Should religions pay taxes in this country?

ShoulderChip

hmm?

Rev Hellfire

bug?

ShoulderChip

sorry im just listening to george carlin.

Dades

ShoulderChip wrote: »

Should religions pay taxes in this country?

I don't think we have the same problem here as in the US with money flowing through the coffers. Sure, the odd bad apple may take advantage here and there but you don't see too many PPs driving about in jewel encrusted Bentleys.

BTW I'm assuming Scientology is not given charitable status here.

aidan24326

Scientology does not have tax exemption here afaik, though ludicrously it does in the USA.

But here in Ireland does it make any sense to give tax exemption to an organisation that are worth billions? (RC Church)

8kvscdpglqnyr4

I think it's a case of all or nothing. If you give the RCC, Islam ... etc tax exemptions then Scientology and Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster should also get tax exemptions.

toiletduck

How exactly is a religion judged when going for tax free status? I mean why isn't Scientology given it here?

pH

To what extent are religions "tax free" anyone know?

Do clergymen pay PAYE tax? I guess donations are tax-free (but then don't similar arrangements cover all charities/non-profit organisations?).

Anyway, it could be worse, not only could the church be exempt from paying tax, but we could be paying *them* tax.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_tax

robindch

If churches have non-profit status (as I assume they do), then I'd love to see them publish fully audited annual accounts. If they choose not to do this, then they should operate as a limited liability company.

...which suggests that some churches might choose to float on the stock exchange. Now that I'd like to see -- hostile takeover bids, mergers, acquisitions and the like

ChocolateSauce

They are organisations which make money, own land, etc. So yes, yes they should.

Some of them do sometimes do charity work, and this work should be documented, audited and tax allowances made on this work alone.

who is this

No in principal, yes in practice.

The reason I say "No" in principal, is because IMO tax should always have a rationale - e.g. income tax pays for health and education for children. Corporate tax could be justified as helping pay unemployment benefit when they fire workers/close down.

But in theory religions don't really get any benefit from the State.

The reason I say yes in practice is really only two words: Ferns etc. . The ridiculous debt the government took on in exchange for that miserable amount of assets was scandalous. It had to have been a violation of something! And it's not as though they didn't have anything reasonable to ask for. They could have used it as a way to obtain lots of Catholic-owned schools. The most common argument I've seen on why they haven't done it it the cost to the State, but they could've easily gotten a decent number of schools for that €1 billion liability. They could even put it like this: "Give us ALL the schools, or no deal, and we'll watch you go bankrupt". The choice they would've made is obvious.

It's for that reason I think they should be taxed in practice. Or at least the Catholic Church. They got a huge benefit of State money without every contributing a cent.

PDN

pH wrote: »

To what extent are religions "tax free" anyone know?

Do clergymen pay PAYE tax? I guess donations are tax-free (but then don't similar arrangements cover all charities/non-profit organisations?).

Anyway, it could be worse, not only could the church be exempt from paying tax, but we could be paying *them* tax.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_tax

Yes, I can affirm from personal experience that clergymen do indeed pay tax. Some pay it on a PAYE basis, others on a self-employed basis.

Religions also pay VAT etc. on anything they purchase. A charity cannot register for VAT, so no refunds are possible as with a business.

Religions that are registered charities are exempt from Stamp Duty when purchasing property, and most local councils exempt them from rates. I can't think of any other tax benefits here in Ireland. Donors to any charity, religious or otherwise, can claim tax relief on their donations.

PDN

robindch wrote: »

If churches have non-profit status (as I assume they do), then I'd love to see them publish fully audited annual accounts. If they choose not to do this, then they should operate as a limited liability company.

...which suggests that some churches might choose to float on the stock exchange. Now that I'd like to see -- hostile takeover bids, mergers, acquisitions and the like

Our church is a limited company granted charitable status by the Revenue Commissioners. As such we have to return annual audited accounts to the Commissioners or we would lose our charitable status. I thought this applied to all charities in Ireland -no?

WooPeeA

Should religions pay taxes in this country?

Yes, they should. We all should be equal to the law. No expectations and no overmen..

PDN

WooPeeA wrote: »

Yes, they should. We all should be equal to the law. No expectations and no overmen..

Fair enough - so long as you insist that Oxfam, Amnesty International etc. should pay tax on their income.

Where I think you guys probably have a problem is in the Revenue Commissioners definition of a charity.

1 Trusts for the Relief of Poverty
2 Trusts for the Advancement of Education
3 Trusts for the Advancement of Religion
4 Trusts for other purposes beneficial to the community


The problem, as I see it from your end, is that the Revenue Commissioners reflect the general consensus, both within Ireland and internationally, that religion is more of a beneficial influence on society than otherwise.

I certainly agree that all private individuals and all businesses should pay tax, but I don't believe that should apply to organisations that make no profits - be they a church, the Humanist Society, the Vegetarian Society, or Irish Skeptics.

For example, our church uses every penny of income to promote our goals of evangelism, community care, relief of poverty etc. Any material assets we own (buildings, vehicles, musical instruments etc) are used purely to achieve those goals. No one is making any profit, so why should tax be paid?

eoin5

PDN wrote: »

The problem, as I see it from your end, is that the Revenue Commissioners reflect the general consensus, both within Ireland and internationally, that their religion is more of a beneficial influence on society than otherwise.

Fixed

robindch

PDN wrote: »

[...] the Revenue Commissioners reflect the general consensus, both within Ireland and internationally, that religion is more of a beneficial influence on society than otherwise.

In general, historians hold that religions acquired many state benefits, including tax freedom, because of the very close links that the religions had with the state administrations, and the services which the religions rendered to them. Also, religions acquired most of these benefits long before the existence of democratic systems which could establish whether or not such state support reflected any agreement within client populations.

BTW, the last poll that I'm aware of in the UK showed that the percentage of people who viewed religion as harmful outnumbered the percentage of people who viewed it as beneficial by a margin of almost three to one (media summary here, research data here).

PDN wrote: »

For example, our church uses every penny of income to promote our goals of evangelism, community care, relief of poverty etc.

Out of interest, and in general terms, what percentages are allocated to each of these areas?

In the USA, I believe that in most religious organizations, evangelism accounts for the majority of available expenditure (>85%), while social services in the broadest possible sense accounts for less than 15%. Is the situation the same in this country in your experience?

PDN

robindch wrote: »

BTW, the last poll that I'm aware of in the UK showed that the percentage of people who viewed religion as harmful outnumbered the percentage of people who viewed it as beneficial by a margin of almost three to one

Yes, I saw that survey as well. Would be typical of the UK, I think. However, I don't think that would be typical of Ireland, or indeed most other countries. I think it would depend on how the question is framed as well.

Out of interest, and in general terms, what percentages are allocated to each of these areas?

In the USA, I believe that in most religious organizations, evangelism accounts for the majority of available expenditure (>85%), while social services in the broadest possible sense accounts for less than 15%. Is the situation the same in this country in your experience?

I think it would be quite difficult to work that out. For example, a considerable portion of a church's income would maintain buildings and pay wages. Most clergy I know spend at least 50% of their work time visiting the sick, counselling those with marriage problems etc. I can't speak for other churches, but our church spends less than 5% of its income on evangelism. Ordinary Christians sharing their faith with others (our primary means of evangelism) doesn't actually cost anything. However, the 85%-15% figure you mention may well be correct.