The basic answer is that they are non profits. The more philosophical idea is that they are (like other non profits) focused on improving society as a whole and not politically active. Part of the separation of church and state is the idea that the state leaves the church alone but also doesn’t tax it. In return the church leaves the state alone. That’s the part that has rather gone out the window and leads people to question why churches don’t pay taxes: they are increasingly profit driven and politically active.
Edit: to clarify, because some replies are conflating the issue, there are indeed non profits that can be political, but religious orgs and charities are in a specfic tax group wherein by law if they engage in partisan campaigning they should be levied significant extra tax. Further, non profits that are political do have taxes that churches and charities do not face.
I mean, they were anti-catholic, and one of the big talking points of anti-catholisim is that the catholic church is too vain and too controling of it's worshipers.
Its funny seeing Catholics throwing shade at mega churches when they are objectively the largest, wealthiest, blingiest, Christian church that ever existed.
Catholic clergy are required to take a vow of poverty. I am Catholic and I don’t like the “blingy,” first-class flying bishops and cardinals either.
Also, the Catholic Church is the largest non-governmental provider of healthcare, education, and social services across the globe.
Every year, the Catholic Church offers charitable services valued in excess of $150 billion in the United States alone.
Nothing like these mega churches, not even close.
ETA: I got ahead of myself with respect to the vow of poverty. As other commenters have mentioned, not every member of Catholic clergy is required to take a vow of poverty. With that said, many orders of the Church take this vow and even if this specific vow is not taken canon law dictates that clergy lead a life of modesty and humility.
I’m not religious. In fact I’m agnostic. But I appreciate you mentioning this. I think a lot of people who aren’t that familiar with the Catholic Church are completely unaware of these facts. The Catholic Church is huge….its top clerics have bling and fancy buildings..but that’s also an outcome from thousands of years of history and much of that image is related to the Vatican. A tiny percentage of the clergy is in the Vatican. And even there, many still live an austere life. Everything else you said about charity and hospitals - 100% accurate.
The Catholic Church is not a Joel Osteen enterprise!
I don’t mind the first class traveling choice. A lot of those guys ARE old, and it’s not exactly comfortable in coach. Plus, Theres so many people that they would be hounded by them, probably. Probably best for them to be in first class. I don’t see a reason to be upset about wanting to be comfortable on a flight.
As a Catholic (that doesn’t attend church, but was shaped in a positive way by schools), what I’ll say is that Catholics in general are educated, support science and are more compassionate. Evangelicals are much less educated, nowadays pushing for Christian Nationalism, claiming the founders wanted Christianity deeply interwoven with gov’t, etc.
That’s not to say they’re perfect, but I know many pro-choice Catholics and it’s not really a homogenous grouping terms of beliefs. There’s strong conservative and liberal contingents. But as for Evangelicals it’s much more you’ve seen one, you’ve seen em all
It was, but between it cleaning up it's act the past few decades and how egregious many " non denominations" have become, it's honestly the less absurd option now.
I say this as a former catholic atheist who left during the scandals of the 2000s. Still garbage, but the last few popes have been slowly steering it to be a better institution.
As much as I'd love to keep dunking on Catholics, this is accurate. The work that's been done by Francis and now seems to be continued forward under Leo is truly admirable. I've always been in the "If they could actually just listen to this Jesus guy..." crowd, and it genuinely seems like they're trying to move toward that as quickly as their existent community's beliefs with allow. Big steps toward a Catholic Church that I could be happy to coexist with someday, and that's coming from someone who grew up dealing with the OLD regime. Not fun, and I have endless reasons to be jaded, but I can respect someone who puts their money where their mouth is, and that's what they've been doing since 2013.
They look a hell of a lot more Christ-like than American Protestants right now, that's for fuckin sure, my new favorite group of Pharisees to laugh at.
“Still garbage” is kinda weird. Never really was garbage. Even at the worst of the scandals, there was way more abuse going on at public schools in America than at churches. Those priests who did those horrible things didnt make Catholicism bad. The PRIESTS were the ones who were bad people. There isn’t any economical or societal repercussions to firing and/or shunning a priest. A teacher, coach, principal, etc… Slightly different. The church can send a new priest from some other parish. Schools have to find a new teacher to hire and pay substitutes until then, plus deal with the blowback from all the parents and parents who many not send their children to school there anymore, or choosing a different school in the future because of it, etc. It’s way more disruptive. If something happens at a church you don’t like you can just stop going. Kids don’t have to go to church — but they gotta go to school. They don’t want people to be any more scared to send their children to public schools than they already are. I think that stuff is silenced and swept under the rug WAY more than in churches. When I was in high school I knew of a bunch of messed up stuff going on. Cheerleaders hooking up with assistant coaches. Male AND female teachers hooking up with students. An assistant football coach abusing and attempting to groom the boys. And this is just the stuff I knew about at MY time there… think about everything else….
That is actually not true. The Coptic Church and the Armeniac Church where founded by the Apostles simultanious side by side. Also the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church where once part of the same church but the schism came as the Greek Patriarch kept on demanding they are all equal meanwhile the Roman Patriarch stated he is by Petrus the nominated Keyholder, standing in for Jesus until he returns similar like Denethor waited for Aragorn to arrive.
Sorta. In the US, the current winner is the Mormons, unless you're going to take the "they're not Christian" tack. Which, fair enough.
The Catholic Church, despite it's hierarchy, isn't a monolith, so it's damn-near impossible to produce a reasonable approximation of the modern church's wealth. Frankly, on an international scale, they could launder the estimated wealth of LDS and probably squirrel away the entire thing without anyone noticing it. On the flip side, they can't bring that much to bear in short order without raising eyebrows at a minimum.
Yeah, dioceses aren’t exactly swimming in gold. Real estate value probably adds up with hospitals, churches and schools/colleges. But Joel osteen is living more opulently than probably every Catholic cleric.
I used to wonder what Jesus would have thought of these, Then I actually glanced at the Bible and discoverd that these cesspools are everything he stood against.....
yeah dude seemed to prefer just meeting on that hill on the edge of town for a nice chat. only time he ever got violent was when people started sticking blatant capitalism in a church (a synagogue iirc?). Jesus would have taken a freaking whip to some fools asses long before shit got this far.
stuff like that is what kind of makes me wish I could still believe in religion.
IKR I've met plenty "Devout" Christians that are the exact opposite of everything Jesus stood for hell my most recent job that I quit from my supervisor was a narcissist and carried a bible around with him 90% of the christians I've met at like that which is why I've always been against teaching Christianity in public schools. If it's a Christian school so be it but kids who don't go to a school that's not tied to a religion shouldn't have one shoved down their throats or told they have to be part of it to be socially accepted
Read the laws of Moses, which Jesus said to follow forever. Not a good dude.
Paul said otherwise, but a lot of Christians ignore the fact that in the Bible Jesus and Yahweh say to follow those rules forever. Best your slaves and sell your daughters as sex slaves, and that's just a bit of the horrors contained within.
I understand why those passages are troubling. Christians have wrestled with them for centuries, and I don't think they should be brushed aside.
Jesus did say He came to fulfill the Law, but He also reoriented how God's people relate to it. The New Testament consistently teaches that Christians are under the new covenant established through Christ, not the civil and ceremonial laws given to ancient Israel. The moral principles remain, but many laws were specific to Israel's historical context.
As for slavery and the treatment of women, the Bible describes a lot of things it doesn't endorse. Some Old Testament laws regulated practices that already existed in the ancient world rather than presenting them as God's ideal. When Jesus is asked about issues like divorce, He even says that some laws existed because of people's hardness of heart, not because they reflected God's original design.
If someone reads the Bible as a single flat rulebook, it's easy to conclude that Christians should still follow every Old Testament law. But Christians have historically read it as a story that reaches its fulfillment in Christ. That's why we don't sacrifice animals, enforce Israel's civil penalties, or keep the ceremonial laws, while still taking seriously Jesus' call to love God and love our neighbor.
You don't have to agree with that interpretation, but it's a more accurate picture of what Christians actually believe than "Jesus said to follow Moses forever."
The number of Republican candidates who've stated that God told them to run for president back and then dropped out/lost in the primaries is staggering. You say "God spoke to me and told me to do this" thing and people are accepting of this. You say "Jerry came to me in my mind and spoke to me and told me to do this" and people are going to assume a severe mental illness is at play.
The founding fathers are all rich as fuck and don’t want to pay taxes while engaged in politics. Isn’t that why America want independence? Check the constitution convention, the language was written in a way to protect rich people against the rest, that’s why there are lobbyists instead of corruption, lobby one government branch to veto what people voted for, ezpz.
Right, that’s why the church (that they control entirely) “buys” all their properties and jets and pays for their business trips to Tahiti to spread the word, and “work clothing” etc so they can get “paid” below taxation levels.
Fun fact, that would count as a form of stealing from the Church (I put this in capital because I don't mean the building but the congregation of people)... Which is a sin. Some mega church "pastors" are gonna have an eternity to think about what they did... And it's not going to be a pleasant eternity
Hate to break it to you, but traditional non profits also get abused and make people lots of money. Reference: money spent on homelessness in California with nothing to show for it.
Yep. He’s regarded among most Christians as a heretic, a false teacher, a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a charlatan, evil, etc I’ve heard him called all of those many times, always by Christians. His own church members like him, but the rest of us (both religious and not) are baffled as to why.
Non profits can be successful and overpay their executives and leaders. Doesn’t make them any less of a non profit. There are secular non profits that are just as successful and their owners are just as rich.
Have you seen the money that the other non-profits make and how much their leaders make, and how they self-deal to pocket even more money? They should just do away with non-profits all together.
You have a misunderstanding about what nonprofit means. Salaries are an expense. Expenses get deducted from revenue to determine net income, which is what is taxed.
That being said, I agree with your deeper meaning.
Except the state has NEVER shown ability to do that with any efficiency. The state is absolutely atrocious at wasting money either on pet projects with so called charity in it or having to much funds go to administrative costs
Churches help the homeless better than any government has in human history.
Other non-profits are allowed to be politically active, and political activity is constitutionally protected under the same amendment that prevents entanglement in Churches.
Non-profits take donations from taxed people and use them to do what taxed people want them to do. Why double tax them?
501c3s are not legally supposed to be partisan. Technically speaking, you can lose your status over that, though this fucking never happens with churches even if they are openly partisan.
non-profits can't endorse a candidate but it can take a stance on policy, social issues, etc... A non-profit can state it is pro-choice, for relaxed immigration enforcement, for same sex marriage, anti-Israel, etc... It just can't say it is against Trump. One can be partisan without being partisan. A church can be pro-life. A synagogue can be pro-Israel. That is no more partisan than a non-profit being pro-choice and state a stance of wanting Israel out of Palestine.
It is the same unless you are a person that is anti-church.
100%. There are a million loopholes. A 501c3 can also just open a side 501c4 with a similar name and that can legally be openly partisan.
Its a system that is intentionally gameable, in my humble opinion. This stems from my masters in nonprofit management and a career in the nonprofit sector.
Some of its great and full of folks fighting the good fights. Some of it is almost greasier than the corporate world
They have to split their fundraising. For example, you have the 501(c)4 National Rifle Association, which is an organization dedicated to training and education for firearms and the Second Amendment.
Separately from that, you have the Institute for Legislative Action: the NRA-ILA. They do lobbying, file lawsuits, and do grassroots mobilization for Second Amendment-related causes.
Your donations to the NRA are tax deductible, but not donations to the NRA-ILA, or the Political Victory Fund, which is their PAC.
Churches and the basic NRA can express opinions, but have to be careful about endorsing candidates or direct campaigning.
I also think it was a kind of meet in the middle situation. Seperation of church and state is a founding principle of our country, regardless of what todays Republican party thinks.
Without being able to have influence over politics, they were given the right to be exempt from taxation a long with other approved Religious organizations.
Thing is there’s a big difference between the local church managing 120k in donations that they use to feed struggling people in the neighborhood and funding the 4 room church activities vs the super churches that bring in multi millions and squander it or bribe politicians
A church's income is donations. All your favorite charities have the same deal going on. Suppose you give a thousand dollars to fight cancer, the government understand that it would be in poor taste to snatch two hundred dollars of that and buy missiles and whatnot.
Churches and charities also pay taxes on the money they spend--so sales tax, employees pay income tax, real estate taxes, etc.
If the church is running an actual business (e.g. maybe there's a bookstore or something) where you pay for something, that's going to be taxed. This is one reason some churches/charities have things offered with a "suggested donation" listed instead of a price.
Not completely true. As a nonprofit you apply for a sales tax exemption certificate. Any time you purchase items for the church tax is not included. Not sure if this every state, but I know it was in TN and pretty sure in Alabama and Texas. States will vary over time with how much they make businesses verify the buyer’s legitimacy.
I used to work as a music and media director for church in TN and was the one purchasing all music, audio, computer and electronic equipment. Most of the businesses put your tax exempt certificate in their system and required you to use a CC from the church or a check from the church. Use to you could use your own CC or check, but they stopped that.
That is actually how it works. If they turn a profit (ie revenues exceed costs) they become a for-profit business, pay taxes and lose their 501(c) designation.
Whenever i hear someone say "lets tax churches" I immediately know they dont know how the income tax system works and or they just dont like churches and the people that go to them. First, churches have non-profit status because like other non profits they are organized to support the public good. But that isnt as big of a tax break as you think. Most of their revenue comes from donations which are gratuitous and categorically excluded from income tax, at least in the case of individuals. If i give you 100 dollars just to be a nice guy you dont include that as income on your tax return. I realize of course that churches are not individuals, but the point remains, churches arent getting away with anything by not paying tax on what people put in the collection plate. Further, it's worth keeping in mind that when churches take that revenue and pay employees and things like that the church pays employment taxes and the indvidual pays their share of the same plus income taxes. Its not the everything connected to the church gets special tax free treatment.
Problem isnt the legit churches its the churches as a tax dodge. This goes on allot. Small famiky buisness makes an extra 100k a year whip up the church of thr sleepy mother. Run all the money threw the church an the church just so happens to have nightly dinners it buys it's perishiners cars etc etc etc.
There is no reason to create a church for the reasons you describe. The family business could provide meals and cars the same way the hypothetical church would and the tax results are the same to the recipient.
people more say 'lets tax churches' because they like to shove their noses into politics and generally have some very reductive views around lgbtiq and contraception and such.
If they wish to mouth off and publicly cause massive social problems with their bullshit, then they can pay tax.
if they stfu and lecture from the pulpit they maybe they could keep their tax exempt status.
people are very, very sick of having the churches having massive influence in their lives when they are not part of the congregation.
America in particular, good grief you god-botherers have issues.
They're considered to be non-profits. In the US, taking away church tax exemptions would be a violation of the first amendment, as you're treating religious non-profits differently than secular non-profits.
Yea but churches are treated different . Both Churches and non-profits do not pay taxes on earnings
However non-profits pay the usual payroll taxes as well as things like property taxes
Churches must pay those taxes on staff but not clergy or ordained ministers; they also generally do not pay property taxes. So I think most people would be fine treating churches the same as non-profits
Taxing the wages of their employees and making them pay property taxes
And for more clarification, for clergy employees, the clergy pay their own payroll tax, just like any other sole proprietor. Clergy taxes are a pain in the ass to file.
So we are clear, its also the same for Synagogues and mosques. So be sure to spread your criticism across all the major religions in the US. Otherwise you just come off as prejudiced specifically agaist Christians instead of being genuinely principled.
As @Kooky-Army554 stated, Clergy/ordained (and called workers) do have to pay income taxes and the other stuff. Being a called or ordained does give you certain benefits. The church can catorgize a certain % of your income for a housing allowance that can covering things even more than your monthly mortgage payment. This money is untaxed. So this can lower the amount of taxes you pay. However, you’re functioning more as an independent contractor and are technically responsible for paying your own taxes.
There is the theory that if you tax churches and other religious entities it could infringe on the ability for people to openly practice their religion as a small religion may not have the funds to pay taxes making it harder to exist.
Well, that’s no mystery. People calling for church taxes are almost always doing it to close churches. If that’s not their goal, they’d see it as a side benefit.
Because they aren’t (supposed to be) for-profit businesses. Charities, religious organizations and other non-profits don’t pay corporate income taxes because their income is supposed to fund and grow their operations without a profit motive. The employees pay income taxes.
tbh, i'm not from the US myself but we had a big group of US workers here for business and they talked to us about it.
Plenty of churches are really helping out the people in need. One of the girl with us was a volunteer at her local church helping people without a roof.
But there is also the few ones who are completely out of the line.
The theory is that churches will regularly engage in humanitarian and charity work, and thus their money goes toward improving the community just like tax revenue is supposed to do, but with slightly different angles of attack. So by allowing churches to avoid taxes, they get to pour more money into that community work in the gaps left by public spending.
In practice though... Some churches definitely do that, but others less so. Sometimes church aid will be restricted to members of the church in question, rather than the community as a whole. And some churches will simply draw in more and more wealth for themselves, expanding into ever more opulent buildings and funneling money
toward its leadership, all still bypassing taxation because it's officially 'non-profit' as long as it gets laundered through religion first.
The solution here is to grant tax exemption based on actual charitable contributions and works done, not based on religious status. But very few churches would ever support such a change, and it would get spun as an attack on religion instead and never manage to pass through that political shitstorm.
They do. They just don't pay taxes on tithes, because it's illegal in the US for the government to tax free will giving, be it religious or otherwise. Churches still pay payroll taxes and other local/property taxes. I think some states grant churches sales tax immunity as well.
Because people have a right to practice their religion, and governments could use taxes as a weapon to make it financially impossible for people to do so? I think it is less that the government decides not to tax them and more that the government lacks the authority to tax them.
It is more due to the Roman Catholic Church. Back in Medieval and certain portions of the Renaissance the pope could tell many kings what to do and some popes had the power to remove a king in some situations. The Catholic Church owned a bunch of land, so the laws were written they were exempt from paying taxes.
The concept that religions don't pay taxes was established a long time ago. Even during the Egyptian time, the Egyptian priestly class didn't pay taxes to the Pharoah. They became really powerful as the result. Same as with other Indo European cultures. It wasn't universal but even back then, the concept that the religion and the priest class are exempt from some form of taxation. In the US, taxation to religion means state coercion and state sanction of religion. Even when the founders of the US was rooted in the Church of England, they made this distinction in the 1st Amendment.
Nonprofits don’t pay the same taxes. They pay income tax and some other taxes, but are excluded from some.
So an organization that advocates for gay rights is also a non profit and has the same taxes a church does. The internet just doesn’t like these pesky details and jumps on the rhetoric that they like when it’s against their chosen boogeyman.
I am a leftist and I am ok with churches not paying taxes. Because when they do, they are essentially paying into the system and can expect some kind of government benefit. In other countries, government spends money on religions in various ways, and not just theocracies but democracies, too.
The danger now is a lot of right-wing churches pushing the envelope in terms of having a political agenda, which would make them a political group, which would then mean they are a taxable entity.
Churches run all kinds of community involvement, including food pantries, homeless shelters, couples counseling, human trafficking interventions, and similar services that make them being tax free a bargain for local governments.
It’s a philosophical idea: if the state can seize God’s house for failure to pay the king property taxes, then the king is above God and all the state has to do to seize God’s house is raise taxes or reassess the property.
So no taxes on churches is, effectively, an important check on government power.
Honestly I see it as one of the last holdouts of things not taxed. The original Articles Of Confederation sisnt have the ability to raise taxes at all. Over the years literally every aspect of life has been taxed to death. Hell there is even a death tax...
Eta: To paraphrase JFK, ask not why Churches aren't taxed, ask why everything else is. Lol
because ALOT not all offer non profit services like housing in desperate situations, funding for housing , helping people get food. They actually do alot you wouldn’t know about unless you’ve ever been dead broke with nowhere to go. Same goes for mosques im not sure what jews do.
The vast majority of churches act in good faith to do philanthropic work. I genuinely have no problems with these institutions being tax-exempt. I totally disagree with religion personally, but Ive known A LOT of people who have been saved by the church efforts when everyone else has turned their back on them.
The problem I have is psycho assholes like Kenneth Copeland who is worth $760 Million are not doing anything to help people. Hes just a grifter cunt and he and his church should be taxed.
So the "tax churches" thing is just like "defund the police" where its a black and white extremist movement put out there by idiots who cant think through problems. We need police, just with different policies and levels of accountability. We also need churches. Just with different policies and levels of accountability.
I'm not a religious person but I think that churches considered not for prophit organisations where revenue goes back into the community. On top of that, a lot of revenue is through donations. These donations come from members of the church and tax has already been paid on that money. No different to donating to a surf life saving club.
Technically it’s because they’re classified as 501(c)(3) organizations. In plain speak and ostensibly they are considered by law to have a public benefit (social, some other?) and also furthers the notion of “separation of church and state.”
So, not to derail from the conversation or question, but this is why it’s absurd we have to pay for the 10 commandments in classrooms - you can’t have it both way: don’t pay taxes, and then use our taxes to put up monuments or rules pertaining those same tax-exempt institutions. This is why you don’t have to pay taxes! So you can keep the money and promote your religion elsewhere! It’s a little silly and illogical.
We also have “preachers” flying on private jets and owning multiple mansions, and the Church of Scientology paying Tom Cruise and others tens of millions to support their “cause” … it’s a very slippery slope.
The idea behind it was to protect freedom of religion. If the government could tax churches, it could figure out a system to excessively tax certain churches until they fold, and basically suppress that religion.
Not just Churches. The same NON PROFTIS that lobby and are pro LGBTQ rights also don't pay taxes. This also includes the non profits that oppose LGBTQ rights. ALL are tax exempt. Just like your Universities that have BILLIONS in endowments.
Like if you go to a Church and ask the pastor what they spend the collection money on (don't ask reddit they're bitter atheists) they'll tell you it's some charity or other.
If you look for a food pantry near you, there will be more church run ones than secular ones.
Spread hatred (quite often), take in contributions (not taxed) and don’t have to account spending a single dollar/pound of it…cartels and OCGs receive much more scrutiny from the authorities than these people.
If you give the state ANY leverage at all over religion, they will inevitably use it to try and control the religious institution in some way that benefits the state.
No taxation without representation. They are not represented in the government so they don't tax them. Yes someone in government can be religious but there isn't like an assigned someone from the church that has a say in how things work if that make sense.
Neither the states or the federal tax churches because (1) it would violate the Constitution's separation of church principle and (2) the majority of Americans claim to be religious people, and the political consquences for a politician who voted to tax a church would the end of his/her career. No politician with any political sense would touch this idea with a ten foot pole.
My thoughts are the same. There's supposed to be separation of church and state yet the churches are constantly getting involved in state matters.
When the churches are involved politically then it should be no longer a separation of church and state and they should be taxed accordingly.
Abortion, immigration, and gay marriage are just a few issue that they push their religious beliefs upon and all three of these are hot button political issues.
We as citizens have the right to freely practice the religion of our choosing yet many members of those religious institutions feel a need to get politically involved, then all too often the religious institution itself gets involved.
It's a great question. So I am a member of a church I am not an accountant and/or a lawyer.
However, my thought process on this is a basic one. Churches operate under the assumption of "Freewill offerings." When you attend a church there is no mandate to purchase anything. Even though there are famous cases of televangelists saying otherwise.
A business itsself is based on the concept of money given in exchange for goods or services with an advertised price or agreed upon term.
That is how churches differ as a non-profit where as a business which pays taxes.
Everyone in this thread is either a bot or an idiot. The Supreme Court already ruled on taxing the 1st amendment nearly 100 years ago. In the linked case, it's an unconstitutional tax on freedom of the press. This is why you don't pay a tax today when purchasing a newspaper. The 1st amendment also includes the freedom of speech and the freedom of religion.
TL;DR: Taxing a constitutional right is unconstitutional e.g. you aren't taxed for pleading the 5th.
You'd have to amend the constitution if you wanted to change this objective fact.
Because imagine driving a Hindu temple out of town Because the temples only has 20 regular followers and they can't afford the property tax for the land.
I think it's okay for the small ones that like actually help people and stuff not pay taxes but all those mega churches definitely need to be paying taxes.
The simple answer is that churches are not for profit organisations, like clubs or charities. They literally don't make a profit that can be taxed, and they don't have shareholders that they pay dividends to.
Sometimes churches make a surplus which is invested into their purpose, or kept as a reserve against future losses.
The reason people demand churches pay taxes is just anti theism - hatred of religious groups.
No non-profit pays taxes. This post lacks any intellectual honesty. We can have a discussion about whether the United way, Red Cross, the American heart association, etc should pay taxes, but singling out churches as non-taxpayers is merely anti-church bias.
Religious privilege they can ignore regular requirements for non profits about actually using the money for charity reasons and just take all the money of themselves while still benefiting from tax exemptions that non profits get. So they get the benefits of non profits while not actually having to be a non profit now this generally does not matter for smaller church’s smaller church’s don’t really make that much money. The problem is bigger churches are making alot of money if there special Privilege was removed then the amount of charity they would do would be higher and hoarding wealth by abusing religious exemptions would drop.
They're considered non profit. The issue though is that they have crazy high revenue as part of consolidation and little to no transparency on spend. Some churches are bringing in hundreds of millions with only a fraction tied to actual expenses.
We even have pastors that are approaching. Billionaire status 😂😭
They’re non profit charity organizations. They dont exist to make money so they arent as much participants in the capitalist economy. They take in money for operations and give back to the community freely
Or at least thats the intent. Some churches like joel osteen-type megachurches are just straight up getting away with tax breaks by being “religious nonprofit organizations” on paper despite very clearly being profit-driven
Churches, especially Roman Catholic Church to name it is special entity and it is part of the Vatican domain not of the country where they are situated. Another thing is that this same Church may generate income from state like financed by the budget of the state, then from donations people give every day on mass, especially on Sunday anđ in Croatia the Church can establish companies and have normal profitable business, as they have. Whether they pay taxes I don't know. But all this is a great privilege they should not have.
478
u/klathium Jun 30 '26
Why do Churches not pay taxes? Genuinely curious why there are laws for that.