NationStates Jolt Archive

The pastor of a liberal christian church who gave an anti-war sermon was warned by the IRS that his church may lose tax exempt status for interfering in a political race. Meanwhile, conservative churches that push their members to vote against politicians who support abortion, evolution, and gay rights are being left alone.

Isn't it a violation of the establishment clause for government to use tax law to influence what's preached in a church?

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-allsaints7nov07,0,6769876.story?coll=la-home-headlines

I've seen conservative churches get the same letter here in Virginia.

Pastors have to be careful what they say, even when it's not during an election.

It only makes news if a liberal church gets the letter.

I've seen conservative churches get the same letter here in Virginia.

Pastors have to be careful what they say, even when it's not during an election.

It only makes news if a liberal church gets the letter.
My bad. I'd never heard of churches getting letters like that before, so it seemed like discrimination.

It really depends on what your church is doing, the IRS is over run with "churches" that claim to be a church so they can be tax exempt and really aren't at all. They are having a big crack down right now with the tax exempt people and things are getting fishy for churches. The rules have changed recently, but since I only do a tax report for 1 non profit I haven't really looked into it much yet, I am dealing with my rental house tax payers this week trying to get their stuff together, but I will look into it and come back and give you a tax person's comment.

It really depends on what your church is doing, the IRS is over run with "churches" that claim to be a church so they can be tax exempt and really aren't at all. They are having a big crack down right now with the tax exempt people and things are getting fishy for churches. The rules have changed recently, but since I only do a tax report for 1 non profit I haven't really looked into it much yet, I am dealing with my rental house tax payers this week trying to get their stuff together, but I will look into it and come back and give you a tax person's comment.

Fishy is hardly the word for it. :headbang:
SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT! As you read the below article keep this fact in mind. According to the tax appraiser's office for Pinellas County, Florida the dollar amount of exempt real estate held by religions in Pinellas county alone is: $583,581,970.00!!!

That half a billion dollars plus could be added to the tax base and used to help the uninsured that the faith-healers can't heal, or to help clean up the environment, for education, etc., etc., etc. Instead it goes to promote superstition.

SHOULD THE CHURCHES BE TAXED?
by Leland W. Ruble

Should organized religion be taxed? And if not, why not? For most of the population, religion exists in a peculiar, rarefied atmosphere. It is for most people (even though they may have some doubts) the only source of hope they have for continuing their existence after the body has expired. Naturally they expect restitution in heaven, a sort of reward for countless prayers; a moral life; and obedience to God. Obviously, taxation of a faith based on a biblical God, would be a desecration of this image.

Religion therefore, has been able to develop, grow and prosper without the payment of taxes that are required from most other organizations that teach a certain philosophy or concept of existence. The majority do not think of religious mysticism as an ideology that is taxable. They feel, you cannot tax a church whose reverend is a representative of God. A person who has daily conversations and visions pertaining to a sometimes benevolent, sometimes revengeful Lord of all, the Almighty.

Presumably because religion is more concerned with the afterlife, Heaven, Hell, and a government presided over by an assembly of angels, saints, and evangelists, and considers sin as the main cause of discord on this planet, it has been exempted from taxation. It is a privilege that has granted religion an elite status that few other organizations, activities, and the productivity of human labor is immune from. The mystical exploitation of religion has created a hierarchy of sanctimonious pedagogues who prosper in an environment free of obligation to the society from which they profit immensely. There is no such thing as a non-profit religion. If there were non-profit religions, most established religions would not exist.

Why then, is religion exempt from taxation? There are those who assume that it is to prevent government influence into the activities of religion, and to prevent the same from interfering in the affairs of government. It is also thought that taxation of religion would restrict its growth, thus constricting the freedom of worship and making it difficult for religious activity to flourish. This does not make sense. If a mystical organization cannot prosper or survive because of taxation, it must not have a message or purpose worth sustaining, nor the ability to communicate a concept that appeals to the public. If it requires exemption from taxation as the only way it can exist, then it is a religion based on a superficial concept of Biblical nonsense that eventually the public will ignore.

James Madison, the fourth President of the United States of America and a leading promoter and authority of the U.S. Constitution, had this to say in regard to the exemption of taxation for religious organizations: "Are the U.S. duly awake to the tendency of the precedents they are establishing, in the multiplied incorporations of religious congregations with the faculty of acquiring and holding property real as well as personal...? The people of the U.S. owe their independence and their Liberty to the wisdom of descrying in the minute of 3 pence on tea, the magnitude of the evil comprised in the precedent. Let them exert the same wisdom, in watching against every evil lurking under plausible disguises, and growing up from small beginnings."

Apparently not all future legislators or bureaucrats visualized the tenacity of religion to develop into huge corporations with vast properties, investments, and influence over legislation favorable to its prosperity. The present has proven Madison correct in his assumption. The scheming and manipulation of the frenzied, right wing religious fundamentalists with their army of enthusiasts, has proven that religion untaxed, is more dangerous to Liberty than taxation of the same. Why should an institution founded on fantasy and myth, the incredible and improbable, be exonerated from taxation while existing in a society that supports the infrastructure and services that make it possible for that religion to succeed? My freedom, yours, and every other individual that exists in this society, is threatened by the immense influence of organized religion in its massive appeal to legislate laws favorable to its establishment. We, unlike the religionists, do not as individuals, have the use of untaxed funds or Christianized Coalitions that exist to peddle, distribute and exercise leverage over politicians.

What is Democratic, what is justifiable in allowing the churches the extraordinary freedom to exist independently exempt from taxation??? Especially when the exempted religions pursue as their objective, the influence of legislation favorable to their continued material advancement. The survival of organized revealed religion is dependent on not only the generosity of its members, but also from a government that is sympathetic to the continued domination of mystical authority in the affairs of state and society. Witness George Bush receiving the blessing from his religious minister for the carpet bombing and resulting mass murder of Iraqi civilians during the Desert Storm exercise in ignorance.

The established religions have prospered in an environment that is maintained through the taxation of others for such simple things as street upkeep, courts of law, police and fire protection, or any of the many other services that the public pays for. It is we the people, who are assuring that religious associations can perform their functions, while they are exempted from the same obligation. They have been granted an exclusion, that is based on the erroneous concept, that religion is a non-profit enterprise. Anyone who believes religion is not profitable and exists solely as a distributor of myth and magic, has not looked recently at the vast resources and property that churches have acquired as non-profit organizations.

The religions of this nation do not contribute, in any way, to my freedom, your Liberty, or the future of civilization. Freed of taxation, indebted to the worship of an abstract biblical god, they exist exclusively as a hierarchy whose interest is the exploitation and propaganda of supernatural absurdity!

IS IT NOT TIME THAT WE THE PUBLIC DEMAND THAT THE RELIGIONS OF THIS NATION PAY FOR THEIR PARTICIPATION IN SOCIETY??? Is it not the proper time to cease characterizing religious institutions as a privileged ideology that is more important than other philosophies and concepts?

Why should the labor of a person working eight hours a day be taxed, while a preacher who labors in mystical fantasy be excluded from the same? Why should there be a tax for the general public, but not for those engaged in the production (or fabrication) of a religious ideology? Is the enterprise of corporate religion any better or more useful to society than an individual who thinks about existence from a philosophical and rational perspective? I think not. There is no such thing as an aristocracy of thought or complete agreement on any conception. Religion in all its many forms, does not have the exclusive answers to the complexity of existence. Its reliance on mystical incomprehension, the miraculous, the impossible, is based on a fictionalized perspective, rooted in the dreams and desires of primitive man.

Taxation of religion is based on fairness and justice. It is a notification to those who represent corporate religion that they are not a special institution or a favored aristocracy that can benefit from all the liberties of a democracy, but have no obligation to support that democratic society in the form of taxation. Particularly when, as the Christian Coalition is doing, they use the millions of dollars saved from taxes to pump into the campaigns of politicians who agreed to spread their brand of bigotry and superstition.

http://deism.com/tax_religions.htm

What he said.

Surely this is also a restriction of the basic human right to free speech?

Fishy is hardly the word for it. :headbang:

Most churches fall into the realm of non-proffit organizations... Whose "income" is only based from voluntarily donated funds (which had already been taxed)... And whose funds are mostly used for "missions" programs [which include, heavily, operating and donating to orphanidge programs, and assistance with building schools].

If you remove the tax expempt status of religious institutions.... I expect the following to also have their tax expempt status pulled:

1. The Red Cross
2. The Christian Children's Fund (CCF)
3. American Association for the Disabled
4. American Psychiatric Association (APA)
5. American Medical Association (AMA)
6. American Breast Cancer Association
7. American Civil Liberties Union Foundation (ACLU)

And the list could go on...

The Third Reich had the gestapo, America has the IRS.

My bad. I'd never heard of churches getting letters like that before, so it seemed like discrimination.

A lot of the Republican grass-roots has its roots in churches. They have become more and more careful of not handing out any politically related flyers, do not invite political speakers, and are careful about what they say - especially during services.

The Third Reich had the gestapo, America has the IRS.
They aren't really trying to shut down churches, they are trying to catch criminals, they are just going a little too far sometimes.

I hesitate to comment on this specific case though, because I have not seen thier tax report.

Most churches fall into the realm of non-proffit organizations... From above..."Anyone who believes religion is not profitable and exists solely as a distributor of myth and magic, has not looked recently at the vast resources and property that churches have acquired as non-profit organizations." "According to the tax appraiser's office for Pinellas County, Florida the dollar amount of exempt real estate held by religions in Pinellas county alone is: $583,581,970.00" - how is that "helping missions"?

Whose "income" is only based from voluntarily donated funds (which had already been taxed)...Why am I allowed to take a tax write off on charitable contributions then? And whose funds are mostly used for "missions" programs [which include, heavily, operating and donating to orphanidge programs, and assistance with building schools].Then they should prove it.
If you remove the tax expempt status of religious institutions.... I expect the following to also have their tax expempt status pulled:

1. The Red Cross
2. The Christian Children's Fund (CCF)
3. American Association for the Disabled
4. American Psychiatric Association (APA)
5. American Medical Association (AMA)
6. American Breast Cancer Association
7. American Civil Liberties Union Foundation (ACLU)

And the list could go on...
How many of those own otherwise taxable real estate?

From above..."Anyone who believes religion is not profitable and exists solely as a distributor of myth and magic, has not looked recently at the vast resources and property that churches have acquired as non-profit organizations." "According to the tax appraiser's office for Pinellas County, Florida the dollar amount of exempt real estate held by religions in Pinellas county alone is: $583,581,970.00" - how is that "helping missions"?
Why am I allowed to take a tax write off on charitable contributions then?Then they should prove it.

How many of those own otherwise taxable real estate?

Problem:

1. The power to tax is the power to destroy.
2. We have religious freedoms under the First Amendment - so you can't go around destroying organized religion.

Problem:

1. The power to tax is the power to destroy.
2. We have religious freedoms under the First Amendment - so you can't go around destroying organized religion.

I'm just saying that if they want to be Not-For Profit organizations, then they should act like every other NFP - and dealt with on a case by case basis.

It's utter BS that a NFP has non taxable assets/income in excess of simple operating requirements... (somthing called "profit"... which they aren't supposed to have.)

Why am I allowed to take a tax write off on charitable contributions then?Then they should prove it.
Non-profits and tax exempts do have to file report with the Irs accounting how much money came in and where it goes, it is a very detailed report and I dread doing it every year.

The write off you recieve (and I am talking about Us tax code here) goes on your schedule A, it reduces your taxable income and is limited by how much you make.

If you make over a certian amount a year, your deductions are limited and at a certain point of income they are disallowed completely.

You actually end up paying more tax on your donations than what you are recieving benifit for on your tax return.

Non-profits and tax exempts do have to file report with the Irs accounting how much money came in and where it goes, it is a very detailed report and I dread doing it every year. But Churches don't - at least not to the same extent. If they did there wouldbe more red flags when non-operating assets are purchased.
The write off you recieve (and I am talking about Us tax code here) goes on your schedule A, it reduces your taxable income and is limited by how much you make.

If you make over a certian amount a year, your deductions are limited and at a certain point of income they are disallowed completely.

You actually end up paying more tax on your donations than what you are recieving benifit for on your tax return.But it is still not "already taxed" in an appreciable way. However, my point has less to do with donations as "income" than using that money to buy real estate and other income-producing assets.

When I buy Stock or (non-home) Real Estate, I am using "already taxed" money, but you bet your bippy I get taxed again on any increase in value of those assets. (I do on my home too, but I'm willing to forgo that for a NFPs operating location).

Why are Churches exempt from this?

From above..."Anyone who believes religion is not profitable and exists solely as a distributor of myth and magic, has not looked recently at the vast resources and property that churches have acquired as non-profit organizations." "According to the tax appraiser's office for Pinellas County, Florida the dollar amount of exempt real estate held by religions in Pinellas county alone is: $583,581,970.00" - how is that "helping missions"?

Every Tax-Exempt organization owns property... So singling out "religious" institutions is idiotic, if not retarded. The dollar ammount is the "exempt" real-estate held by ALL of the institutions in a particular county... Organizations have infrastructure to operate... Which requires buildings... Which sits on property, which is effected by land-value assigned by appraisers.... The property they own, nor the value of it, really has any intrinsic connection to whether they should be taxed or not...

I'm not going to fall victim to your particular prejudice/discrimination here...


Why am I allowed to take a tax write off on charitable contributions then?

Because the government says you can? Again, the government "tax writeoff" is a tax credit which encourages voluntary donations... If you want the tax-writeoffs to end, go for it... But don't steal the food from starving babies...


Then they should prove it.

IRS form 990... If questions come up, organizations can be audited, and have their exempt status revoked... However, they already DO proove it... Most of us determine our budgets and manage our funds very closely... My particular "religious organization" brought in over 590 thousand dollars last year; 97% of which went to missions programs in our city, in Belize, Romania, Haiti and China... Exempt organizations still have to file... And still have to indicate expenses and donations to the IRS...


How many of those own otherwise taxable real estate?

All of them...

The author, Leiand W. Ruble, used blatant deceit to drive his view... Ideas such as "what is justifiable in allowing the churches the extraordinary freedom to exist exempt from taxation???" [It does not enjoy some "extraordinary" freedom, this freedom is shared equally by all sorts of non-profits, and churches can have their not-for-profit tax exemption pulled, as any other non-proffit, for violating the rules].... "Not paying your fair share of anything, including taxes, reveals a non-altruistic and greedy streak." [Thought we do, as much as anyone else... Our personal income is taxed just like everyone elses... And out contributions are deductible, just like everyone elses... The author shows himself as a pedantic twit....].... "Taxation of religion is based on fairness and justice." [No, it's based on the authors blatant hate of religious people... An absolute prejudice almost as heinous as the crap spewed by KKK members and the Aryan Nation.... He wants his charities honored, with exceptional status, while relegating the religious to rubbish...]

I see you've fallen victim to the authors sophistry to push his particular form of anti-liberalism...

But it is still not "already taxed" in an appreciable way. However, my point has less to do with donations as "income" than using that money to buy real estate and other income-producing assets.
nobody is actually "taxed" until they file thier tax return, but I didn't think we were going to get that specific.

Real Estate is a way for a church to make money outside of donations, you really don't expect a church to live on donation alone do you?

Owning real estate is the same as if my church rents out it's reception hall for a wedding. Should they not be allowed to do that either?

Every Tax-Exempt organization owns property... So singling out "religious" institutions is idiotic, if not retarded. The dollar ammount is the "exempt" real-estate held by ALL of the institutions in a particular county... Organizations have infrastructure to operate... Which requires buildings... Which sits on property, which is effected by land-value assigned by appraisers.... The property they own, nor the value of it, really has any intrinsic connection to whether they should be taxed or not...If they are not operating on the property, then it should be a taxable asset. If the Red Cross owned (just for example) 35 radio stations or Farmland in Nebraska Florida, Utah, Wyoming, etc, etc. (http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon410.htm) You might have a point. But they don't. Only "churches" do that sort of thing.
Because the government says you can? Again, the government "tax writeoff" is a tax credit which encourages voluntary donations... If you want the tax-writeoffs to end, go for it... But don't steal the food from starving babies... Illigitimate Appeal to emotion.
IRS form 990... If questions come up, organizations can be audited, and have their exempt status revoked... You mean like $cientology? IIRC They are still "tax exempt" - no matter how many rules they bend to delamination. And they forced the Government to do it with this same "Religions MUST=Tax Exempt" rhetoric. However, they already DO proove it... Most of us determine our budgets and manage our funds very closely... My particular "religious organization" brought in over 590 thousand dollars last year; 97% of which went to missions programs in our city, in Belize, Romania, Haiti and China... Exempt organizations still have to file... And still have to indicate expenses and donations to the IRS...So your church should have no problem. We're not talking about $590K little churches. This is about Mega Organizations that operate under the banner of "religion". Small churches that actually operate as non profits would be totally unaffected by correcting the tax structure.
The author, Leiand W. Ruble, used blatant deceit to drive his view... Ideas such as "what is justifiable in allowing the churches the extraordinary freedom to exist exempt from taxation???" [It does not enjoy some "extraordinary" freedom, this freedom is shared equally by all sorts of non-profits, and churches can have their not-for-profit tax exemption pulled, as any other non-proffit, for violating the rules].... Again, like $cientology? "Not paying your fair share of anything, including taxes, reveals a non-altruistic and greedy streak." [Thought we do, as much as anyone else... Our personal income is taxed just like everyone elses... And out contributions are deductible, just like everyone elses... The author shows himself as a pedantic twit....]Yes, the Emloyees pay taxes on their income, amd most churches can barely make their operating expenses. OTOH, there are still a lot of "churches" out there who DO make Profits in large excess of operating expenses even granting a reasonable "rainy day" cushion..... Profit is Profit. If you make a Profit, you are NOT a non Profit org. Period. "Taxation of religion is based on fairness and justice." [No, it's based on the authors blatant hate of religious people... An absolute prejudice almost as heinous as the crap spewed by KKK members and the Aryan Nation....That is about as close to Godwin as you can get without it actually being one. He wants his charities honored, with exceptional status, while relegating the religious to rubbish... How about just actually treating them the same way?
I see you've fallen victim to the authors sophistry to push his particular form of anti-liberalism...Funny, since it comes from a fairly politically liberal site - deism.com

nobody is actually "taxed" until they file thier tax return, but I didn't think we were going to get that specific. I guess that 25% that's gets sucked from my check isn't really "tax"...
Real Estate is a way for a church to make money outside of donations, you really don't expect a church to live on donation alone do you? Why not? The other Not for Profits seem to manage.
Owning real estate is the same as if my church rents out it's reception hall for a wedding. Should they not be allowed to do that either? Sure they should... but if said income exceeds the taxable threshold, then they should be taxed for it.

I guess that 25% that's gets sucked from my check isn't really "tax"...
actually some of it is (social security tax, medicare tax) but what the federal government takes out is an estimated payment, you get what you paid in that was over your actual tax when you get a refund.
Why not? The other Not for Profits seem to manage.
name one.

Sure they should... but if said income exceeds the taxable threshold, then they should be taxed for it.
how do you figure that income threshold? for example a lot of my churches money goes to overseas missions, and the rest to paying day to day stuff at the church, and helping the community, we are not turning a profit, if we were taxed on any money taken in over a certain amount the community would suffer greatly.

Oh, and just to be fair - $cientology has some competition here:

By its own admission, the Mormon Church gave $60,000,000 in humanitarian aid last year. It is spending 15 times that for shopping malls.

(From the Salt Lake Tribune)
“The LDS Church will invest close to $1 billion when it remakes downtown Salt Lake City's two malls - which will be closed on Sundays - according to Salt Lake City Council members.

The price tag is double initial estimates. And whatever the church is doing with all that money, the preliminary design has impressed mall critic Mayor Rocky Anderson.

The mayor met with LDS Presiding Bishop H. David Burton, who is in charge of the mall makeovers, at Burton's office Thursday. And while Anderson has criticized the church for its secrecy, he refused to discuss what he learned, saying the meeting was confidential.

However, he did release a statement saying "many of the concerns previously raised have been met by innovative design solutions. This will be a unique, exciting project bringing hundreds of new residents to the downtown area and attracting millions of people to beautiful retail, residential and office facilities."

While the church is still publicly mum about its mixed-used design - though it presented preliminary concepts recently to City Council members and business leaders - it plans to seek more public comment than the city requires as soon as this summer.”

If they are not operating on the property, then it should be a taxable asset. If the Red Cross owned (just for example) 35 radio stations or Farmland in Nebraska Florida, Utah, Wyoming, etc, etc. (http://www.exmormon.org/mormon/mormon410.htm) You might have a point. But they don't. Only "churches" do that sort of thing.
Illigitimate Appeal to emotion.

You're dealing with something that already exists in law... It just means that the existing IRS, is not performing enough audits...


You mean like $cientology? IIRC They are still "tax exempt" - no matter how many rules they bend to delamination. And they forced the Government to do it with this same "Religions MUST=Tax Exempt" rhetoric. So your church should have no problem. We're not talking about $590K little churches. This is about Mega Organizations that operate under the banner of "religion". Small churches that actually operate as non profits would be totally unaffected by correcting the tax structure.

OF course, owning a radio station, or TV station does not automatically equate to "proffit" under give rules... Churches [as well as any other non-profit organization] can "make" money... It just depends on what is being done with the money.... Profit is understood, economically, to be a fiscal gain for a person, or share-holders in such an organization... Not merely "making more money" or "using money or assets to make more money"... As long as the "profit" is being used for charitable work [example, Mt. Zion Publications proffits from operations by the church... But the proffit is used to provide FREE books and study materials for people who can't afford them]... There are many religious organizations which own "radio stations" it's not all that common... Most of those are non-profit stations, very little different than NPR [National Public Radio] in their makeup... RBC, for example, is purely a "Radio" Based ministry, which also produced publications itself [and sales, to support the station]...


Again, like $cientology? Yes, the Emloyees pay taxes on their income, amd most churches can barely make their operating expenses. OTOH, there are still a lot of "churches" out there who DO make Profits in large excess of operating expenses even granting a reasonable "rainy day" cushion..... Profit is Profit. If you make a Profit, you are NOT a non Profit org. Period.

You miss what "profit" actually means here... Like illustrated earlier... Non-Profits still can "make money" but even their "monkey making" adventures are not economically "profit", because it's not used, necesarily as a "capital" gain upon an individual or holder.... Take for example my Church... We make money through donations... And that money sits in an interest bearing account... However, it's not "profit" because it does not result in material gain for any holders... Sure, we pay our pastor, but he is in the EMPLOYMENT of the organization [Church], and his "pay" is subject to all the same withholdings your pay would be... The church, rather, is ran by an elected panel of "Elders", who in turn are accountable to the Congregation (who elects them), all budgetary matters are decided by the whole...

If you want to audit and revoke on a case by case basis, that is fine... To make blanket statements against religious institutions in general, however, is not acceptable.


That is about as close to Godwin as you can get without it actually being one.

LOL... you need to reread Godwin's law... Godwin has to do with threads, not people...


How about just actually treating them the same way?

He's not advocating "treating them the same way"... In fact, quite the opposite... His argument is basically "Religion is all myth, they have lots of money, let's grab it..."


Funny, since it comes from a fairly politically liberal site - deism.com

Political "Liberalism" as it has come to be known, is anything but actually "liberal"... Just as Political "Conservatism" [Traditionalism] is no where close to "Traditional"... Neither are actually adhering to the principles behind the words they attach themselves to.... An actual Liberal [unlike the Deist site here in question], that is a Classic liberal... would be concerned with actual equal treatment under the law... Deism.com isn't actually concerned with that... They are just another religious organization...

The Third Reich had the gestapo, America has the IRS.

Because sending out a warning letter or conducting an audit is pretty much the same as concentration camps and genocide. :rolleyes: :headbang:

You're dealing with something that already exists in law... It just means that the existing IRS, is not performing enough audits... And yet, when one does get audited the cry is "Partisanship" and "Freedom of Religion"!

And yet, when one does get audited the cry is "Partisanship" and "Freedom of Religion"!

It can be used that way... But the abuse is two-handed, one, the violation of their status... and two, misuse of government offices for unjust enforcement... This is done equally by all sorts of non-profits... And should be handled by fair and just audits, not for reasons of politics, nor removing the status of one group of non-profits, while grant to the other... You don't trump one illegality or illicit activity by commiting yet another one in the opposite...

Because sending out a warning letter or conducting an audit is pretty much the same as concentration camps and genocide. :rolleyes: :headbang:
They send them to right-leaning churches around here....

haven't seen any stories...
haven't seen the media or anyone else raising a fuss...

but it happens to a left-leaning church....

and it's in the papers...

They aren't really trying to shut down churches, they are trying to catch criminals, they are just going a little too far sometimes.

I hesitate to comment on this specific case though, because I have not seen thier tax report.
If they were trying to catch criminals, they would stop recognizing cults as tax-exempt religions. *cough scientology cough*

Even more of a reason to hate the IRS!

If they were trying to catch criminals, they would stop recognizing cults as tax-exempt religions. *cough scientology cough*
that's the thing, it's all in how you document things, some rules are very specific and some rules are so general that they are easy to get around (not that I would try) They are doing a major crackdown on non-profits and the rules are about to get a lot stricter, and I think a lot of "churches" are about to be in a lot of trouble.

Question is, where do you draw the line between "Real" religions and Cults?

Question is, where do you draw the line between "Real" religions and Cults?
doesn't matter. The IRS is trying to figure a line between a church and a set of people with the same beliefs who claim to be religious but mainly are trying to effect political change, activist lobby groups should not (imo) be non-profit for the purposes of taxes, churches and charity only.

doesn't matter. The IRS is trying to figure a line between a church and a set of people with the same beliefs who claim to be religious but mainly are trying to effect political change, activist lobby groups should not (imo) be non-profit for the purposes of taxes, churches and charity only.

Again, anyone can claim to be a religion, and claim their house to be a church.

And, if you deny them tax exempt status, you could be seen as trying to promote the tax exempt religions over the non tax exempt religions.

Question is, where do you draw the line between "Real" religions and Cults?
Traditionally, 'cult' refers to religious organizations that are present a clear danger, like the Thugees.

Again, anyone can claim to be a religion, and claim their house to be a church.

And, if you deny them tax exempt status, you could be seen as trying to promote the tax exempt religions over the non tax exempt religions.
there is a difference between an activist lobby group and a church. I see too many lobby groups on both sides that are tax exempt and I don't think they should be. I have seen too many "tax-exempt charities" that are cheating the IRS, I have no patience for it anymore.

that's the thing, it's all in how you document things, some rules are very specific and some rules are so general that they are easy to get around (not that I would try) They are doing a major crackdown on non-profits and the rules are about to get a lot stricter, and I think a lot of "churches" are about to be in a lot of trouble.I certainly hope so.

Again, anyone can claim to be a religion, and claim their house to be a church.

And, if you deny them tax exempt status, you could be seen as trying to promote the tax exempt religions over the non tax exempt religions.
Which is why, IMO, the word "Religion" should be stricken from the Tax laws and let exempt-status apply equally and fairly to all verifiable not-for-profit orgs. THAT would be "seperation of church and state".

I certainly hope so.
me too.