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

91–100 of 335 posts

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#91

Post by ficklepickle »

randompwd wrote: post #50
dmarchand90 wrote: post #5

What's bizarre to me is that they are tax free for worship (in my mind fair enough). But get taxed for hosting community services, e.g., foodbank. Definitely think usage in charitable functions warrants tax exemption as much as service

I don't think it's that bizarre. I find it quite subversive when a church group does 'community events' when there are other organisations which those church members could join to achieve the same result, without flying the banner of $ideology. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Souperism for a more blatant historical take.

That article says the practice was actually very rare, even though it features very prominently in literature from the period. Maybe not the best example.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#92

Post by forgotmypw17 »

jsmeaton wrote: post #56
earthscienceman wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It's not just about the amounts, but the time tax, and the effort tax. Maintaining tax records is not zero-effort.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#93

Post by juskrey »

throwaway_pdp09 wrote: post #85
juskrey wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should see some Soviet community centers before thinking they can replace anything. USA is highly uneven. In some states like Florida you can see churches on every other corner, and they are very active and developing, serving not only as community centers, but also as halls, child day care, hospitals, schools, galleries etc. No freaking "community center" can replace that.

> some Soviet community centers before Could you elaborate?

I was born in the exUSSR and there, if you want to find the most apocalyptic, neglected, boring and useless building which lives by renting out itself to some strange businesses (if at all), you can ask for the local community center.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#94

Post by neya »

Churches are one of the biggest business entities in any part of the world. Most churches are structured like a proper business entity (Eg. they have equivalent of directors, CEOs and managers) and have revenue targets and KPIs set.

Most churches are also located in some of the prime real estate of top tier cities and I always wondered how they were able to afford paying $1500+/Sq.M in a prime, central area.

About the charity work - I know for a fact the charity work the churches do cost less than 10% of the income they make, I got this number from a former church member who was a top level guy in his church. Given that churches are anyway structured like a business entity internally and manage money like a proper business, why shouldn't they be taxed as one?

It makes no sense to not tax them no matter how you try to justify it. If they did get an exemption, so should Mc Donald's for giving away a free Cola bottle with every $20 meal you get.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#95

Post by threatofrain »

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…

One problem I see is that church is also leading the cause to marginalize gay people from society by force of government.

There's a reason why during the Bush presidential candidacy a big news item was the push for a Constitutional amendment to exclude gay marriage. The Mormon church spent a great amount of money advertising in California with regards to how dangerous gay people are to kids.

People talk about "intolerance" of "cancelling", but cancelling is about the exercise of free relations by withdrawing. And then there's the force of law.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#96

Post by onetimemanytime »

jsmeaton wrote: post #56
earthscienceman wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

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

Land and buildings for one could be taxed. Churches bought or were given land ages ago, before there was a Manhattan or Boston, as we today know it. Go ahead and pay property tax on land worth $250 Million when you barely make income to keep the lights on.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#97

Post by ranman »

Everyone commenting about how great churches are? You’re absolutely delusional. The gross majority of these organizations are bigoted and racist. I grew up in the southern United States and experienced all manner of churches. I don’t care how great your church is. Give me 20 minutes with your congregation and I’ll find the racists and bigots. These assholes promote terrible mental and physical health. They don’t believe women have a right to make family planning decisions and they protect rapists. They push political agendas under the guise of religious belief. Half of them don’t have education past high school.

Religion is a vestigial structure and a hideyhole for the worst parts of humanity.

This is not an exaggeration. I have lived this. I have watched others live through this. The USA will ultimately be destroyed by completely ignorant Christians who are able to fake some semblance of rational thought.

Stop defending these institutions as “for the public good”. Tax them out or existence and let secular / non religious organizations take their place. It is absolutely absurd to pretend Christians, Muslims, Hindus, or whoever are special because of the particular brand of imaginary edicts they subscribe to. None of us are special. We are all just stupid meatbags on a rock.

I commend all the lives saved in the name of God but let’s not pretend or equivocate. Christianity in the USA is a net drain on society and it has no place in a rational conversation. Anyone who thinks, believes, or sells otherwise? You’re a lunatic.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#98

Post by adventured »

Galaxeblaffer wrote: post #64
earthscienceman wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Maybe you could earmark the collected taxes for creating secular alternatives? Or maybe create a system where people don't have to rely on churches and rich people for charity.

> Or maybe create a system where people don't have to rely on churches and rich people for charity.

Being handed everything by a welfare state is de facto charity for the recipient. The biggest difference is that charity is morally superior because it's voluntary.

Besides, the US has a very large welfare state. I get a big kick out of people pretending the US doesn't have an epic scale, highly dysfunctional, poorly operated, welfare state, that doesn't spend trillions of dollars per year. I just can't figure out what they're spending $8.1 trillion on every year. Must be roads and military. Where'd all that magic trillions of dollars in stimulus spending come from? That laissez-faire Capitalist US system surely. Those free market $1,200 checks raining from the sky.

Without exception every welfare state - including the US, which has one of the most progressive tax systems - heavily relies on rich people to pay an extremely outsized share of taxes.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#99

Post by hrktb »

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 article in particular seems to be about better use of church space to not let empty rooms stays unused, albeit in a somewhat aggressive way.

But more generally, I think an angle to the whole question would be to apply either or both:

- treat religious organizations as any other non-profit, with no specific religious exemption. If they can’t continue doing the same in that legal framing they need to adapt.

- give all non-profit orgs a path to have the same advantages as religious organizations, so they can help the community in the same ways.

Re: Montreal is taxing churches (2017)

#100

Post by lazyasciiart »

ThePadawan wrote: post #76
ars wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Alright, so all churches doing charity work now set up a non-for-profit. Problem solved?

AFAIK, the difference would pretty much be that they actually have (pretty loose) limits on what they can spend money on, and on endorsing electoral candidates - and they'd have to publish information about their finances.

If you argued that religion was not an intrinsic social benefit then you might start saying that some of what they do is not non-profit work. That could get interesting.

Post reply on HN