A idea worth emulating?
Prime Minister Mario Monti plans an amendment to an Italian law that will force the Catholic Church to pay taxes on all its commercial properties, according to a statement posted late yesterday on the government’s website.
[…]
The Catholic Church owns about 100,000 properties in Italy, a third of which are commercial, according to the Italian Radical Party, which historically has challenged the church.Italy would gain an additional 100 million euros ($130 million) from increasing levies on the church to include all its commercial property, Paolo Berdini, an urban planner and consultant for local administrations, said in an interview last month.
The Vatican reported a profit of 9.8 million euros ($12.7 million) in 2010 after three years of losses during the recession.
Here in Dallas, the Taliban buys up or inherits precious property that get taken off the tax rolls. When I lived in Fort Lauderdale, Fl, the problem was even worse.
Solution to restore fiscal responsibility for municipalities:
* Tax the Taliban castles at the highest millage possible
* Tax the priest lodge (built in church back yard) at 2x rate.
* Make taxes retroactive to 1776
As I mentioned in detail below, how do you than keep separation of Church and State (which is likely dear to you for opposite reasons than to me, but still dear…)?
As I mentioned before, there is no separation of church and state. So, the proposal is to tax the church immediately and retroactively while getting them out of government.
When they are out (which is unlikely), they can have tax exempt status and their own fire department.
To all those who’d greedily lay their Government hands on religious organizations income: how on Earth can that ever mesh with separation of Church and State? If any Government takes a single cent from any Church/Mosque/Synagogue/Temple/… separation is fundamentally broken. I don’t know Italian Constitution and Law but I suspect a similar clause as in US Constitution laying somewhere there. Because it is reasonable. Because religious people of any faith can freely worship whatever they choose only and only if Government has no impact on their Church. As soon as Government can demand anything from the Church, particularly money – this freedom is gone and it becomes Government sanctioned and monitored. And as soon as Government erodes one freedom, it will reach for some other.
Why? Because there is no separation of church and state. It’s only in theory. Wake up to the real world.
Having said that, I agree with your hypothesis.
The Catholic Church in America has already forfeited their tax-free status by becoming political players. They push their political agenda, they lobby, they tell their parishioners which candidate to vote for, et cetera.
They’re just another political player on the scene, they should pay their taxes just like all the other players.
The Catholic Church is trying to have an impact on the Government, so why shouldn’t the Government have an impact on the Catholic Church? Why should the Catholic Church get a free ride on its taxes when all the other political players don’t?
And there are many other churches doing the same thing.
You want special tax breaks from the government, stay out of politics.
So they shouldn’t have been supporting Obama? I’d say they’ve learned their lesson about that one.
50 years on going to Mass, waiting for marching orders from the pulpit… gun’s rusty, uniform’s motheaten, powder is wet. Nothing. Stay out of politics; cripes, the problem is convincing them to get INTO it! Sorry bub, you’re getting your news from the wrong places.
I would much rather leave significant portions of my money with the churches than with the government. You see this is part of the economic engine; government, private enterprise, and the church. If one stopped existing, it would have to be invented to keep the world going ’round.
Italy is full of shit, as it has been for over 2000 years. Relax folks.
And I’m sure the Catholic Church is a big player in Italian politics too.
Then by your logic/argument churches should also not receive ANY money from government, which many of them do. G W Bush even created a department in the White House to encourage and expand the giving of tax-payer money to religious entities.
I don’t get the math. From the article, they think they can get 100 million Euros from 9.8 million Euros of profit.
Aside from the fact that taxing churches violates the separation of church and state, you can’t tax ten times the money they have. Look at the numbers and see if you get it.
That was exactly what I was thinking, the church would just close all shops, maybe go to an amazon model? move operations outside the country? makes no sense to me.
Good ideas, there. Perhaps the scourge of religion would eventually vanish.
You are an atheists. In the good old US of A that is defined as an officially recognized religion so when the others are being kicked out of the country at your behest why shouldn’t they be coming after you? Holy wars are so cool! That is if you like oceans of blood shed.
Your not so small quandary is that you don’t want others to have freedom of religion but your aren’t going to be happy if the religious group that comes out on top isn’t yours and it most likely won’t be.
The Vatican is one of the most concentrated areas of wealth in the world. They can dig deep into their pockets as far as I’m concerned.
They pulled in, what, 350 million in 2011. There’s 2 billion Catholics in the world. That adds up to about $5 per person or so.
There is no such thing as “separation of church and state” in the US Constitution. Search the text, it is not there. What is there, says that the government can not establish its own religion. Nor can it prohibit the free exercise thereof.
Bottom line, in the US, the govt can’t make their own church, and they can’t stop you from going to yours. (Or not going to any if you choose.) And that’s as far as it goes, period.
Exactly.
As long as you treat them all the same, shold be no problem.
Render unto Caesar…
35% Tax rate on every offering or tithe…
And an audit on the sacrificial wine. I don’t think it’s all being consumed in the front of the church…
Why do you people think taxing churches violates separation of church and state (the question of does it exist in the Constitution is a different issue — it should be there if not)? In fact, NOT taxing them violates that separation by treating them as special. Treating them the same as any other business ensures eliminating special treatment.
Dear Unc: I think this is another of those Supreme things. The statement “…free exercise thereof…” was the sticker. I believe the Court decided in the late 60’s that the power to tax was the power to destroy. Therefore, no taxation on churches because gov should not have the power to “destroy” a church.
Just before hitting submit, I figured I ought to provide a reference. The case was Walz vs. Tax Commission of the City of New York and it was 1970 http://bit.ly/x4sTJh
Actually, by not taxing churches, the state stays in cahoots with them.
Churches, and by that I include temples, mosques and so forth should be taxed like any other business.
Their employees….priests, pastors, rabbis, et al should be taxed like any other individuals.
That is how you keep things separate. Not by scratching each other’s backs like we have now.
This has nothing to do with separation between church and state, and they are not proposing to tax churches. Look at the article and see where it says commercial properties.
Suppose, for example, that Joe Schmoe (or, since it’s in Italy, Giacomo Schmoe) dies and leaves his dry cleaning business to the local Catholic diocese. Does it seem fair to all the competing dry cleaners that this one business is now exempt from business taxes?
In the US I think that commercial property is actually taxed even if owned by a church however churches tend to own non profits like hospitals. Of course some of you would be happy to close those down. Who the heck needs medical care with the Fed Gov taking care of them?
Well I do in fact mother just spent a few days at St. Thomas and I have a great nephew getting cancer treatment at St. Judes so all you guys who want to tax them are welcome to breath vacuum. I’m going to agree with the Greens on this. Some of you are seriously in surplus of the needs of the human race so why don’t you go fix it. Why wait on the next round of progressive laws to get passed? You know those are coming if you’re smart….Okay you aren’t smart so forget it.
We’ll just have to wait until they get around to sterilizing and euthanizing the non elite non productive citizens…
I guess the atheists can go to Atheist Hospital if they don’t like hospitals that are founded by Christian organizations.
I am just surprised the Italian gov. had tapped that booty years ago. Please no death threats.
All churches should be taxed. Just like any other business.
Might as well tax all non-profits too then.
A very successful businesswoman once told me that a non-profit organization does not prevent people profiting from the organization.
How about we tax all the contraceptives used by so called Catholics?
YOU KNOW: so much faulty thinking comes from “conflation.” Treating two or more very different things as if they were one in the same.
SUCH AS: Freeeeeeeeeeedom of/from Religion with TAX STATUS. Two very different issues conflated by almost everyone.
EVEN AFTER: I posted at least once before that if Religion really was what it purported to be: MORAL then they would forego their tax free status and fully engage the political world.
BUT THEY DONT.
because they have conflated making as much money as possible with doing gawd’s work.
CONFLATION: worse than dogma—although hardly ever absent.
Hey—think about it. Socially relevant religious authority: paying taxes like everyone else. Following the law like everyone else. Being prosecuted like everyone else.
Because morality won’t be CONFLATED with being religious.
Heh, heh.
I’m afraid that being a religious leader doesn’t keep you from being prosecuted in this country? Maybe you had some other country in mind?
Do-ill==I don’t understand what point you are trying to make at all. Not even a possible.
How can any instiution claiming to be moral let elections go by and not preach to the choir at least about the relevant issues?
NOTHING IN LAW PREVENTS CHURCHES TO DO THIS.
Non profit tax law however says you can’t be untaxed and advocate for one political party/candidate or another.
Why do Churches apply for and restrict themselves to non profit status?
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Rather than seeing this as “leveling the playing field” to compel Churches to pay property tax, how about NOBODY pays property tax whatsoever?
At the very most, one should only get taxed for owning something once instead of annually.
Guyver—a fresh idea. Kudo’s. ………. somewhere, in an alternate universe…………
Politicians love spending other people’s money too much for this to ever be a reality.
Yes, somewhere in an alternate universe.
Well–for me it goes to a separate issue of who really “owns” what and the perceived unfairness that land tax default can have your property/living area/castle taken away from you all the result of mere passive ownership.
Maybe not as obvious for suburban homes a block from a school with fire, garbage, sewer, light, electrical, water, police services and what not==all that have to be paid for somehow but….
a few weeks ago DU presented an article about Desert Rats living totally self sufficiently in the desert 10 miles from anyone else and the gubment coming in and taking their property for—zoning violations if I remember correctly==but close enough to tax forfeiture which I would be surprised doesn’t happen as well.
Tension between individual survivial and a society that makes being poor a crime.
Pros and Cons to all we do.
The Christian Churches should have been paying taxes all along as their own leader Jesus Christ said to render to Caesar what is his.
The money belongs to the government as they issued it and back its use.
But they do not because they know they have it easy. And they would NEVER take up their own cross and bear it. Why do that?
When they can stay fat and happy thanks to the bounty of worldly possession AND the blessings of God.
Mammon and God all together. The Unholy and Holy twisted into one. Amen.
Cursor_
Over the centuries the Catholic Church has stolen a lot of money from the God fearing Citizens also. It’s how they got all their gold and glitter property in the first place. And their Vatican Banks.
Makes me wonder now if the Pope receives a yearly bonus also?
The Christers figured that out a thousand years ago: celibate priesthood. With all expenses paid, I doubt the robe wearing elite get any salary at all, if so not bonuses which are waiting in Heaven. Whatever they do have is actually the Churches on lease/lend while here on earth.
Tight little cabal. Its why they are so anti-women. Not just because they hate the intimacy is normally requires but because it involves them in the real world too much.
Womens Rights. Undermines totalitarian/authoritarian regimes.
God Hates It. Republicans Hate it too. I don’t know which team is using which other team. Oh wait—God doesn’t exist so I do know.
Silly, evil, women hating, Hoomans.
Ha, ha.
Word for the day: Pukes.
The church always talks about hardship. Tax em up Big !
Well obviously, throughout history, in the rest of the world, whoever owns the most property gets to have the tax laws written in their favor. Not only major religions, but also the royalty and large private corporations too. And it’s all about buying off the governing body representatives, who make and change the tax laws. In the US, the Constitution has this clause known as “separation of church and state”, protecting the laws therein from being manipulated for the purposes of various established religions. But this only seems to apply to laws these groups don’t care about. And what they do ALL care about is protecting their respective material assets. So they all get tax exemptions (even cults), for as much property as they can amass. When it should only apply to property used as their primary houses of worship. And not everything someone prays in, once in a while. And also not all properties assigned to various religious officials. Because obviously this loophole can be abused to justify tax exempting everything and anything. Even luxury dog houses, of some Televangelists. Fleets of limos, etc, etc. The tax loopholes have got to go, but expect those getting them to lobby for their protection, with all tax exempt money they’ve got to spare in their political war chests.
Let’s start by taxing university property. At least churches aren’t using eminent domain to expand as Columbia is doing.
Bishop William Lori of Bridgeport, Connecticut, offered a useful political parable this morning about a fictional law that requires all businesses to serve pork, including kosher delis.
“But pork is good for you.”
“So many Jews eat pork, and those who don’t should just get with the times.”
“Those Orthodox are just trying to impose their beliefs on everyone else.”
These were the responses to Orthodox Jews who expressed outrage about the hypothetical law.
Mercifully, in Bishop Lori’s parable, there was a recognition that “it is absurd for someone to come into a kosher deli and demand a ham sandwich,” “it is beyond absurd for that private demand to be backed with the coercive power of the state,” and “it is downright surreal to apply this coercive power when the customer can get the same sandwich cheaply, or even free, just a few doors down.”
Tax Exemption of Churches
Tax exemption of churches — Is it constitutional?
As much as one quarter or one-half of a typical U.S. city may be made up of tax-exempt property, much of that churches or church schools. FFRF receives many queries by disgruntled taxpayers over this involuntary form of subsidy. It is important to point out that the Supreme Court has spoken on this question, finding it constitutional. That does not mean that citizens cannot educate about the inherent problems and inequity, write letters to the editor raising questions over the wisdom and expense to taxpayers of this exemption, etc. But it does mean that if there were continuing litigation over property tax exemptions by churches, it would have to involve very specific types of abuses.
Below is a short discussion of the Supreme Court’s ruling over property tax exemption for churches, and at the conclusion, some of the inquities involved in current practices.
The Walz decision
NFS==doesn’t the parable break down at several key points?
Should a church run secular service be required to pay for a set menu of healthcare services should it decide to pay for any healthcare services at all?
The parable says “no” because that would be like requiring a Kosher Deli to offer ham.
But how similar is that?
The healthcare services are offered to employees not the general public. Employees have little rights/power/bargaining power against employers and nothing like the bargaining power/choices/alternatives the public does in feeding itself.
Where are general health care services provided for cheap or free? Most free clinic services have income threshold requirements that “any” job disqualifies. Usually in one place down town in a run down neighborhood?
No, what we have here is another case of CONFLATION. Confusing what is a religion engaged in religious services/observation conflated with anything else non-religious that they voluntarily want to do.
If you want to sell Kosher food, you can’t have your eatery infested with rats and cockroaches. Same with the Church.
Silly Hoomans.
Hmm, I see that the readers of this blog don’t have a clue of what the Italian church is all about.
According to the current Italian laws, religious organizations (including the Cathiloc church) are not required to pay taxes on buildings that are used for religious purposes.
Therefore, what they do on a commercial building, is to allocate a room, sometimes a corner where people can go and pray.
It’s very common to find a 5 star hotel/resort that has just a corner allocated to “religious purposes”, and because they don’t pay property taxes they can offer better prices than the “normal” competition.
This is thing that most Italians are complaining about.
No one wants to tax churches, but only resorts, hotels, shops and private homes owned by the Chatolic church.
In Italy when people die and they don’t have anyone to leave their propery to, they often leave it to the Catholic church.
One Italian TV program estimated that as much as 1/3 of all the private homes in Italy are owned by the Catholic.
It the property taxes were to be applied – today – to those properties, the state would have to collect around 600,000,000 Euros.
And with many people having their pension slashed, that’s what the fuss is all about.
That bad huh?
Similar to home office deduction here in the USA–and it gets proportioned?
Not enough for the Catholics though. Thats what money does==but thats not news at all.
And as in the USA==the Italians are choosing their own destruction. Just as the Greeks are doing.
Same as it ever was.
Time for ALL churches to start paying their fair share of taxes
It has always been like that in Italy.
The Catholics bring lots of votes to the Italian politicians and therefore they trend to let the Catholics have it the way they want it.
And they even got the balls to clearly show it.
One cardinal in commenting about the proposed tax said “we are willing to discuss it with the government”
The nerve!, what do you think is going to happen if a normal guy says “I am willing to discuss whether to pay this tax or not”?
Yep !!! Tax ‘Em !!! Especially the Brothels !!!
Let them pay taxes. They have enough money as it is anyway… Why shouldn’t they pay? They just keep the money. It’s not used to help the poor. Damn Catholics and all other churches… Think they are special, have special rights and a say so in everything.
Time to start paying>>>>>>>>>>>>Way over due
I love succinct posts that actually impart usable information.