IRS and the NAACP

[ruthie]

WASHINGTON - The Internal Revenue Service is investigating whether a speech by NAACP Chairman Julian Bond last summer that criticized the Bush administration violated a federal law that prohibits tax-exempt charitable organizations from engaging in most forms of political activity.

Ok..now it's attack the NAACP. You know, the organizationthat Bush has refused to talk to for 3 years or so? Bond did criticize Bush in his speech, but he didn't tell the listeners to go vote Kerry. (like the orations from some of the pulpits across the country).
what happened to the IRS going after the tax exempt status of religious institutions that outright endorse candidates, threaten an eternity of hellfire and brimstone if the parishoners don't vote for Bush?

[vidcc]

I believe any charity, churches included should be taxed...let them claim deductables like any other business if they use money for charitable causes.... make them show it

[manker]

Are they not already taxed if they don't meet the strict criteria of being a charity, like having a very low profit compared with turnover.

Are the employees of the Church taxed if they earn money (wages) from the Church.

That is how it works in the UK. It would surprise me if it differed significantly in the US. What are the IRS rules there that govern charities and their tax-free status?

Here if you donate to the Church or a registered charity through the proper channels then you pay the tax on this but they can claim it back, swelling your donation to it's gross amount. This seems fine to me provided that the Charity uses it legitimately i.e. a donation to a worthy cause or other allowable expense. Is this different in the U.S.?

If not then I see no reason for Churches and Charitable organisations to lose their 'tax-free' status.

[vidcc]

Donating to church via collections... how do you pay tax on that?. Uk laws allow tax relief for charitable donations up to a certain amount i believe, for personal and comercial donations.

I feel that ALL tax free status as "status" should be removed and as i said any money raised used for charitable causes can then be written off in the tax return. If all monies raised are shown to be used for such reasons then no tax will be paid.

Yes church employees pay income tax if they earn enough as far as i am aware...just as an employee of any other business. The charity is tax exempt..not it's workers (unless someone knows better)

[manker]

Donating to church via collections... how do you pay tax on that?. Uk laws allow tax relief for charitable donations up to a certain amount i believe, for personal and comercial donations.

I feel that ALL tax free status as "status" should be removed and as i said any money raised used for charitable causes can then be written off in the tax return. If all monies raised are shown to be used for such reasons then no tax will be paid.

Yes church employees pay income tax if they earn enough as far as i am aware...just as an employee of any other business. The charity is tax exempt..not it's workers (unless someone knows better)

If it's money in your pocket going to the Church collection then presumably you've already paid tax on it. No? However, this is a different thing entirely.

I was talking about money being paid by charitable covenant and yes there is a limit to this. It is one of the limitations of the 'tax free' status that they enjoy. The profit level they are allowed is so small that if they are going to maintain their 'tax-free' status that they literally have to donate any surplus to good causes to reduce their profits to this level.

This small surplus is then an asset of the church, it cannot be enjoyed by it's employees lest it be taxed, so what happens to it? It may well go toward the funding of capital items, the total value of which cannot be claimed in the year of aquisition.

Of course the employees of the Church and Charities pay tax as normal.

So you see to strip the Church of it's 'tax-free' status is pointless. In the UK.

I was enquiring if it was different in the US such that it would cause your ire. I cannot see how this would be so. Provided the Charity or Church is legitimate then the few benefits it receives from it's status are transferred to the worthy causes.

[vidcc]

well yes there are rules they must follow but as pointed out often they don't....such as canvasing for a candidate from the pulpit. But in having their tax free status it is assumed that what they do is "charitable" and not everyone agrees with that.

Ok running a soup kitchen for example...yes charitable.

But what about distributing free bibles?.... is that a charitable act?..as a non believer i think not. To me it is a work of fiction.
What about those leaflets i get through the door if i am not in when they call ? To assume this is charity is to assume god actually exists....and i don't believe he does.


If i wanted to set up a "charity" to distribute a michael moore book for example i doubt i would be granted charity status and would have to prove i made no money before not paying tax...but then i doubt it would be allowed as a tax write off either.

You may see change as pointless but the original post of this thread pointed to abuse of the rules and they are getting away with it... so if charities had to make the same write off claims as other business concerns do then they would have nothing to worry about as long as they play by the rules.

I read a lot of post from people complaining that homosexuals what "preferencial treatment" when all they want is equal rights, and those people wish to deny those rights because of their religious beliefs...well why should they get preferencial treatment themselves because of those beliefs

[vidcc]

What's NAACP.

national association for the advancement of colored people...they have a website


NAACP


edit:....so you looked it up

[Rat Faced]

There are loads of loopholes that get used by the "Clergy" of recognised religions.

For example; empty domestic Property in the UK is exempt from Council Tax, if its owned by a recognised church/religion and its next use is likely to be that of accomodation for "Clergy".

As an example... all male members of The Church of Latter Day Saints are classed as the priesthood... So in effect, they can claim exemption if its likely to be sold to or used by other Church Members, including renting the accomodation out.

For Business Rates, all that is required is an Implied Public Invitation to worship and a certificate that you send off for saying the property is to be used for Religious Worship (unless Anglican, in which case its automatic exemption).. that implied invitation is all the evidence needed.. abracadabra.. its exempt. We have a few shops around here using that loophole

Alternatively, for recognised Religions (which includes Jedi Knight now remember)... all you have to do is show that what is happening on the premises are within the publicly disclosed doctrines of your religion... That means, in effect, any property owned by a religious organisation can claim exemption, if they have the correct arguments to use with the Valuation Office.

[Rat Faced]

You are, of course, correct.

In my opinion, they should.

[vidcc]

it's not the loss of charitable status more the loss of tax exempt status... Absolutetly they should lose it if the don't abide by the rules. The religious side was raised by Ruthie because the IRS is going after the NAACP but seem to be ignoring religious groups that are openly breaking the rules