RE: Should Churches Remain Tax-Exempt?
December 12, 2014 at 11:49 am
(This post was last modified: December 12, 2014 at 11:49 am by Cato.)
(December 12, 2014 at 8:17 am)Heywood Wrote: Negative.....you are not even close.
The reasons Chuches have tax exemptions is because of the First Amendment of our constitution.
Congress first tried to exempt religious organizations in the Revenue Act of 1894, but this act was determined to be unconstitutional primarily due to the apportionment clause. So much for your First Amendment bullshit.
It took the Sixteenth Amendment that removed the apportionment requirement before religions could be exempted. Even then, religions were given tax exempt status because they were considered charitable organization and not because of religion per se. This was first done via the Revenue Act of 1913.
In the Revenue Act of 1938, the Ways and Means Committee documented clarification of the purpose of the tax exemption:
Quote: The exemption from taxation of money or property devoted to charitable or other purposes is based upon the theory that the government is compensated for the loss of revenue by its relief from the financial burdens which would otherwise have to be made by appropriations from public funds, and by benefits resulting from the promotion of the general welfare.Again, tax exemption is not granted because of religion, but because religious organizations were deemed charitable.
In 1969, religions were subject to tax for unrelated business income. This means that income that did not further their charitable arm was taxable.
This is probably also a good time to point out that like other exempt charitable organizations, religious organizations can face penalty and forfeiture of their exempt status if caught "attempting to influence legislation, (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)) and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office".