Are there any Christians here who favor taxing all church properties ?

Question

If yes, what are the advantages ?

If no, what are the advantages ?

Yes, all taxing should be equal. If the churches are taxed, then all non-profits should be taxed. Doing this would lower the tax burden on all present taxpayers.

Answer 1

This question never seems to ask "should we tax all non-profit organization property?" The tax exemption for churches follows the same exemption for any other non-profit group.

I will grant that it is a bit easier for a church to obtain non-profit status. Less forms to fill out, because a church is understood to be non-profit, where other organizations may or may not be. (Is a clothing store non-profit? How about if it's the Goodwill?)

One reason for the non-profit exemption is that it is presumed that as a non-profit, the community derives benefits other than taxes from their services.

Of course there are churches that abuse this, just as there are other "non-profit" organizations that are just dodges for taxes. The IRS has a nasty tendancy to remove non-profit status in those cases, even if the organization calls itself a "church".

So, should a museum pay taxes on its property (the Bishop Museum in Hawaii owns a bunch of property, the Getty Museum owns some pricey land, etc...)? How about a university (Harvard, Yale, Princeton)? Would you tax St. Jude's Children's Hospital?

Oh, and just to be perfectly honest. Yes, the exemption on churches came before anyone thought that those outfits should also be tax-exempt. Many of those outfits actually started as church-run organizations.

So, the advantage of taxing non-profit property would be more revenue transferred from private organizations providing services, to the government providing those same services.

And that is also the disadvantage.

** Added note **

Taxing non-profits would shift some money to the government, but would not necessarily ease the tax burden, as government is often rather inefficient at providing the public services that those non-profits are providing.

Taxing the YMCA (for example) would require it to either raise additional money or cut services. It could be argued that many taxpayers provide their own swimming pools, exercise programs, recreational facilities, and don't need services like financial counseling, job training, etc...

Yes, the government can, and often does provide many of these services, but I don't often hear that they can do so as effectively or cheaply as the YMCA, and I've never heard that they could do so using the rather small amount that they would receive from the Y if it were taxed. (Yes, I picked the "Y" because it's an easy example that most folks are familiar with. I could do so with most non-profits, including churches, but it would take longer.)

Remember that the salaries of the non-profit employees (even church Pastors) are still taxed, and items sold by non-profits are also taxed.

Considering that there are no profits (by definition) to tax, all we're talking about are the land and facilities.

So, how much is a church, college or hospital worth in property taxes? Is that more or less than the cost that the taxpayers would have to pick up to provide those services?

I think that there is really no question that the services provided to the public are worth far more than the amount the government would receive in additional taxes.

Answer 2

I think it would be better to tax the churches to remove some of burden from tax -paying American families. Taxing churches would allow taxes to be lowered or at least not go up for middle class Americans. I also think that all of these wealthy people who never pay taxes, because they have "plenty" of write-offs, is a crime. I've never understood why someone with so much does not contribute to lower the burden on those who have so little. The same should be true for churches.

Answer 3

Bad idea. It would put many programs out of commission.
Paying the bills (heat, electric, upkeep, supplies, salary, etc.)
takes a lot, and all that is left goes towards the programs such as food shelf, clothing closet, financial aid for the needy, aid to people for meds, etc.
The programs are the priority, but the bills are in-your-face monthly things that must be paid.
An added burden of any increased tax would choke out some necessary things for people.
Church properties are taxed already.

Answer 4

I understand the point of not taxing. You don't want the government to tax some and not others--endorsing a religion. For many of these small under one hundred member congregations, it isn't really relevant.

Now when a church becomes a profit center, a top local employer I start to look at their tax free status as a loop hole, and want to remove it.

Answer 5

No, give to God what is God's. Churches do good for people. They should not be taxed, just like nonprofit organizations are exempt from property tax.

Answer 6

Sometimes I think we should tax government property. How is it we have to hire one bunch of gangsters to protect us from another. Don't they all fight together anyway? Why pay extra to watch. The Roman citizens got their entertainment free or am I being too cynical today?

Answer 7

Not me. The favorable governments did not tax them. (Read the scriptures); ones like the Roman government did tax them.

Answer 8

today yes. churches use to take care of the poor and ill now taxes do.

Answer 9

i think you should tax and one that has debt.....they have proven they are not following Gods word......They arent churches

Answer 10

no financial problems