Pope: Catholics should ask gay people for forgiveness

[rah]

This paper investigates three special tax provisions for not-for-profit (NFP) hospitals. First taxes

Not all hospitals are not-for-profit. I'm inclined to agree with you on not-for-profit ones, but would retain judgement based on other circumstances since there are different types of not-for-profit.

And I don't believe hospitals are the same as churches.

[Jon Miller]

I agree. But churches are not-for-profit (at least most of them are even in reality, some, like some hospitals, funnel a 'profit' to the top management).

I actually would like to see an extra tax on leaders of non-profits making more than 100k (say 50% marginal tax) and 1m (say 60% marginal tax) per year.

That would fix a lot of problems everywhere, and in a general not religion focused way.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Even better, make that an extra tax on leaders of every organization (profit as well as non-profit) that make more than 1m per year.

The extra tax on leaders making more than 100k could just go to non-profits...

JM
(I understand why churches, hospitals, and non-profits like greenpeace pay people large salaries... but those large salaries are a way of taking a profit from a company/corporation... any leader is in some sense an owner )

[rah]

But again we come to the fairness of the church not paying property taxes.
Why should the poor pay more so the church can pay nothing?
They both receive the services.
The church would be helping the poor by picking up their fair share.

[Jon Miller]

I also would be supportive of being more strict about non-profit use of land.

Parsonages, restaurants, etc should all be considered profit based and paid taxes on. Only the actual religiously/medically used buildings (or even portion of buildings in some cases) should be tax-exempt.

JM

[Jon Miller]

But again we come to the fairness of the church not paying property taxes.
Why should the poor pay more so the church can pay nothing?
They both receive the services.
The church would be helping the poor by picking up their fair share.

It is the same as museums and hospitals not paying.

Or are you saying that everyone should pay?

And then you end up with 'what is a fair valuation of the property'. Even for housing where there is a robust housing market, there is often a 50% uncertainty. And the market for cathedrals or museums or sanctuaries /etc is much much much smaller.

JM
(a taxation on property that is based on land and not on property valuation, ala Noah Smith, is reasonable of course)

[Jon Miller]

For a discussion on Land Tax

http://noahpinionblog.blogspot.cl/2015/03/a-misguided-attack-on-land-value-taxes.html

Note even here there is a problem when you can't value something on the market.

JM

[kentonio]

Additionally, what is a fair property tax? For Cathedrals/etc, other places can't use them, so it is difficult to value them

This is incorrect, we have some excellent bars in the UK that were made in old churches.

[rah]

It is the same as museums and hospitals not paying.

I couldn't disagree more. I don't consider the church providing a similar service to all like a museum or hospital.

[Jon Miller]

But others do. Just because you value one good more than another doesn't mean that all do, and that you should dictate based on your preferences.

Basically it comes down, then, to you not valuing religious services.

JM

[Jon Miller]

This is incorrect, we have some excellent bars in the UK that were made in old churches.

This only works for a small percent.

But in Europe where there are so many empty ones... something should be done with them.

JM

[rah]

But others do. Just because you value one good more than another doesn't mean that all do, and that you should dictate based on your preferences.

Basically it comes down, then, to you not valuing religious services.

JM

Well DUH Jon, that's what I've been saying all along. IN MY OPINION. I don't think it's fair.

I don't see it that way. I see it as removing of an unfair advantage, not a punishment. But again, Just my Opinion.

I expect the more religious types to disagree. I wanted to hear why they think so.
Just stating they're the same as hospitals and museums isn't good enough for me because I don't think they're the same.
I don't value the religious aspects because I believe that besides the limited value, it's mostly provided to only those of the same faith.
A hospital and a museum doesn't limit themselves that way (specifically anyway)

[Proteus_MST]

But others do. Just because you value one good more than another doesn't mean that all do, and that you should dictate based on your preferences.

Basically it comes down, then, to you not valuing religious services.

JM

Hm, but Rah is right ... museums and (especially) hospitals offer their services to all.
Churches offer most of their services (like marriages or funerals) only to those with their own faith (and, in case of marriages, often also only to those with the right sexual orientation [actually some american churches, like the WBC even seem to be a hewterosexuals only club]).


Therefore, maybe they should just get a tax reduction instead of a tax exemption

[Jon Miller]

I expect the more religious types to disagree. I wanted to hear why they think so.
Just stating they're the same as hospitals and museums isn't good enough for me because I don't think they're the same.
I don't value the religious aspects because I believe that besides the limited value, it's mostly provided to only those of the same faith.
A hospital and a museum doesn't limit themselves that way (specifically anyway)

They provide a good in a non-profit way.

Museums and Hospitals are limited, museums do not provide goods to those who are not interested in it (exactly like Churches) and the same is true for Hospitals (but they also limit your reception of goods by your ability to pay).

The only way to differentiate them from Museums/Hospitals/etc is to somehow say that the good they provide (Religious Services) is somehow less valuable or not a real good or the like, unlike those goods provided by Museums/Hospitals/etc.

This is obviously an extremely biased statement.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Hm, but Rah is right ... museums and (especially) hospitals offer their services to all.
Churches offer most of their services (like marriages or funerals) only to those with their own faith (and, in case of marriages, often also only to those with the right sexual orientation [actually some american churches, like the WBC even seem to be a hewterosexuals only club]).

They offer 'catholic marriages' and 'catholic funerals'.

Catholic marriages are not homosexual marriages or ones where one party member is not Catholic.

Catholic funerals are not funerals where the deceased was not ever Catholic.

JM