I don't agree with giving churches tax-exempt status just for being churches (I do agree with giving nonprofits tax-exempt status), but if that's the policy then I'm glad to see it's being applied across-the-board.
Nonprofits categorically are not tax exempt, tax exempt nonprofits are.
And the reasons that (as well as the actual terms, conditions, benefits, and restrictions under which) exemption to is offered to them varies for different subtypes of nonprofits eligible for taxation. But he main overarching basis is that business taxation is a tax on profits of entities which can be redistributed to do group of owners/members/shareholders/etc., and serves to discourage using the business as a vehicle by those people for tax avoidance, whereas tax exempt nonprofits generally do not have such claims against their assets.
For charities (to which donations are also tax deductible beyond the org beyond exempt), there is additionally the idea that they are serving a public function (which, yes, makes the designation of churches as tax exempt charities problematic, and arguably contrary to the spirit, if not the case law, of the First Amendment.)
Yes, I know, and it is probably hair-splitting in practice. I just disagree with there being a special category for religious organizations. I think nonprofit status alone is sufficient to cover everyone.
> I think nonprofit status alone is sufficient to cover everyone.
There's a whole bunch of major categories of tax exempt non-profit status with different detailed rules, and within the main categories (e.g., charities) there are often minor categories with different variations on the rules.
If you have concrete, disagreements with the rules (including better, simpler alternatives that require fewer distinctions), great.
I don't. My attitude is more of a political/philosphical one than a policy one.
My take on the First Amendment differs a bit from the government's. I interpret "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" as incompatible with making an IRS category about them. This is because it requires the government to decide what does and does not count as a religion -- which seems to be, at least in spirit, what the first amendment says should not be done.
That said, this is not really something that I get terribly upset about. In practice, I don't think a great deal of injustice results (meaning that if I'm going to make a big stink about injustice, there are much bigger fish to fry.)
8 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 30.6 ms ] threadI don't agree with giving churches tax-exempt status just for being churches (I do agree with giving nonprofits tax-exempt status), but if that's the policy then I'm glad to see it's being applied across-the-board.
Tax exempt churches are a subset of tax exempt nonprofits.
And the reasons that (as well as the actual terms, conditions, benefits, and restrictions under which) exemption to is offered to them varies for different subtypes of nonprofits eligible for taxation. But he main overarching basis is that business taxation is a tax on profits of entities which can be redistributed to do group of owners/members/shareholders/etc., and serves to discourage using the business as a vehicle by those people for tax avoidance, whereas tax exempt nonprofits generally do not have such claims against their assets.
For charities (to which donations are also tax deductible beyond the org beyond exempt), there is additionally the idea that they are serving a public function (which, yes, makes the designation of churches as tax exempt charities problematic, and arguably contrary to the spirit, if not the case law, of the First Amendment.)
There's a whole bunch of major categories of tax exempt non-profit status with different detailed rules, and within the main categories (e.g., charities) there are often minor categories with different variations on the rules.
If you have concrete, disagreements with the rules (including better, simpler alternatives that require fewer distinctions), great.
I don't. My attitude is more of a political/philosphical one than a policy one.
My take on the First Amendment differs a bit from the government's. I interpret "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" as incompatible with making an IRS category about them. This is because it requires the government to decide what does and does not count as a religion -- which seems to be, at least in spirit, what the first amendment says should not be done.
That said, this is not really something that I get terribly upset about. In practice, I don't think a great deal of injustice results (meaning that if I'm going to make a big stink about injustice, there are much bigger fish to fry.)