Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

Lost tax revenues are essentially sponsoring and favoring a religion over others. That's the same as the state promoting a religion.


sort by: page size:

I would suggest that giving religious institutions tax-free status in the US is a form of subsidy. That’s why it’s such a problem when they begin to preach in a partisan manner.

Tax exemption can be considered a form of public funding. Churches are beginning to be stripped of their tax exemption exactly because of their political operations.

He/she might also have been referencing the preferential tax treatment of religious groups, some of which amass vast fortunes without paying taxes.

I would argue that all religious tax-dodges are scams if you're an atheist. My businesses and lack of faith don't get a free-ride, but I have to subsidize that of somebody else's?

By this logic, it's a cool business hack to run a megachurch and buy your own 737 without paying taxes, not a scam?


Which would only come into play if a religion collects revenue.

Sort of. Those evangelical churches are getting an implicit subsidy by not having to pay taxes. Why do they deserve such special treatment?

In some countries, like mine, churches are funded by taxpayer money and they are also allowed to have commercial activities with no taxes at all.

In a way there is the irony of atheists providing support for churches, but it's just one of the ways the democracy fails with majority rules (55% religious vote that non-religious people pay taxes for churches) and governments as immoral institutions that exist to rule over people, not to care about them.


Interesting example here, in Romania, where a very small but vocal minority (atheists and agnostics, 0.2% of the population) have a constant political fight against public funding of religious cults (18 officially recognised), that is the ~0.2% of the annual budget. One of the many points raised is that its their money too and churches should fund themselves from donations, which in turn, should not be tax free.

so should religions that make profits pay taxes, something tells me neither will happen

But non-profits have to pay property tax, right?

I don't think religious institutions have to pay property taxes.

Ok, I looked it up: “states subsidize religions to the tune of about $26.2 billion per year by not requiring religious institutions to pay property taxes for property worth about $600 billion. This subsidy is of particular interest because property taxes pay for services such as firefighting and police, which religious institutions use the same as corporations and private citizens.”


It's a business, like any other--it just sells something that cannot be redeemed until after death. Let's pull back tax benefits for religious institutions and treat them the same as the rest.

Tax all religious institutions.

I believe you can designate the state as the recipient of the 'church tax'. For example if you're atheist..

Simply put: why does their religion get money from the state when mine does not?

I dont care if you have weird beliefs. I just don't want weird beliefs funded by the state. And that's also including my own weird beliefs.


Well, we don't take separation of church and state as seriously as we should. The state collects the taxes for the churches, it's around 9% of your income tax. This happens automatically if you're baptized, and you have to leave the church if you don't want to pay this, which also happens at a government office.

That's not how taxes work.

Churches owe taxes because they conduct business in the United States. The government pays those taxes instead. That's a subsidy.


You can say that about any deduction. Why should taxpayers who aren't Christian subsidize donations to churches?

Curious - how does one's religion affects one's taxes?

They are stealing from everyone. Churches do not pay taxes. This is supposed to be contingent on not engaging in politics and actually acting like a non-profit.
next

Legal | privacy