Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

montreal.ctvnews.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 335 posts

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#51

Post by ars »

wrnr wrote: post #47
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #4

Churches get a bad rap these days, for many reasons. I want to take a minute to defend them. Right away, I want to say that I am not defending religion-driven bigotry, nor megachurches, nor abuse. I don't know about Canada, but in the U.S. churches are still where communities meet, where people connect with the spiritual world, and also the ones doing most of the "heavy lifting" on any kind of charity activity. They…

Sounds fair but why can't these things just be a not for profit? Don't know about the US law, but often in my country there are for-profit non-profit.

> Sounds fair but why can't these things just be a not for profit?

They are. There is no difference tax-wise for a non-profit and church.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#52

Post by skissane »

laurencerowe wrote: post #30
seesawtron wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any countries where the religious groups are NOT exempt from taxes? I'd be curious if this has been done and those religious groups still managed to remain "open to public" while surviving on private donations.

Britain nationalised church property during the reformation.

It is more complex than that. The Church of England started out as the English branch of the Roman Catholic Church. In that form, it was scarcely a private body – it was the state religion, intimately entwined with the state, with the power to levy taxes, and it ran its own court system with jurisdiction over issues which today would be viewed as essentially secular in character (validity of marriages; inheritance of personal property; crimes committed by clergy), and the state would recognise and enforce that court system's decisions. The property of such a state religion is hardly "private property", it is arguably "public property".

For centuries, the King and Pope had intermittently fought over control of it (a situation not unique to England, but repeated across mediaeval Europe). Henry VIII did not see himself as carrying out a state takeover of the Church, but simply as settling that traditional conflict between Pope and King decisively in his own favour.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#54

Post by steve19 »

hbarka wrote: post #48

I acknowledge this is anecdotal but in the Bay Area CA I drive by many churches (of different faiths) occupying large areas of land on prime hilltop real estate. I’m astonished by this.

Given the extreme wealth in the bay area, I am astonished you find it astonishing. Billionaires and multi millionaires would have funded these churches. Most churches and other religious organisations run on a tight budget and deter important costs like building maintenance because of lack of funds.

I have seen crumbling Catholic churches, and I have seen the Vatican Meusum. Two extremes of wealth.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#55

Post by saltyfever »

ggggtez wrote: post #38
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #4

Churches get a bad rap these days, for many reasons. I want to take a minute to defend them. Right away, I want to say that I am not defending religion-driven bigotry, nor megachurches, nor abuse. I don't know about Canada, but in the U.S. churches are still where communities meet, where people connect with the spiritual world, and also the ones doing most of the "heavy lifting" on any kind of charity activity. They…

> where people connect with the spiritual world In the USA, this is quickly becoming an obsolete understanding of religion. Regular church attendance is down from 70% to just over 50% in the last 20 years, according to Gallup. People are leaving the churches. The real question is what will replace them. If people need community, build community centers. There are other solutions that do not rely on continuing to prov…

Are people fleeing churches or have they never been?

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#56

Post by jsmeaton »

earthscienceman wrote: post #43
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #4

Churches get a bad rap these days, for many reasons. I want to take a minute to defend them. Right away, I want to say that I am not defending religion-driven bigotry, nor megachurches, nor abuse. I don't know about Canada, but in the U.S. churches are still where communities meet, where people connect with the spiritual world, and also the ones doing most of the "heavy lifting" on any kind of charity activity. They…

This is such an important point. It's going to go against the grain at hackernews, but taxing churches in the US is a terrible idea. If you wanted to further the divide between the "liberal city"/"conservative rural" American cultures, this would be a great way to do it. If you grew up in a rural area of the flyover states you would know that churches form the backbone of these rural communities. For example, the chu…

Don't you only tax profits? If a church isn't making any, then there'd be nothing to tax?

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#57

Post by roenxi »

skissane wrote: post #19
colordrops wrote: post #2

Makes sense to me, and should be done in the US as well. Providing a tax exemption is in a way the opposite of a separation of church and state. The state is giving them special treatment.

The article makes clear that churches in Montreal are still getting their tax exemption if they stick to purely religious activities (prayer, worship, etc). They are only being taxed when they use their property for not explicitly religious activities like charitable uses, community groups, etc. Do those people applauding this really want to applaud a policy that gives tax exemptions to specifically religious activit…

Opinions on the cheering side are likely diverse; but a good argument for it is wanting a consistent tax code where people are treated consistently without reference to what they are thinking. I am not at all sympathetic to the idea that we allow good works to go tax-free only when religious people do them. That isn't fair. No exemptions for churches is fair, although they should have gotten more notice if this article is representing the situation comprehensively.

People doing charitable work probably shouldn't be paying taxes. People doing community work probably shouldn't be paying taxes. I'm even nervous about taxes on business since things like supermarkets are primarily involved with is getting food to people cheaply - discouraging that seems foolish. The basis of that taxation status shouldn't be linked to religious affiliation.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#58

Post by colordrops »

solresol wrote: post #11
colordrops wrote: post #2

Makes sense to me, and should be done in the US as well. Providing a tax exemption is in a way the opposite of a separation of church and state. The state is giving them special treatment.

To put this in perspective, in Switzerland your employer takes your church donations out of your salary. Your taxes directly fund the church. _That's_ the opposite of separation of church and state. In the USA, tax deductions to churches is giving the same treatment as a charity.

Do churches not use US infrastructure and services? We are implicitly taxed on behalf of churches.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#59

Post by alpaca128 »

solresol wrote: post #11
colordrops wrote: post #2

Makes sense to me, and should be done in the US as well. Providing a tax exemption is in a way the opposite of a separation of church and state. The state is giving them special treatment.

To put this in perspective, in Switzerland your employer takes your church donations out of your salary. Your taxes directly fund the church. _That's_ the opposite of separation of church and state. In the USA, tax deductions to churches is giving the same treatment as a charity.

Both are wrong. Churches should prove they act as non-profits just like any other organisation. Because especially in the US a lot do not exactly oppose profits.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#60

Post by jay_kyburz »

I don't mind charities being exempt from paying municipal taxes on church land, but I do object to things like Sanitarium making Weetbix and Peanut butter, selling it in the supermarket, and not paying any company tax on profits.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitarium_Health_and_Wellbein...

Post reply on HN