2017 Tax Bill Has Churches Start Paying Some Taxes

[Cougarbear]

Oh, it's all my problem, eh?
Try answering my questions.
We'll see where this leads.

Yes, it is your problem.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, it is your problem.

I think answering my questions would convince you otherwise.

 

[Cougarbear]

I think answering my questions would convince you otherwise.

Yes, you seem to be the spokesperson against religion. Who else?

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, you seem to be the spokesperson against religion. Who else?

Au contraire, liebchen.
I favor more freedom of religion than we currently have in Americastan.
There should be no restriction on political speech, nor should bakers
be forced to make cakes which offend their religious sensibility.
But churches should still pay taxes on real estate for the services they
enjoy & payroll taxes on employees. And if compensation benefits are
given members, they should pay tax just like everyone else.

 

[Milton Platt]

Churches may have to pay taxes, and members of Congress may pay politically







Some complain that complying with paying taxes is too complicated for churches.
It's difficult & expensive to handle the procedures.

Poor babies!
Welcome to the world the rest of us live in..

This is a good change.
Let's hope that it survives the next election cycle.

What I really want to see is full public accountability for religious institutions. They need to file full disclosure statements every year just like all other non profits do now.

 

[Revoltingest]

What I really want to see is full public accountability for religious institutions. They need to file full disclosure statements every year just like all other non profits do now.

I don't see the need.
Members will pursue that if they feel the need.

 

[Milton Platt]

I don't see the need.
Members will pursue that if they feel the need.

At last! I get to disagree with you on something!!!

 

[Revoltingest]

At last! I get to disagree with you on something!!!

I live to serve.

 

[Cougarbear]

Au contraire, liebchen.
I favor more freedom of religion than we currently have in Americastan.
There should be no restriction on political speech, nor should bakers
be forced to make cakes which offend their religious sensibility.
But churches should still pay taxes on real estate for the services they
enjoy & payroll taxes on employees. And if compensation benefits are
given members, they should pay tax just like everyone else.

This would only cause massive closures of small churches and large churches would get massive. Much like liberals do to small businesses and encourage the growth of the Federal Government through regulations and high taxation. Religious freedom? Don’t think so.

 

[Milton Platt]

This would only cause massive closures of small churches and large churches would get massive. Much like liberals do to small businesses and encourage the growth of the Federal Government through regulations and high taxation. Religious freedom? Don’t think so.

Why do you feel it is fair for churches to ride on the coattails of others who are not members of said church?

 

[Milton Platt]

I live to serve.

I'll have a Reuben and a mug of cold beer, please!

 

[Cougarbear]

Why do you feel it is fair for churches to ride on the coattails of others who are not members of said church?

Because we know what happens when governments and churches partner up controlled by government money. Tyranny. That’s why we have the Bill of Rights specifically the 1st Amendment. It’s the law of the land. The highest law of the land.

 

[Milton Platt]

Because we know what happens when governments and churches partner up controlled by government money. Tyranny. That’s why we have the Bill of Rights specifically the 1st Amendment. It’s the law of the land. The highest law of the land.

Wait, I don't understand your post. How does paying their fair share of taxes become "partnering up"? To my mind, "partnering up" would be indicated by churches getting special privileges like not paying taxes and not being accountable for the funds their members give to them.

 

[Cougarbear]

Wait, I don't understand your post. How does paying their fair share of taxes become "partnering up"? To my mind, "partnering up" would be indicated by churches getting special privileges like not paying taxes and not being accountable for the funds their members give to them.

I take it that History isn’t your subject. Or, you’ve been educated by the left wing educational system of America. The same left wing that supports the fascist Anti-Fa and other Democrats who are following the playbook of Hitler and Aulinsky all rolled up into one.
Again, there is a purpose for the 1st Amendment. To keep Government from controlling Churches and their religions. Once there is that bond of money through taxation Government leaders who hate God, guns and their religions will exercise tyranny and a church favored by the government will exercise unrighteous dominion over all other religions and freedom of thought.
It isn’t about paying a fair share, as if life is fair. It’s about liberty, freedom of religion and thought, freedom of speech and we know money talks too much. The founding fathers were truly inspired of God.

 

[Revoltingest]

This would only cause massive closures of small churches and large churches would get massive. Much like liberals do to small businesses and encourage the growth of the Federal Government through regulations and high taxation. Religious freedom? Don’t think so.

We should agree to disagree.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'll have a Reuben and a mug of cold beer, please!

Have ya not seen me avatar!?
Alls I gots is haggis.
But I kin put sauerkraut & thousand island dress'n on it fer ya.

 

[Revoltingest]

Once there is that bond of money through taxation.....

The bond of subsidy is what government uses to justify enforcing political silence in churches.

1) Do you agree that churches should be forced to silent on candidates
for office under threat of loss of tax abatement?
2) Churches must pay payroll taxes on employees. Do you oppose this?

 

[Cougarbear]

We should agree to disagree.

We probably will. But, my conclusion is through facts, experience, logical reasoning. Yours seems pretty much none of the above and simply conclude with emotional Un-Constitutional jibberish.

 

[Revoltingest]

We probably will. But, my conclusion is through facts, experience, logical reasoning. Yours seems pretty much none of the above and simply conclude with emotional Un-Constitutional jibberish.

Tis good that pix are back.

 

[Brickjectivity]

While I object to Washington's attempt to federalize all things, the states are still with us.

They are merely enforcers of the whims of Congress, their complaints unheard, their disagreements boycotted.

The fed is free to pursue all my sources of income.
Churches shouldn't have more right against this than do I.
Besides, the subsidy they receive is too high to justify their
desire for extreme member anonymity.

I am not justifying the govco intrusion into your life. State universities dont pay taxes, and they are redundant publicly funded floating cities whose primary function is to restrict access to jobs much like guilds. They are complicit in granting monopoly power to a corrupt textbook industry, which buys and destroys all used textbooks such that our public libraries are almost devoid of higher quality technical resources. But its the churches that ought to pay taxes?

The subsidy exists in several ways....
We non-church goers pay property taxes which provide churches with service (eg, fire, police).
Their getting these services for free is a subsidy. And before the 2017 tax changes, they could
give tax free compensation (unavailable to the rest of us) to their workers.

What about we non university goers? What about those who do not frequent zoos and national parks? I do not use Route 66. Why did I ever pay taxes on that? I am subsidizing Hollywood!

The bond of subsidy is what government uses to justify enforcing political silence in churches.

1) Do you agree that churches should be forced to silent on candidates
for office under threat of loss of tax abatement?
2) Churches must pay payroll taxes on employees. Do you oppose this?

Churches today enforce silence upon themselves or the govco would not have any sway. They are big boys and are responsible for their own problems. In fact the problems in our govco can be laid at the feet of the churches, but taxing churches does not seem like a solution though it would solve some university bloat to tax state universities.