Hey Mr President! I represent evangelicals, televangelists and scientology like Kenneth Copeland, Joel Osteen, David Miscavige, etc.
We collectively call you out as a raping pedophile piece of shit living specimen who wouldn’t dare come after our tax-free status. FUCK YOU!
The problem with this is that there’s no profit to tax.
I hate religion as much as the next guy but taxing a non-profit charity is nonsensical.
What you actually want is:
Mega-churches make massive profits.
You mean massive cash surpluses.
All that cash is legally required to be spent in the course of the churches objectives, which in almost all cases will be the furtherance of religion.
That means, the minister is restricted from using that money for personal things like holidays or boats or whatever.
Yes, mega churches provide celebrity ministers a lot of perks. Thats why I said this area needs stronger restrictions.
I assume the church can pay the minister a salary…are there restrictions on that salary?
Preachers and all other church staff members have to pay income taxes.
There is an interest-free housing stipend for preachers that works similar to an FSA (use it or lose it annually). Some military service members get a similar stipend if they live off-base for the same reason. Many preachers and service members are itenerant and may be reassigned to a different area at any time. Purchsing a house isn’trealistic if you don’tknownwhere you’ll live in 6 months, so they can’t take advantage of tax breaks like the home interest mortgage deduction. Preachers who are provided free housing (parsonage) can’t take advantage of the tax-free stipend because they don’t pay for housing.
My thought on that particular tax break isn’t to close it but to expand it to everyone who rents.
Someone knows their clergy tax code! I agree with your idea of expansion. That’s something I’d not considered and think it makes a lot of sense.
Depends on jurisdiction.
It can be taxed like any other salary. Sometimes they enjoy some tax concessions.
The point I was trying to make is that those churches that are bringing in big money may have a way to funnel that money to the minister - just make it his or her salary. Add bonuses. Sure the minister probably has to pay taxes on the income, but so what, they’re still making a lot more than most people (including members of their own church).
My comment is about taxing churches.
And unfortunately those would not be the ones targeted.
This is categorically untrue. Hiding profits doesn’t mean they don’t have them. That’s just fraud. The mormon church, for example, has trillions invested.
Same for Scientology.
Literally created as a tax dodge for L. Ron Hubbard.
This is demonstrably untrue. Swimming in literal profit pools like Scrudge McDuck is life.
That’s pretty similar to how it is.
I used to be a preacher. I paid taxes. Any facility space or property we rented to commercial companies (we had a psychologist who used a portion of our space during the week) was taxed.
The only real break we got versus other charities was that clergy can get a tax-freee home/apartment rental stipend if they aren’t provided a personage. The idea there was that, for itenerant clergy, purchasing a home isn’t realistic because they don’t know where they’ll live in a year. They can’t take advantage of things like a mortgage interest deduction.
But my solution there is to open up tax exemption for all rent payers.
I said this type of thing should be curtailed. Thats not the same as teaching churches because theyre like a business.
No profit? They literally tell their congregation to give them 10-20% of their earnings.
Thats income, not profit.
By definition, its all spent in the furtherance of the club / churches objectives.
If you and I form a dinner club and every week we chip in $50 and go out for dinner, the club has no “profit” we’re just sharing the cost of our hobby.
Sure, but our dinner club isn’t selling anything, while a church is.
Sure it is, our dinner club is selling great vibes.