Not sure if this should be here or in Politics (Page 2)

Zanjan
Zanjan: Yet gives that money away to those who don't have any. Hmmm

If it charges a fee for services rendered, it's selling a product - that's a business, no matter what financial shape its in. If it doesn't make a profit, it goes bankrupt. If it's a non-profit agency, it stays afloat.

Our government hands out all kinds of money to non-profit agencies of every kind. When you buy a lotto ticket, that's where your money goes, after administrative expenses, of course. Does our government pay taxes on property it owns? Is our government a profit making business? No, it's so far in debt it can never get back out.





(Edited by Zanjan)
10 years ago Report
0
Nicotina
Nicotina: Crown Corporations make Payments in Lieu if Taxes.
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/sor-81-29/FullText.html
10 years ago Report
0
Geoff
Geoff: "Yet gives that money away to those who don't have any" - Not always. And as I said, they should be subject to the same rules that apply to other businesses, where money used for charitable works is offset against their tax bill.

And government employees pay taxes. Government money and government property is owned "by the people" - at least in a democracy.
10 years ago Report
1
Zanjan
Zanjan: Perhaps they should move the Parliament buildings out into the country where their 'payments' would be cheaper. I know a few churches that did that.

I guess we forgot to mention that members of religions can donate land to their religious organization - they often have. But, in Canada, there's this silly law where to achieve that, they must sell it to their religion....$1 is sufficient. Of course, they need to hire a lawyer to make the transaction.

Clergy are also employees - they pay taxes too. They're not the organization, which is owned collectively by its members.
(Edited by Zanjan)
10 years ago Report
0
Nicotina
Nicotina: That is ridiculous Zanjan. The Parliament must be in the country it is governing. Thankfully in most countries the churches no longer govern the land.
A church that moves location to decrease taxes or "payments" shows that that specific church is acting in a business like manner and ought to be treated as such.
10 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: I didn't say they should move outside the country. 'Into' the country means countryside = rural.

I moved into the countryside because its cheaper - wise decision but I'm not a business. I'm employed; I contract my services to an agency but I'm not a business. I pay property taxes but not farm taxes - for that, my income would have to be $250,000 a year, **minimum**.

I can assure you, local churches don't bring in that much money at all. I know the local Baptist church which has one of the largest congregations in our small town has to bring in $60,000 per year to pay all expenses. Regular contributions don't do it so they put on all kinds of fund-raising events to raise the cash - that money comes from the general public.

//edited: Yes, the Baptists show anybody their financial records - that's how I know.

(Edited by Zanjan)
10 years ago Report
0
Nicotina
Nicotina: Sorry for the misunderstanding wrt "country" Zanjan. As far as I know, there has to be a transfer of money to transfer land to another person, business or charity.
I think the problem for many people is that a certain belief system can give some people (recognized religions) a tax advantage over those who do not have a religion.
To be required to have a belief in a "god" in order to attain tax free status is by no means fair.
As Geoff has pointed out, there are many atheists that chose to donate their money, time and assets for the betterment of mankind but are not afforded the same privileges as a religion would have. It comes down to a matter of equality and under the present laws atheists are not equal to those who have a belief in a god/gods.
10 years ago Report
0
Zanjan
Zanjan: What atheist groups pay property taxes?
10 years ago Report
0
morning_glorie
morning_glorie: Meriam Ibrahim – Sentenced to Death for Her Faith

Posted by Leisa Crawford / May 16, 2014
A Muslim judge in Sudan has ordered the flogging and execution of an eight months pregnant Christian woman after she refused to convert to Islam, triggering condemnation from American government officials and leaders of international ministries.

World Net Daily writes: “According to the independent Christian news service Morning Star News, Judge Abaas Al Khalifa on Thursday condemned Meriam Yahia Ibrahim, pronouncing, “The court has sentenced you to be hanged till you are dead.”

Ibrahim was “raised as a Muslim” according to authorities, but not according to her own declaration.

“I was raised as a Christian from the start.” Meriam Yahia Irbahim

She married a Christian man, and was accused of rejecting Islam (called “apostasy”). The court followed the rule of Islamic Shariah law – that the father confers his faith to his children. But Ibrahim’s father abandoned her family when she was a young child.

World Net Daily continued: “She was ordered to be flogged on a separate charge of adultery, because her marriage is not recognized by the Islamic state. Under Islamic law, a Muslim woman is not allowed to marry a Christian man. Though Muslim men can marry outside their faith.”

The judge on April 30 gave Ibrahim, 27, two weeks to convert from Christianity to Islam, which she has not done.

She is imprisoned with her 20-month-old son, Martin. According to Fox News, the court ruled that she “must give birth and nurse her baby before being executed, but must receive 100 lashes immediately after having her baby for adultery.”
9 years ago Report
0
Geoff
Geoff: While that is horrifically barbaric, it is more than a little off topic.
9 years ago Report
0
morning_glorie
9 years ago Report
0
Corwin
Corwin: I love the bit about churches being "non-profit" organizations.

I need to laugh a bit more about that. ---->
9 years ago Report
1
chronology
chronology: Religion always get's a 'free pass' on many legal points. Am surprised you have not posted the dispute some sceptics had about religion not being regulated by the 'Fair Trading Laws', people can make any claim they want to, using religion, and not face jail.

The problem is, you could never 'prove' scientologies Flying Saucers did not land on Earth thousands of years ago, or that Jesus never floated up into the sky waving goodbye to His friends, or that Moses did not part the Red Sea.

The problem with church taxes is that politicians like keeping Churches happy, hitting them with tax bills kind of spoils their day. Does seem a little unfair to start breaking tradition and tax religions, Sorry Geoff, let sleeping dogs lie I say.
9 years ago Report
0