why should newspapers, concern halls, or lawyers be taxed?

- Dan G

[lawrocket 3]

Would you suggest ending tax free status of non-profits?

And have you taken a look at how much government buildings cost? Take a look at this GAO report - and this is only federal courthouses. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10753t.pdf

The first paragraph puts it there: "The estimated cost to construct this extra space, when adjusted to 2010 dollars, is $835 million, and the annual cost to rent, operate and maintain it is $51 million."

This is just EXTRA space. Here in Fresno, I can look out my window at the brand spanking new Coyle Federal Courthouse, where an extra $35 million in construction cost was spent on unnecessary space. The facility itself was supposed to cost $121 million and become the tallest building in town.

So my concern is that a church with a magnificent building is called upon to be taxed because of it. Meanwhile, government Taj Majals are going up all over.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

If you want to tax religion, perhaps you would also like to tax the exercise of freedrom of speech, the right to own guns, the right to vote, and the right to peaceably assemble also. And if you haven't kept your 4th Amendment taxes up to date, then the police will be free to search your home any time they feel like it, without a warrant. Deal?

C'mon, John. You've twisted the message in order to "argue" against it. It may make for a sound-byte, but it doesn't advance the discussion.

Hint: he wasn't advocating "taxing religion". And no, I'm not willing to play The Semantics Game with you about it.

[captain_stan 0]

Quote

Would you suggest ending tax free status of non-profits?

Not-profits are treated different than churches. Money dontated to a non-profit is subject to income tax unless it qualifies as a "charity." Churches need not meet that requirement.

In my state, real property owned by a non-profit is subject to property tax unless the public has access to it and can use it in some way that is beneficial to the public. But IIRC, churches do not pay property tax here.

Quote

So my concern is that a church with a magnificent building is called upon to be taxed because of it. Meanwhile, government Taj Majals are going up all over.

Is there any reason for a publicly owned building to pay a public tax? Isn't that just a wash?

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

It is far beyond time to end the tax free status that these so called churches enjoy

Couldn't agree more. Maybe give them a break on their primary property. But all secondary property holdings must pay tax.

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

If you want to tax religion,

Not saying that. If they start building up a large collection of property, they should be paying property tax.

We are all engines of karma

[freethefly 6]

Quote

Would you suggest ending tax free status of non-profits?

I sure would, if they use the money much in the way that the mega-churches do. Preachers like Schuller, Joyce Meyer, Billy Graham (outed in 1977 hiding 23M), Ned Graham, Benny Hinn, Joel Osteen (... the list would eat up way to much bandwidth to continue listing) take and use to support their huge salaries and lavish lifestyles. These groups bilk the poor and gullible. A church that owns private jets and mansions for the personal use of its leader should not be enjoying the tax free status that the smaller churches that actually use the donations to help people do.

Quote

And have you taken a look at how much government buildings cost?

It's your tax dollars. If you don't like it, rally against it.
Note, I do agree with you that far too much waste is spent to build Taj Mahal type buildings in government. If you don't like it, do what I do, write letters to your congressman/woman. On county and State projects, either vote for or against.
here in Lawrence County, MO. millions were spent on a new court building. The old court could had been refurbished for less. The old building was then refurbished and is being used. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of emergency funds were used to upgrade (?) the jail. What did they do? they painted the cells pink. http://www.hometowndailynews.com/local_news.php?id=4717 Funds would had been put to better use to add a jail addition to the court building. The existing jail is still an old, ram-shackled building and a drain on the county as it has yet to be filled from other counties overcrowding problems. Neighboring Greene County has been in the news recently pushing for an extension to their facilities. This article is from last March. http://articles.ky3.com/2011-03-21/new-jail_29172920
Too much waste.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[captain_stan 0]

Quote

Hint: he wasn't advocating "taxing religion". And no, I'm not willing to play The Semantics Game with you about it.

What we're really talkin' about isn't a matter of the church itself being taxed anyway, but rather a lower rate of income tax for those individuals who support it. And in other words a higher rate of income tax for those of us who exercise our freedom from religion.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Hint: he wasn't advocating "taxing religion". And no, I'm not willing to play The Semantics Game with you about it.

What we're really talkin' about isn't a matter of the church itself being taxed, but a lower rate of income tax for those individuals who support it. And in other words a higher rate of income tax for those of us who exercise our freedom from religion.

Bull - find a charity and donate to it, and you can deduct the donation just like they do.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[captain_stan 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Hint: he wasn't advocating "taxing religion". And no, I'm not willing to play The Semantics Game with you about it.

What we're really talkin' about isn't a matter of the church itself being taxed, but a lower rate of income tax for those individuals who support it. And in other words a higher rate of income tax for those of us who exercise our freedom from religion.

Bull - find a charity and donate to it, and you can deduct the donation just like they do.

Bull? The difference is that a charity is reqired by law to prove they are actually helping people in some tangible way. Religion doesn't have to meet that test.

BTW, I do donate to charity because I like to help people.

Edit to add: I don't consider paying someone to stand up and shout "God Damn America!" to be helping anyone. But when our government gives people a financial incentive to participate in a religion, this is gonna be one of the results for which the rest of us are paying.

[lawrocket 3]

I agree. I am by no means a tax guy but I would think that even though the churches aren't taxed the individuals are. Meaning that if Schuller makes $200k per year and gets $2 million in benefits that those would be taxed as normal income.

Can anybody support or deny it? I just don't know.

ps was that new courthouse you're talking about the Limbaugh courthouse? Hence providing further evidence of the wasteful GOP policies?

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[captain_stan 0]

Quote

if Schuller makes $200k per year and gets $2 million in benefits that those would be taxed as normal income.

Can anybody support or deny it? I just don't know.

A church is a perfect tax haven. An "employee" of the church doesn't have to accept a salary, but can enjoy a very comfortable tax-free lifestyle including car, travel, home, food, entertainment, etc, which are indeed benefits, but are not taxable. Of course a corporation or trust can evade tax in similar way, but unlike the church, they will at least pay tax on the money going in.

[freethefly 6]

Quote

I agree. I am by no means a tax guy but I would think that even though the churches aren't taxed the individuals are. Meaning that if Schuller makes $200k per year and gets $2 million in benefits that those would be taxed as normal income.

Can anybody support or deny it? I just don't know.

ps was that new courthouse you're talking about the Limbaugh courthouse? Hence providing further evidence of the wasteful GOP policies?

The Limbaugh Courthouse is on the other side of the state in Cape Girardeau, Mo..
The new court here in Mt. Vernon is the Lawrence County Justice Center, Judicial Circuit 39.
I went in there a few weeks ago, thinking that the offices from the old court building were moved, to pay personal property tax. The place is freaking huge. You could fit four houses the size of mine in the lobby alone. The building was very much close to vacant. There were a few people in there. They don't hold a lot of court there. Most cases are just traffic. Some small time drug cases. Nothing to justify the cost. I was able to find out that non of the offices from the old building were moved and then crossed the road to the old court to pay my taxes. There were, maybe, 10 cars in the new courts parking lot. Major waste of money spent in an extremely poor county. Lawrence county is a GOP hotbed. Near 80% of the residents are registered republicans.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Hint: he wasn't advocating "taxing religion". And no, I'm not willing to play The Semantics Game with you about it.

What we're really talkin' about isn't a matter of the church itself being taxed, but a lower rate of income tax for those individuals who support it. And in other words a higher rate of income tax for those of us who exercise our freedom from religion.

Bull - find a charity and donate to it, and you can deduct the donation just like they do.

Bull? The difference is that a charity is reqired by law to prove they are actually helping people in some tangible way. Religion doesn't have to meet that test.

BTW, I do donate to charity because I like to help people.

Then you get the same "tax break" that the religious do - congratulations, one less thing you get to worry about.

Quote

Edit to add: I don't consider paying someone to stand up and shout "God Damn America!" to be helping anyone. But when our government gives people a financial incentive to participate in a religion, this is gonna be one of the results for which the rest of us are paying.

They aren't, as you showed above.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[captain_stan 0]

Quote

Then you get the same "tax break" that the religious do - congratulations, one less thing you get to worry about.

I quit worrying about politics and religion a long time ago. Most people will believe that which makes them feel good, and I don't expect to influence them (you). But for the others with an open mind, I offer another point of view to ponder.

Quote

Quote

Edit to add: I don't consider paying someone to stand up and shout "God Damn America!" to be helping anyone. But when our government gives people a financial incentive to participate in a religion, this is gonna be one of the results for which the rest of us are paying.

They aren't, as you showed above

Salary is taxable--everything else is not. Ask youself if the orator in question can not enjoy the benefit of everyting from the platform on which he stands, to the roof over his head, to the meals he eats, to the car he drives being provided by tax-free funds.

How you gonna pretend to be a conservative when you support this kind of government subsidy? You've just defined the difference between a Republican and a conservative.

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

I agree. I am by no means a tax guy but I would think that even though the churches aren't taxed the individuals are. Meaning that if Schuller makes $200k per year and gets $2 million in benefits that those would be taxed as normal income.

Can anybody support or deny it? I just don't know.

Clergy pay taxes. Clergy taxes are a little bit weird. Without going into a lot of detail, they are considered self employed for purposes of SSA/Medicare taxes but are employees for income tax purposes. Clergy can either buy their own house or use a house (parsonage or manse) the church has purchased for them. The use of the manse is taxed for SSA/Medicare purposes but it not taxed as income. If you buy your own home you may receive a housing allowance which is not taxed for income tax purposes. You may still deduct your mortgage interest.

Property taxes are local but in the jurisdictions I am familiar w/ churches were supposed to pay taxes on property not being used for a primarily religious or charitable purpose. Example, one church I know was renting their manse while they were between pastors. They should be paying property tax on that manse. I would guess such rules are poorly monitored but I don't really know.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[GeorgiaDon 380]

Quote

Quote

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

What part of that sentance states that churches should be exempt from taxes? If they should be, why should newspapers, concern halls, or lawyers be taxed?

Here's a web site that explains the reason for the legal tradition of not taxing churches. If one entity can tax another, the entity that does the taxing is in a position of superiority over the entity that is taxed. Because the 4th amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion...", Congress and religious institutions are considered to be separate sovereign entities: Congress has no authority over religions, and religions have no authority over Congress (at least, yet!). If Congress were to tax churches, it would put them in a position of authority over the church and violate the 4th amendment. Similarly, Congress cannot tax States, and States cannot tax Congress. The Supreme Court most recently upheld this reasoning in Lemon v. Kurtzman in 1971.

Ministers do pay state and federal tax on their income. The only exemption they can get is that they can exempt themselves from social security and medicare, but they must ask for the exemption in the first year of their ministry, and prove that such government insurance violates the tenets of their religion. Otherwise they are considered to be self-employed and pay the same rate (15% I think) as any other self-employed person.

I'm no lawyer or expert on the Constitution, but I thought the questions were interesting enough to look up and share.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[Coreece 190]

Quote

Preachers like Schuller, Joyce Meyer, Billy Graham (outed in 1977 hiding 23M), Ned Graham, Benny Hinn, Joel Osteen....It is far beyond time to end the tax free status that these so called churches enjoy.

Listen, I'm no fan of these prosperity gospel mega churches either, but I'm not so sure taxing them is such a wise idea. Perhaps you haven't thought this through carefully...

Don't you think that if all these Churches are giving money to the government that they're gonna want something in return? I'm suprised that people who are against religious political clout would be so willing to go down a road that would only make that stronger.

Now I may not be so concerened about religious political clout, but I am concerned with protecting the local Church against any political pressure from government officials who we can't trust, especially those in the future who we don't even know yet.

I don't want government in my religion and you don't want my religion in your government...let's try to keep focused on that mutual goal without proposing ideas that have a counteractive influence on the seperation of Church and State.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[captain_stan 0]

Quote

Listen, I'm no fan of these prosperity gospel mega churches either, but I'm not so sure taxing them is such a wise idea. Perhaps you haven't thought this through carefully...

There are two separate questions here (1) To start taxing a church? (2) To continue to reward church donors with a lower income tax?

As to #1, a church can qualify as a not-for-profit organzation anywy (just like USPA) and enjoy freedom from tax on any profit they generate. So this is a non-issue. I haven't heard anyone in this thread propose a special "church tax!"

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

How you gonna pretend to be a conservative when you support this kind of government subsidy? You've just defined the difference between a Republican and a conservative.

Must have missed where it was the government that gave the church the money. You've also missed where the SC has stated that the benefit of the church to the community offsets the tax issue.

You've just illustrated the difference between a Republican and a liberal in Republican's clothing.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706