Many churches do not qualify to be tax exempt, this is why.

[Quantum Windbag]

That's why it would be better to eliminate their tax-exempt status.....all of them.

Wrong.

Amazing insight...

Care to elaborate on why you do not think so.

That exemption applies to museums, hospitals, libraries, schools, and professional associations. For some reason everyone here thinks that only churches get special treatment, and they want to strip them of that status simply because some people in the church engage in speech that has political impact. That makes everyone wrong.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I read the link.

Here is what it says:

No situation better illustrates the principle that all the facts and circumstances must be considered than the problem of when issue advocacy becomes participation or intervention in a political campaign. On the one hand, the Service [IRS] is not going to tell IRC 501(c)(3) organizations that they cannot talk about issues of morality or of social or economic problems at particular times of the year, simply because there is a campaign occurring.

<SNIP>

Basically, a finding of campaign intervention in an issue advertisement requires more than just a positive or negative correspondence between an organization's position and a candidate's position. What is required is that there must be some reasonably overt indication in the communication to the reader, viewer, or listener that the organization supports or opposes a particular candidate (or slate of candidates) in an election; rather than being a message restricted to an issue.

If he said it for the last 3 years he is not supporting a candidate, but the IRS might not see it that way.

I get that, but as I said before, what has changed is that Romney filed to run for the office of the President of the United States...making him a candidate.

According to the IRS, the prohibition against supporting (or by extension, opposing) a candidate is absolute.

The only wiggle room I see is the language of the precedent cited in the link is specific to "supporting". It would take more research to clarify the amplification that included "opposition".

If the language needs clarification then I guess I was right, it is not as simple as you think.

 

[Missourian]

If he said it for the last 3 years he is not supporting a candidate, but the IRS might not see it that way.

I get that, but as I said before, what has changed is that Romney filed to run for the office of the President of the United States...making him a candidate.

According to the IRS, the prohibition against supporting (or by extension, opposing) a candidate is absolute.

The only wiggle room I see is the language of the precedent cited in the link is specific to "supporting". It would take more research to clarify the amplification that included "opposition".

If the language needs clarification then I guess I was right, it is not as simple as you think.

Nope, still simple...non profits can't support or oppose a candidate.

It doesn't get much simpler.

Here it is again, for the cheap seats:

Basically, a finding of campaign intervention in an issue advertisement requires more than just a positive or negative correspondence between an organization's position and a candidate's position. What is required is that there must be some reasonably overt indication in the communication to the reader, viewer, or listener that the organization supports or opposes a particular candidate (or slate of candidates) in an election; rather than being a message restricted to an issue.

 

[Missourian]

From another website:

In order to maintain tax-exempt status, 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations cannot engage in political campaigning. Nonprofits with 501(c)(3) tax exempt status should be ever vigilant about this prohibition -- a violation could result in severe consequences.


The federal tax law is very strict on the issue of political campaigning: A 501(c)(3) organization is absolutely forbidden to directly or indirectly participate in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Violation of this prohibition could lead the IRS to completely revoke your organization's tax-exempt status or impose excise taxes on your organization.


In other words, the IRS is serious about this issue, and your board of directors and officers should be equally serious in making sure that your organization complies with federal law in this area.

Limits on Political Campaigning for 501(c)(3) Nonprofits | Nolo.com

 

[Missourian]

From yet another website:

Supporting or opposing any candidate for elected office, even in nonpartisan races, is strictly prohibited and can result in loss of your tax exemption. Fear of violating this prohibition on political activity may be behind the reluctance of many nonprofits to get involved in policy issues.


Nonprofits can, however, get involved in election campaigns for or against ballot initiatives or referenda. These campaigns are very important policy tools in California and many other states. Trying to influence how people vote on initiatives is direct lobbying, since the voters act as legislators in approving or rejecting a ballot initiative.


Center for Nonprofit Management - FAQ Lobbying and Advocacy

 

[Missourian]

And yet another website:

[FONT=Verdana, Times, Times New Roman, serif]What Political Activities by Churches are NOT Permitted?[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Times, Times New Roman, serif][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Times, Times New Roman, serif]Official Endorsements &#8212; Churches may not officially endorse or oppose any political candidate and maintain tax-exempt status. Pastors or other church officials may not endorse or oppose candidates from the pulpit or in church publications such as bulletins, websites, or broadcasts during an election campaign season. (p. 8*).[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, Times, Times New Roman, serif]http://www.advanceusa.org/church_involvement.asp
[/FONT]

 

[Missourian]

I'll be happy to draw you a picture if that's what it takes...just let me know.

 

[nitroz]

 

[nitroz]

 

[FA_Q2]

Wrong.

Amazing insight...

Care to elaborate on why you do not think so.

That exemption applies to museums, hospitals, libraries, schools, and professional associations. For some reason everyone here thinks that only churches get special treatment, and they want to strip them of that status simply because some people in the church engage in speech that has political impact. That makes everyone wrong.

I was under the impression that the posters that were saying that were referring to ALL tax exempted bodies loosing that privilege. I can see where trying to divide the church out of the mix can be considered asinine but I can also understand if people want to throw the entire idea of tax exemption out the window. After all, many of these entities are borderline at best.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I don't see what's so sacred about nonprofits.

Some of these businesses rake in millions and pay their officers very well. Now if they show no profit then they won't be assessed an income tax but to exempt them from property and sales taxes is wrong.

These businesses and churches benefit from services just like anyone else why should taxpayers be forced to what amounts to donating to these businesses by picking up the tab for their use of services that would be paid for by taxes from which they are exempt?

 

[nitroz]

I don't see what's so sacred about nonprofits.

Some of these businesses rake in millions ans pay their officers very well. Now if they show no profit then they won't be assessed an income tax but to exempt them from property and sales taxes is wrong.

These businesses and churches benefit from services just like anyone else why should taxpayers be forced to what amounts to donating to these businesses by picking up the tab for their use of services that would be paid for by taxes from which they are exempt?

The only non profit that should be tax exempt I can think of is the SPCA. They really bend over backwards and do wonders for animals.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I don't see what's so sacred about nonprofits.

Some of these businesses rake in millions ans pay their officers very well. Now if they show no profit then they won't be assessed an income tax but to exempt them from property and sales taxes is wrong.

These businesses and churches benefit from services just like anyone else why should taxpayers be forced to what amounts to donating to these businesses by picking up the tab for their use of services that would be paid for by taxes from which they are exempt?

The only non profit that should be tax exempt I can think of is the SPCA. They really bend over backwards and do wonders for animals.

I would rather see all charities treated the same as every other business.

 

[nitroz]

I don't see what's so sacred about nonprofits.

Some of these businesses rake in millions ans pay their officers very well. Now if they show no profit then they won't be assessed an income tax but to exempt them from property and sales taxes is wrong.

These businesses and churches benefit from services just like anyone else why should taxpayers be forced to what amounts to donating to these businesses by picking up the tab for their use of services that would be paid for by taxes from which they are exempt?

The only non profit that should be tax exempt I can think of is the SPCA. They really bend over backwards and do wonders for animals.

I would rather see all charities treated the same as every other business.

I guess that would be best.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Amazing insight...

Care to elaborate on why you do not think so.

That exemption applies to museums, hospitals, libraries, schools, and professional associations. For some reason everyone here thinks that only churches get special treatment, and they want to strip them of that status simply because some people in the church engage in speech that has political impact. That makes everyone wrong.

I was under the impression that the posters that were saying that were referring to ALL tax exempted bodies loosing that privilege. I can see where trying to divide the church out of the mix can be considered asinine but I can also understand if people want to throw the entire idea of tax exemption out the window. After all, many of these entities are borderline at best.

You were under the impression that these people want hospitals to pay higher taxes? What the frack gave you that impression when they keep using the word church?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I don't see what's so sacred about nonprofits.

Some of these businesses rake in millions and pay their officers very well. Now if they show no profit then they won't be assessed an income tax but to exempt them from property and sales taxes is wrong.

These businesses and churches benefit from services just like anyone else why should taxpayers be forced to what amounts to donating to these businesses by picking up the tab for their use of services that would be paid for by taxes from which they are exempt?

What is so special about schools that they should not have to pay taxes? How about the fact that you personally have argued that everyone is entitled to an education even if they can't afford it? Now you want to tax schools on top of that? How stupid so you think I am?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I don't see what's so sacred about nonprofits.

Some of these businesses rake in millions ans pay their officers very well. Now if they show no profit then they won't be assessed an income tax but to exempt them from property and sales taxes is wrong.

These businesses and churches benefit from services just like anyone else why should taxpayers be forced to what amounts to donating to these businesses by picking up the tab for their use of services that would be paid for by taxes from which they are exempt?

The only non profit that should be tax exempt I can think of is the SPCA. They really bend over backwards and do wonders for animals.

What about PETA, don't they help animals? How about the World Wildlife Fund, Greenpeace, and all the other non profits that help animals?

I think the real problem here is you are so stupid your cat has to tie your shoes.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I don't see what's so sacred about nonprofits.

Some of these businesses rake in millions ans pay their officers very well. Now if they show no profit then they won't be assessed an income tax but to exempt them from property and sales taxes is wrong.

These businesses and churches benefit from services just like anyone else why should taxpayers be forced to what amounts to donating to these businesses by picking up the tab for their use of services that would be paid for by taxes from which they are exempt?

The only non profit that should be tax exempt I can think of is the SPCA. They really bend over backwards and do wonders for animals.

I would rather see all charities treated the same as every other business.

United Way in Las Vegas just got a $1,000,000.00 donation that they directly passed on to 2000 families in the form of $500.00 prepaid debit cars, if we treated them exactly like any other business they would have had to pay taxes on that donation, and and then withhold income taxes when they passed out the cards. That seems like a pretty stupid idea to me, but I am sure you can explain why it is better for the government to get that money than the people that actually need that.

Alternatively, I will accept an admission that you were simply wrong.

 

[nitroz]

I don't see what's so sacred about nonprofits.

Some of these businesses rake in millions ans pay their officers very well. Now if they show no profit then they won't be assessed an income tax but to exempt them from property and sales taxes is wrong.

These businesses and churches benefit from services just like anyone else why should taxpayers be forced to what amounts to donating to these businesses by picking up the tab for their use of services that would be paid for by taxes from which they are exempt?

The only non profit that should be tax exempt I can think of is the SPCA. They really bend over backwards and do wonders for animals.

What about PETA, don't they help animals?

They have a 98% kill rate and 1% of their budget actually goes towards helping animals.

 

[M14 Shooter]

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf

scroll to page 5 and read the 5 qualifications.

Churches and religious organizations, like many other
charitable organizations, qualify for exemption from
federal income tax under IRC section 501(c)(3) and
are generally eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions.
To qualify for tax-exempt status, such an
organization must meet the following requirements
(covered in greater detail throughout this publication):
&#9632; the organization must be organized and operated
exclusively for religious, educational, scientific, or other
charitable purposes,
&#9632; net earnings may not inure to the benefit of any
private individual or shareholder,
&#9632; no substantial part of its activity may be attempting
to influence legislation,
&#9632; the organization may not intervene in political
campaigns, and
&#9632; the organization’s purposes and activities may not
be illegal or violate fundamental public policy.

Since about half or more get involved in politics...

Show this to be true.