Why is the State bank rolling the Church while cutting carers and the lesser well-off

why o why?

My local church is St. Jude the Apostle, Templeogue. Today we received the usual envelope asking for donation. Not only was there the envelope but also a tax refund form where they would claim back your tax for the church on your behalf.

Attached was a financial statement for the church, year 2012. Total income was €220,964.83. A further break down of this reveals:

• Tax Refund Scheme = €26,529.55
• DIRT refund = €2,913.43
• PRSI refund = €899.33

Total reclaimed = €30,342.31

On the other end expenses included:

• Picture & Shrine = €9,077.50
• Office Renovation = €18,200
• Various = flowers, candles, priniting, retreats, general overheads as one may expect of a church.

According to this Irish Times article there are 2660 Catholic Churches in Ireland. Take it that, on average, each church claims back €20,000 - that's €53 million. Even if it worked out at €10,000 per church that would be €26 million.


Just wanted to see what others thought of this? Do you think these loopholes should be cut?



My opinion would be twofold. Firstly, the church are very wealthy and should not receive tax refunds directly or indirectly through others' tax returns while other cuts are being made to poorer individuals. Secondly, the church owes the State for institutional abuse settlements - this should be taken into consideration when it comes to church tax refunds or exemptions.


*These accounts are public and used as an example to make a point.

Valetta

It is the people that make the donations to the church that are getting the tax relief. They just allow the church to keep it.

These are who you should be directing your question towards.

why o why?

Valetta wrote: »

It is the people that make the donations to the church that are getting the tax relief. They just allow the church to keep it.

These are who you should be directing your question towards.

Not necessarily. They are allowed claim tax back (with permission of the donator of course) based on being a charity.

I have looked through the list of expenses of this church and there are no charitable expenses whatsoever.

The question that maybe I should have asked is: Do you think it right that the church has charitable status and allowed claim back so much money while the poorer are being cut?

Fratton Fred

why o why? wrote: »

Not necessarily. They are allowed claim tax back (with permission of the donator of course) based on being a charity.

I have looked through the list of expenses of this church and there are no charitable expenses whatsoever.

The question that maybe I should have asked is: Do you think it right that the church has charitable status and allowed claim back so much money while the poorer are being cut?

All Churches are charities and although the RC Church may be wealthy, a ot of others, CofI, Presbytarian and Methodist for example, certainly aren't.

My local CofI church, despite being one of the largest Anglican parishes in the country is run on a shoe string and the money it can retain through charitable donations helps out enormously.

If you stop it for one, you have to stop it for all.

why o why?

Fratton Fred wrote: »

All Churches are charities and although the RC Church may be wealthy, a ot of others, CofI, Presbytarian and Methodist for example, certainly aren't.

My local CofI church, despite being one of the largest Anglican parishes in the country is run on a shoe string and the money it can retain through charitable donations helps out enormously.

If you stop it for one, you have to stop it for all.

Personally, I'd rather see a system where the charitable activities were exempt rather than the entire organisation. Why should my church be given back tax only to buy a picture and shrine worth €9,000? The oganisation is huge and varied.

Likewise, other organisations should be treated similar. If you want a CofI outfit you pay for it. If I want to do other spiritual activities such a yoga I pay tax also. What's the difference? If you benefit and can pay, then pay without State help.

I think it's fair to say SVP should be exempt but the Iona Institution which sets out the church's opinion and aims in the media, often offending minority groups, certainly should not be exempt.

Fratton Fred

why o why? wrote: »

Personally, I'd rather see a system where the charitable activities were exempt rather than the entire organisation. Why should my church be given back tax only to buy a picture and shrine worth €9,000? The oganisation is huge and varied.

Likewise, other organisations should be treated similar. If you want a CofI outfit you pay for it. If I want to do other spiritual activities such a yoga I pay tax also. What's the difference? If you benefit and can pay, then pay without State help.

I think it's fair to say SVP should be exempt but the Iona Institution which sets out the church's opinion and aims in the media, often offending minority groups, certainly should not be exempt.

I wouldn't disagree with you, but it would be a nightmare to administer from a tax perspective.

I know that my church is intrinsically linked with it's parish school and a lot of the money it spends is on joint infrastructure projects that benefit both. It also spends pretty heavily on the upkeep of the parochial house as well as the wages for the rector, sexton and secretary. Then there is the parish club, which is effectively a place for retired woman to practice knitting and drink gin (they deny this strongly, but refuse to tell me what it is they actually do, other than support each other and provide somewhere for widowed people to go and meet up)

anything it has left (after living frugally) gets donated to organisations such as the Bishops' appeal and Kenya Build. The money it spends on nice to haves is relatively small.

Our biggest project at the moment is also a refurbishment project, but that is essential in order that a 160 year old building lasts for another 160 years.

Manach

My opinion is that historical Churches have done an excellent and cost effective job of supporting the more marginalised sections of society without the larger overhead that the state uses. The original tax-exemption charitable status of such activities can be traced as a solution to the collapse of welfare services post-Reformation in the UK.

Cookie_Monster

It's because for some unfathomable reason churches are classed as charities instead of businesses.
It's high time they were recognised as the companies that they are and taxed accordingly IMO, all they do is provide services to customers from a 'store'.