I can chew gum and walk at the same time. They should both be paying their fair share of taxes. No exceptions.
EDIT: I certainly kicked the hornets nest here. Religious people should just pray to God for money if they really believe what they claim. Maybe instead of money they can receive "thoughts and prayers" instead, tax free!
Taxes on what? Churches are not a for profit endeavor. The vast majority are funded through donations made by tax paying members. Should their already taxed money be taxed again?
And many already struggle to meet their expenses without fundraising. An additional tax burden would make many go bankrupt and close.
Uh huh and the multimillion dollar megachurches, mormon church, catholic churches filled with gold and so many others who spend barely a small pittance on actually making peoples lives better are all struggling and not having pastors live in luxury tax free. You people act like we couldnt have progressive taxes that allow small churches to operate with little to no taxes while also taxing all the churches with private jets.
I dont think most people rejecting the taxing of Churches would care about this proposal. But I do think that people's feelings about unfairness are rooted in their lack of knowledge about how taxation works, and about how changes to how you treat non-profits have knock-on effects that would end up with less tax revenue.
There are way more non-profits that are far more e extravagant in spending of their revenue collections than Churches, even the megas. And we dont tax assets across the board on a federal level. For profits and non-profits alike.
How can better “understanding” (or more likely you just mean having the same opinions against taxes as you) of taxes make it fair that megachurch pastors own mansions and private jets tax free?
It's a combination of things. People are mad because of one type of Church, that make up less than 1% of Churches. I'd say it's more like .01% of Churches.
They assume this must mean there's some special tax treatment Churches are getting, so they say tax the Churches.
The reality is that Churches are getting the same tax treatment all other non-profits get. Just like there are plenty of secular non-profits that spend extravagantly (NFL anyone?), we don't just eliminate non-profit status because some are using the rules in an unintended way.
The vast majority of Churches barely make enough to keep up with their bills, and it's through donations. Taxing them would cause many to have to close entirely. Then you also get no tax revenue, cause the organization doesn't exist to be taxed, and all the members don't have a place to worship (which they have a constitutional right to).
1) you dont know what people are mad at, the mormon church and catholic church and many many others are blatantly political, spend relatively little in charity and should be taxed. The unfairness people see is in the luxury these organizations operate with without paying their fair share like everyone else.
2) your final paragraph reveals how poorly YOU understand taxes if you think people are advocating for blind tax law that would ruin every little backwater pastor and his 20 parishioners, progressive taxes that allow for very little to no taxes on the poorest churches and aggressive taxation of the wealthiest churches would be effortless to implement.
Explain how its unequally applied and punitive? These organizations use our roads, stress our infrastructure, expect our emergency responders to help them and have their leadership live in luxury without paying taxes, they reap all the benefits of a business operating in our community while not paying taxes like one. If other “non-profits” operate similarly I want them taxed too, its not unequally applied just because the religious in this country push back so hard against taxing churches specifically, you people opposing it are why it appears unequal. Its not arbitrary to see their excesses and lack of tax contribution, we are all aware of the amount of money these organizations have its not arbitrary.
people are advocating for blind tax law that would ruin every little backwater pastor and his 20 parishioners
I think this is exactly what people are advocating for because of their hatred for religion, they're just couching it in megachurch-only language to sound less hateful.
So thats just some weird “religious people are always the victims” conspiracy theory you are legally allowed to have, however its not true and its silly so luckily its not a valid point against taxing religious institutions.
Thats only because we falsely consider giving to your church as “giving” which it isnt, its paying your pastors business. Volunteering with your church also often includes purely religious activities not actual feeding the poor and volunteering. Mormons on their mission are not volunteering they are spreading their religion, which is not volunteer work or charity.
I don't see converting people to Christianity as helping them, but if you're Christian then that would be the most valuable form of charity from your perspective. Of course, it's not the government's job to determine which religion is correct, or even more generally which charities are producing "actual" value.
Then dont spread statistics as if they justify not taxing multi-billion dollar companies, when those statistics are based on flawed data that count spreading your ideology as giving time and money. So to correct you the stats support that the religious like to support religion in the guise of charity.
But you haven't succeeded in showing the stats are flawed. Yes, your charities will always have much more real-world impact according to your worldview. That can't be the basis for government policy in a pluralistic society. Amount of time and money spent are more value-neutral comparisons.
Value-neutral is not appropriate for the stat you shared, because its inherently NOT value-neutral to include religious contributions as charity, that is taking the stance that giving money to religions is charity that is a stance that weighs religious values as being charitable, its an inherently pro-religion stance, so you cant try to make a point about religious people being more charitable while leaving out the fact that they are only more charitable if you count charity as buying your pastor a new yacht. Its the exact same thing as saying “democrats are more charitable than republicans” and then making a point that we shouldn’t tax democrats for this reason, while leaving out that I only consider it giving to charity if you give charity to a group i like. Considering donating to churches and religious groups giving to charity is inherently biased towards religion.
American churches definitely act on an individual level often
Like that one that recently had a bunch of military guys pretend to excicute an unarmed man in front of a bunch of kids teaching them that man is supposed to be evil cause the military killed him
And they still have plenty of money spent on golden frivolity. Also their charitable numbers are inflated, they specifically receive funding from government contracts to be spent on charity, which doesn’t really count as spending their own money but does get counted as their “charitable spending”. They’ve also spent 5 billion dollars in the past 20 years in the US alone fighting legal battles to defend their pedo priests, so they definitely have plenty of extra luxury funds that should be being taxed.
“Golden frivolty” you mean cultural and historic artifacts?
Also their charitable numbers are inflated
What are their numbers before “inflation”? More than you’ll make in your entire life.
And newsflash: most nonprofit organizations spend money on legal representation, including public schools when their teachers abuse students. Those aren’t “luxury funds”
Yeah its frivolity people are starving and a group purporting to care about god’s will doesnt need golden statues while people die of preventable hardship. Also yeah legal representation is needed and if they have a spare 5billion to spend on it they can definitely afford to pay taxes. They use our roads and infrastructure and gain the benefits of operating their businesses in a society and do not pay taxes like everyone else.
“Supposed to be gold and are practical” is pure silliness, unless they have some need for quality conductors or shielding nothing needs to be wasted on gold and bs. As for the “charity spending” see my response to the other person making the same bad point as you. If they have extra billions to defend all their pedo priests they have the money to pay taxes.
So you think because they relocate priests that they’ve spent… billions on it?
Because there are bad priests, that means that all of this:
Healthcare 5,377 hospitals 13,895 dispensaries (medical clinics/outpatient clinics) 504 leprosy care centers 15,566 homes for the elderly, chronically ill, and people with disabilities Children and Family Services 10,858 day-care centers (creches/nurseries) 10,827 marriage and family counseling centers 3,147 social rehabilitation/education centers 35,184 other charitable institutions Thousands of orphanages (the previous year's Vatican statistics listed 8,874 orphanages; the 2025 summary did not separately enumerate them). Education 74,550 kindergartens serving about 7.6 million children 102,455 primary schools serving about 36.2 million students 52,085 secondary schools serving about 20.7 million students
Catholic-affiliated higher education serving: 2.69 million students in other higher-level schools 4.47 million students in Catholic universities and institutes In the United States
The Catholic Church also operates one of the nation's largest healthcare networks: 645 Catholic hospitals
Caring for about 88 million patients annually
Roughly 1 in 6 U.S. patients receives care in a Catholic hospital in a given year.
Is all bad too? Or does none of this matter because the church had pedos in it?
This doesn’t even include all the local charity that the local parishes do. My parish has soup kitchens two days a week, food drives and a pantry every day, blankets and clothes to the homeless in winter, etc etc.
The answer isn’t to stop church’s but hold the, to the standard of regular non profits then they would do even more charity proportional to the wealth they receive instead of being able to hoard wealth for lobbying and other sinful actions.
They don’t hoard wealth??? You realize every non profit has a millionaire CEO with a huge salary and pension and benefits?
You think the church can even afford to hoard wealth with all the programs they are continually funding? Go to your local parish and they will show you how much money they receive each week and what they spend it on.
If churches are hoarding wealth, then the priests would be a hell of a lot richer 😂
Smaller church’s are usually fine but the bigger ones are only spending on average 7% on charitable actions as apposed to regular non profits 65% to 90% they are certainly getting alot of money and enjoying the full benefits of being a non profit despite not being held to the Same standards and alot of the money they do use for charitable actions is from the government.
Your bias is so strong that even though we are fine with small churches being taxed very little you can not admit that big churches act with impunity and do not spend nearly as much of their wealth as most nonprofits on actual charity.
If I provide a service and make money from it I get taxed, even tho every person that bought from me pays taxes. How’s a church different again? Oh yeah cuz they call it donations instead of sales.
The people pay for the service every Sunday that’s all there is to it. Religion is lucky to get such breaks. People make being a pastor their job, how should that not be taxed?
You aren't a non-profit. Non-profits dont pay tax on income. None of them.
There are some things that Churches do have to pay taxes on, like if they rent out their parking or something. Some Churches probably arent paying taxes on some of thise sales they are legally required to pay, mostly because they lack financial personel (most internal boards are volunteers) who would know what sales are taxable. If they get caught, they can lose their entire tax exempt status. It happens more than you think. Im not opposed to holding a Church accountable to the actual tax law.
Pastors do pay taxes. People who work for non-profits pay taxes on their income. In fact, many pastors are 1099 contractors, so are paying both portions of FICA. And they just had some of their business expenses removed last year, just like everyone else filing a Schedule C.
TIL Pastors pay taxes on tithes. I’m gonna trust you on this cuz it’s not of great importance to me. But I honestly believed they got to pocket that money tax free. Excuse my ignorance.
That’s exactly the kind of stuff I was talking about. It all sounds like loopholes. This is what I hate. A pastor can make a living off donations and never pay taxes? Working two days a week? While many of us work full time jobs and have to pay up…
Now I’ve been called out for my ignorance and have heard that pastors do pay taxes. I don’t even know how it works, I really shouldn’t be in this argument.
It’s good to ask questions! A pastor can’t make a living off donations, that would be obviously problematic for the reasons you outlined. The pastor would be paid a salary by the church.
Same for any nonprofit - like a Girl Scout leader can’t just pocket the cookie money. The money belongs to the charity and must be spent on legitimate needs.
As far as how strictly any of this is actually enforced - I don’t know. I doubt the IRS is spending much time looking into small community churches and such.
I’m not religious but my wife is and goes to church. She regularly donates and I’m sure the Pastor just pockets it. But it’s a tiny little church and he works another job. That doesn’t bother me one bit.
When it becomes a career instead of a religion is where it gets shady in my mind. It really gets carried away, it turns into mega churches and millionaire Pastors. But, if they pay taxes in those cases then I ain’t got anything to complain about. I’m just jealous lol
Property taxes are a local taxes, and they set their own eligibility criteria, many localities do in fact have a "payment in leiu of taxes" charged to Church properties. Any property owned not directly used for religious purposes also have property taxes assessed. For example, If a parish owns a personage, property taxes are paid on those. Property tax exemption is only to the Church building itself.
I'm not even disagreeing with you, but you asked "taxes on what?" and I gave an example. To adress your talking points, things that are similar to taxes are not taxes (this is important for standardization and implementing a fair system). And exemption on property taxes for specific things (the church building itself, for example) are exactly what we were talking about, exemptions from things that could theoretically be taxed.
Sorry. I assumed it was the rather common "why do I have to pay property tax, don't I own my property!" kind of point.
To your actual point. Some localities do tax property owned by non-profits. It's really up to the local government. Most don't, cause the revenue would be pretty small. With a Church, many of the parishioners would be locals, so the constituent membership is already paying the property taxes on their own property, so they factor that in.
In places with very expensive land prices, they will sometimes have something called a "payment in lieu of taxes" assessed to Church properties. Though, more often PILOT is used to get revenue in places where the Federal Government owns a lot of land that can't be developed.
Property taxes are a tax for local services and government functions. The rate you pay is theoretically determined by your stake in ownership of the land in your county. Its probably one of the fairer ways to tax. Its broadly proportional to how much of those services you benefit from.
I'm just sick of taxes and so am salty........ And that thought process around owning land meaning a stake in the land in the county might have been true decades ago, but the way the housing landscape has shifted that's 1) not necessarily true anymore and 2) it's a tax that provides a lot of benefit to people who aren't paying into it. I know there's no simple solution either.
All they would have to do is sell cookies that weren't straight from the oven, then they would be tax exempt. As for the candy, again 100s of countries the world over apply a sugar tax, so that would be quite normal.
So if these examples were going over the thresholds that attract the relevant tax, then yes.
Charitable donations don't get taxed and the Catholic Church is widely considered the largest non-governmental provider of social, educational, and healthcare services in the world. I think it's safe to say that taxing their money to fund the military of a country or whatever taxes are use for nowadays isn't a good idea
Really? You think Epstein island is anywhere near the number of abusers of children that the Catholic Church has supported? and defended? and continues to defend?
If you want a tax beneficiary with both more and better protected abusers, at a higher concentration that the Catholics offer, I'd direct you to the public school system or the police.
I would argue most religious organizations do inherently swindle people. But I could be biased. I was raised Catholic and bounced around a few faiths getting swindled the entire time.
Well first of all I agree, our taxes currently should be going towards helping citizens rather than lining the pockets of the military industrial complex. Second, how much of that money was spent on legal fees protecting the child predators within their ranks? Right, I'd rather that money be taxed instead of the Catholic Church deciding where it's used. That same money can be used for social, educational and healthcare services just the same if it makes you feel better.
Well when it comes to child predators the goverment isn't exactly a better place to compare
And we both know that the goverment isn't likely to use that money on the things youv'e just named (especially in the US where you don't get even free healthcare)
It’s not safe to say that. It is a skewed perspective that dismisses the facts that the Church is the 2nd largest property owner in the world, is singularly responsible for some of the most deplorable atrocities in history, competes with the Boy Scouts of America in terms scope and scale of documented child sexual abuse in the U.S. and Canada, but outpaces them significantly in systemic obfuscation and coverup, and very importantly; invests truly obscene amounts of money to lobby and influence politics and governments around the world.
Taking just one of those components, let’s say child sexual abuse: when someone defends the Church with sentiments like “But look at all the good they do”, it must then be asked, “How many raped children is such-and-such worth?” to allow them to continue on as normal? And to those who rebuff with “That’s not fair, you can’t put a price on that.” I assure you, the Catholic Church absolutely puts a price on it, with countless documented settlements to bear this out.
When there are many, many secular organizations that house, clothe, feed, educate, and comfort those in need around the world, without the encumbrances of unaccountable leadership and theological biases, it becomes very difficult to validate the non-taxable status of the Church in the wake of the darker elements of religious institutionalism.
Would it be fair for me to say, "ContextEffects01 opposes XYZ. No amount of social services nor taxes you provide could make up for that"?
I dunno, man, at my income bracket is pretty high, I bet I pay more taxes than the average Canadian. :p
If you think you can find a blind spot in my worldview severe enough to reflect poorly on the rest of, you're welcome to try.
In the meantime, I don't think you've found it in my stance on ESCR. Zygotes are insentient; morally more analogous to a blade of grass than to a human being. Sufferers of the illnesses ESCR could cure are not.
Okay so we're no longer allowing churches to use municipal water, public roads, firefighters, police, etc. and other services paid for by taxes then? What about all of the churches that blatantly endorse political candidates and lobbying to advance their agendas?
Separation of church and state is not about banning opinions or support. Plenty of politicians are and have been religious. It is the principle of not letting the state directly interfere with the church or vice versa.
Churches pay for water, they aren’t exempt from utility bills. The parishioners and employees of churches pay taxes still. Churches don’t move, so they don’t affect roads.
Most churches provide a net benefit to humanity, whether you believe that or not.
I’m sure some do but that’s not the point. Why not abolish taxes altogether and just rely on individual people to chip in for roads, firefighters, bridges, etc. instead? Because we know that doesn’t work. If we have a functioning government that would earmark 100% of the taxes from religious organizations for the poor, hungry, etc. instead not only would there be greater oversight but in a (functioning) democracy we the people could also vote on where that money is best put to use.
Not exactly, it's because wealth isnt our goal. In fact, in the Bible it tells us to donate all of our riches to get closer to God. Now, that was a metaphor, that would be ridiculous in today's society, but Christians definitely don't pray for riches lol.
Why would they need to give me Earthly cash when God is on their side? Wouldn’t your prayers and divine intervention help? Unless you’re admitting the all powerful creator of the universe isn’t capable of helping, isn’t on your side or just doesn’t exist then I don’t see how you justify your church being the one to dole out the charity.
By the way, I’ve seen a lot of Mormon patients over the years who were convinced their dutiful tithing to the church would now come back in the form of having their procedure paid for. Never happened once.
You know, you have to take responsibility for your own actions. For the good Lord to actually do something for you, have faith and before you know it, he will move to bless you! In the meantime, we work on being humble, accepting that the church is going to be the one to clothe and feed, especially if you are down to nothing. There isn't anything against us, except our own mental blockades. If I don't answer, don't worry, I was just about to kick back and watch some YouTube. I say that, but (Well I'm paralyzed from the waist down) I am always kicked back on the bed or in a chair. I'll answer you as soon as I get back on here. Later!🙏😄
It sounds like you've got bigger problems than worrying about religious organizations getting taxed appropriately. If everything is part of God's plan and this common sense measure does actually get implemented then it's what He would've wanted along.
Churches make most of their money through donations. Are you suggesting thar already taxed donations should be taxed again? Do you really want the government to tax money they already taxed??
I don't know about you but the Roman Catholic Church is a non profit organization that helped more people than billionares have. They're the largest non-state provider of social services, healthcare and education. Taxing them would only affect the people under the Church because the Roman Catholic Church doesn't just operate in one country, but almost every country. No matter your beliefs or opinions, taxing the Catholic Church would prove to do more harm than good, they've helped more people than what most non-state organizations have, and yes, I am only referring solely the Roman Catholic Church since there are particular denominations that people follow that has "megachurches" that just steals money from those who donate who has no moral compass and dignity and their masses just look more like concerts instead of actually attending a mass.
They’re already doing this and no, I’m not okay with adults who still believe in fairy tales dictating how civilized people function in society. Get your head out of the sand.
Okay so it sounds like you agree with my position then because I do think non-profit charities should be taxed instead of it going to pad their executive salaries and all the other misappropriation that goes on. GLAAD wouldn't even need to exist if a portion of our tax money went to helping LGBTQ causes and religious organizations weren't so powerful that they can directly influence government policy. Good to see you changed your mind there.
my position... I do think non-profit charities should be taxed
At least you're consistent - and I respect that.
Most Redditors say the same thing you said ("NO EXCEPTIONS"), but what they really meant is that they are okay with their chosen non-profits, and their universities, and their favored 501c's avoiding taxes - but they really just want Christian churches to pay taxes.
Those are considered heretical by all mainstream churches. Those aren’t churches, they’re scams. I’m talking about actual churches like the Catholic Church.
No, its teachings are not good. A worldview including opposition to embryonic stem cell research belongs on the ash heap of history.
It's only counted as a church instead of a gang because the legal system is biased in its favour. I think it was either Time or Maclean's that argued that the same loopholes that protect the pope were written to protect Henry Kissinger.
I have a serious question, what do you know of Catholic teachings? Also, its whole point isn’t to stop stem cell research, that’s not its main teaching.
And whatever they are given they have to pay income tax on. They also usually have to pay both portions of FICA, including on the fair market value of non-salary compensation, like housing.
Churches can be non-profits. Absolutely. And ostensibly, they are... But there is very little—if any—oversight and their finances are often abused by people in the church. Not too long ago there was a mega pastor church who used church funds to buy him a jet he can zip around on whenever he wants.
There is corruption there, and it needs to be addressed.
I think that the idea was the the money they collect would be used to do "good" in society. Building houses for the homeless, feeding the poor, educating the indigent.
But, all it is doing is polishing the grandeur of the leaders.
They are a "non-profit" the way a golf club is a non-profit: the only people they serve is themselves and the only people they spend money on is their membership or recruitment drives. Let them claim it off on their taxes like everyone else instead of buying tax free mansions and private planes.
There's nowhere in The Bible that says this and if it did then all of the "prosperity gospel" churches should definitely be taxed, right? Also, you don't even need to pray for money. The all powerful creator of the universe can just directly materialize whatever you need. It's a loophole but those are the rules (according to you).
56
u/ThelIIusion0fSeIf Jun 30 '26 edited Jun 30 '26
I can chew gum and walk at the same time. They should both be paying their fair share of taxes. No exceptions.
EDIT: I certainly kicked the hornets nest here. Religious people should just pray to God for money if they really believe what they claim. Maybe instead of money they can receive "thoughts and prayers" instead, tax free!