Big problem there debator... how much does god take for himself?
Oz Govt following UK & French lead on Tax/Charity status
by Mattieu 153 Replies latest watchtower scandals
-
-
Doubting Bro
Didn't Jesus say to render Caesar's things to Caesar? Didn't Jesus actually pay the head tax (although the money was found in a fish's mouth)?
So, explain again why ANY religion that claims to follow Christ would be so greedy as to not render a tax when due when the founder of the religion COMMANDED that they do so?
Taxing religious organization's profits is the same as taxing any other entity. Are you telling me that religions don't benefit from governmental services? If a KH, church, or any other building used for religious purposes was burning down, don't tax supported firemen drive tax supported firetrucks on tax supported roads to put out the fire?
Freedom of religious does not equate with freedom from paying taxes any more than my freedom of speech is hindered by my paying taxes.
Rutherford was right, "religion is a snare and a racket".
-
geevee
Rutherford was right, "religion is a snare and a racket".
Including his! Especially his!
-
debator
People no longer will be asking religions what God they believe in but what charitable work they do from a list of acceptable ones. Ex-Religions will just join the thousands of non-religious charitable organisations. And a poor, starving person will get food but he/she doesn't need a Bible apparently or to know about Jehovah.
The People that donate to religions have already paid taxes to the governments, this is just another way for governments to get more of their money.
-
isaacaustin
Well, this is excellent news that the Australian govt is working toward revoking the tax exempt status of cults like the JWs and Scientology. Hopefully more countries follow suit. The French government should be praised for their actions.
-
cantleave
What UK lead? Am I missing something here?
-
Doubting Bro
debator - you do realize we're talking about taxing profits, right? Oh, at least in the US, not only does the donation not get taxed, you don't pay taxes on the money you donate to a not-for profit (including religions). You can write off those donations. So your argument (again at least in the US) that you've already paid taxes on that money is not accurate.
For example, I pay taxes on my income. Then I purchase a good or service and pay yet another tax. But, the business also has to pay taxes on it's profits. The government takes multiple bites.
So are you advocating that no business pay taxes because the individual already pays income taxes? That's great if you're a business but if you think the tax burden is bad now, then think about what it would be without corporate entities paying taxes.
I think governments take way too much of my money as it is, but the world's religions often abuse their not for profit status (in my opinion). I do agree that if you tax one religion, then you should tax them all. Quite frankly, JWs and other fringe groups are really small potatoes.
-
bohm
Debator: The question was: "Explain to an australian tax-payer why scientology should not have to pay taxes."
Take two for debator trying to answer the question. We got:
- random rant about theology of jehovahs witness (completely irrelevant)
- masked threat jehovahs "gunna kill us all" (completely irrelevant)
- stating something that is clearly wrong as an argument: donations to religious organizations are out of the governments juristiction. (uhm no, you see there is such a thing as democracy in australia)
- assert that if a religion is not breaking a law, the government should not deal with it. (oh wait, if there is a law they should pay tax like everyone else, and they dont do it, they suddenly ARE breaking the law!)
Question one (which is still not answered): "Explain to an australian tax-payer why scientology should not have to pay taxes."
The reason i focus on sciontology is, ofcourse, that our dear debator pretend he is against the law in principle grounds. In reality, I think what our dear debator want to say is: "jw should not pay taxes because they are gods organization and we want a free ride". If thats not the case, and debator is arguing on principle grounds, there should be a coherent argument why scientology should not pay taxes. If there is not, we can move on to which kind of religions should pay tax, and which should still have tax-excempt status.
-
debator
Hi bohm
I am not arguing the point on whether religions abuse their non-profit status (clearly many do) but they are the mental property of our spirtuality.
Whether I pay taxes on money I give to a religion is irrelevent. The point is that I pay taxes.
It is paying tax twice if the spiritual choices I made are taxed too when I can be an atheist for free?
Religions are not secular businesses even if some people treat them so.
As soon as a government decides it has the right to dictate the mental property of our spiritual lifes it is going beyond it's authority. Going into to a place it is not meant to be.
It is a bit dishonest to say they "make Profits" since everything donated is a profit? The money is meant to be ploughed right back into the religion and yes they must at times accumulate money and property. But if all these are being used for the spiritual well-being of people what is your issue?
Also taxes isn't really the main issue but that the religions chosen are unacceptable to the Governments therefore they tax them. what next?
You do not want to be supporting the government thinking they have the right to decide our spiritual property. AKA which God we believe in.
Atm it is just taxes but I wonder what will happen if france gets more hungry after it's taster from Jw's among others?
When people stop going to churches so much for weddings, funerals, services, what will the governments do then?
-
isaacaustin
bator:
You are saying that your earnings are taxed? Correct. Then money received by religions being taxes is double taxation on the same money? Correct?
Generally, religions and social services are exempt because the government is, by doing this, subsidizing a service that they would otherwise have to provide. They are, by allowing an individual to deduct this, subsidizing.
Please restate you your point. If you use your earnings to go purchase at Home Depot, the money spent their is subject to taxation by them. On another note, C-corporations (at least in the US) are taxed at the corp level as well as at the individual level.