Religion and tax.

up for anything · 26-06-2010 09:48AM

sock puppet wrote: »

Why not enforce a similar ban next Friday? It's only two Fridays a year so you couldn't possibly have any objections could you?

Excellent idea! Even better would be to have pubs closed Monday and Friday every week.

owenc · 26-06-2010 09:51AM

up for anything wrote: »

Naive. Was that an intentional misspelling?

The Catholic church has always been very good at this. ""Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."

What do they need the money for but?

up for anything · 26-06-2010 10:14AM

owenc wrote: »

What do they need the money for but?

On things like this or there is this to be considered and this.

MIN2511 · 26-06-2010 10:52AM

Naikon wrote: »

One of these days, I am going to set up a cult. Not sure what the belief system will be based on, but I am guessing something centered around this man:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLuaqNoxjro

He exists in our heart and souls. Far more evidence for him than that fictional Jesus guy.

Relgion == Profit !

John Fashanu? Whatever for?

26-06-2010 10:59AM

Tax rape and they'll be forced to close down. While I don't really think they should be taxed for anything, I don't see why the church is necessary.. Faith is a personal thing, you're not going to hell because you decided to take your own view on the bible.

Mike 1972 · 26-06-2010 11:54AM

For what its worth (unsourced and unsubstantiated rumour) Ive heard that clergy in Ireland do have to pay income tax.

Im assuming that churches cant claim VAT on goods and services they buy in since they dont pay VAT themselves (????)

Are they liable for local authority rates ?

What about any money they send out of the country. Would they be taxed on this in the same way as a multinational business would be obliged to pay tax (albeit minimal and largely avoidable) on the profits repatriated back to the country their head operations are based in ?

Someone mentioned earlier about churches being built in the 1840's but this is hardly the case in respect of every Church in Ireland.

I dont really buy the "theyre a charity" line either. In this day and age the line between charity and the more dubious aspects of commercial business is a rather thin one what with chugging companies, excessive "administration expensives" and heads of charities "earning" eye watering salaries.

philologos · 26-06-2010 12:36PM

Lando Griffin wrote: »

Does the Catholic Church pay any tax. Or for that matter any other religious industries in Ireland. If they dont I think they should and have it back dated. The amount of funds they collect must be hugh. Are they VAT EXEMPT?

VAT is charged on every purchase, so that would include every purchase that a church makes. As far as I am aware anyway.

Tax is not payable on donations received. This is because the churches are in fact non-profit, it doesn't pay dividends to shareholders, and it only pays a limited stipend to clergy if even.

This is because churches in general serve a community role, often give to charitable projects, often members in churches play a role in serving in the community (In the UK for example people of faith play a larger role in charitable work than those who do not have any faith).

There is nothing to be made, in fact I think all the people who attend our church can have an idea of how the money is spent if they so request. Most of the average spending comes down to heat, electricity, restoration of church space, stipend to clergy, charitable projects, and missionary activity in Ireland and elsewhere. There isn't really any profit making going on at least from what I know of my own church.

Bearing in mind, secular groups can also avail of tax-exempt status. In fact I'd be surprised if the Humanist Association of Ireland didn't receive this status.

Mike 1972 · 26-06-2010 12:49PM

Tax is not payable on donations received. This is because the churches are in fact non-profit, it doesn't pay dividends to shareholders, and it only pays a limited stipend to clergy if even.

Does your church have to submit accounts proving this is the case or is it just taken as a given ?

Incidentally if a business experiences a couple of lean years in which they dont turn a profit this doesnt completely absolve them of any tax liabilities they may incur.

owenc · 26-06-2010 12:52PM

up for anything wrote: »

On things like this or there is this to be considered and this.

LOL why do they own all this stuff?? The catholic church is a supposed to be a church which is a place for worship, and they come out with this.. thats a discrace it should be owned by the government not by them, i mean catholic healthcare.:rolleyes:

philologos · 26-06-2010 01:16PM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Does your church have to submit accounts proving this is the case or is it just taken as a given ?

Good question. Our church has a treasurer on an elected committee which is elected by the congregation. Accounts are done in the church, and then on a national level at the General Synod (Church of Ireland) the spending, and how the money is used is listed in full for the province as a whole.

As far as I remember, there are similar arrangements in the Presbyterian and Methodist churches.

Mike 1972 wrote: »

Incidentally if a business experiences a couple of lean years in which they dont turn a profit this doesnt completely absolve them of any tax liabilities they may incur.

A church has tax exempt status as a charitable organisation which serves a role in the community as far as I remember. A business is something with the direct intention of making a profit even if it doesn't. Again, as I've already clarified, dividends are not given out by the church at all. If they were I would support them to be taxed as people are making money out of it.

The stipends which are issued by the church to clergy are also obviously subject to normal income tax arrangements.

Biggins · 26-06-2010 01:30PM

thetonynator wrote: »

Pay tax on what?

You dont pay tax just for existing...

Point of order: My house just exists. I will be paying tax on it soon!

owenc · 26-06-2010 02:03PM

Jakkass wrote: »

Good question. Our church has a treasurer on an elected committee which is elected by the congregation. Accounts are done in the church, and then on a national level at the General Synod (Church of Ireland) the spending, and how the money is used is listed in full for the province as a whole.

As far as I remember, there are similar arrangements in the Presbyterian and Methodist churches.

A church has tax exempt status as a charitable organisation which serves a role in the community as far as I remember. A business is something with the direct intention of making a profit even if it doesn't. Again, as I've already clarified, dividends are not given out by the church at all. If they were I would support them to be taxed as people are making money out of it.

The stipends which are issued by the church to clergy are also obviously subject to normal income tax arrangements.

They don't really take money in presbyterian churches, more in church of ireland. When they do take money its for sunday schools trips or to help the church not to build a hospital for presbyterians!:eek:

Mike 1972 · 26-06-2010 02:04PM

bleg wrote: »

The germans have this sorted.

I would have thought that in of all places Germany they would have an appreciation of why having to have ones religion (or lack of) registered by the Government might not be a terribly good idea ?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i · 26-06-2010 02:41PM

thetonynator wrote: »

Pay tax on what?

You dont pay tax just for existing. Businesses pay corporation tax, its not a business, they dont have profits.

VAT exempt - exempt from what? They aren't buying or selling any tangible thing.

I'm sure they pay DIRT on interest received, and will prob have to pay property tax if that comes in.

This made me laugh... hehe...

starbelgrade wrote: »

FIFA are also a registered charity. No joke.

They do some good though? Be it their reasoning for going that route or not.

thetonynator wrote: »

Well its one friday out of 52. And 1 day out of 365 ( unless you're the kind of sad person who wants to go to a pub on christmas day)

It shouldn't hurt too much!!

WTF? Ignorant post. If people want to drink on Xmas day, how does that make them sad? Same for good friday...??

26-06-2010 03:10PM

Seloth wrote: »

It would be like trying to charge a free hospital that relies on donations.

Are you seriously equating a hospital with a church? Do you know that hospitals provide real care and treatments to people with illnesses which are based on evidence and science? They actually do something measurably positive - if not invaluable - for society. They make people feel good by solving the problem which makes them feel bad. Hospitals don't just give you a veil of delusion.

Your comparison is infantile. Churches are not charities and they are not even in the same realm as hospitals.

up for anything wrote:

I don't see many indoctrinated kids these days. My children are so brainwashed that they tell me that they can't believe in Jesus dying and the resurrection but that they definitely believe in Santa Claus. It would be cheaper for me if they believed the other way round

I live in Dublin. I went to a national school where we were taught about God and Jesus and the apostles and other such stories. I have an eleven year old cousin who is completely indoctrinated by religion; she goes to the same primary school I did. Of course, nobody would dare have her read the Bible for obvious reasons. It makes both myself and my brother sick.

orourkeda · 26-06-2010 05:44PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry if my post seems a little all over the place - I'm exhausted.

Nice logical leap there. I know it's difficult for the religious to even begin to comprehend the concept of non-belief, but as I am a patient person, allow me to explain: I don't believe a god exists, I believe religions exist. How hard was that?

Your point would only make sense if I was arguing that religions do not exist, which is clearly absurd.

People mostly do not choose to become religious; for the most part Irish people are indoctrinated from birth and have no choice. In a minority of cases, people realise that there is no evidence to support religion's claims and they become atheist, but the notion that religious belief (for the most part) is a choice is simply not true. Religion requires faith, not rationality, so the majority of people who are brought up in one faith remain in that faith. I would argue that they take advantage of this via donations, which almost nobody who considers themselves a member of that faith will refuse.

Just like taking advantage of a drunk person is considered a bad thing, taking advantage of someone who doesn't know any better than blind faith I would say is also a bad thing. Now, this is not directly related to taxation, but I feel that society should tax religions because of what I would consider to be a net negative effect on humanity as a whole; exploiting faith is only one reason, but in the case of the RCC, covering up child abuse and discouraging condom use (especially with regards to Africa) also count. Additionally, until the religious can present a good argument against taxation, their institutions should be taxed.

It is merely my opinion that religious texts are ludicrous, but it is fact that certain ones are self-contradictory. However, I am not all-knowing. On the contrary, there is a great deal which I do not know, but I don't want to be responsible for causing this thread to degenerate into a debate on the existence of a god. I will say that the state should not operate on the assumption that a god exists and give religions some kind of undeserved special status.

Now, may I ask, why should religions should be exempt from taxation?

(1) Now maybe I'm missing something here. Generally speaking, a central tenet of any religious belief is the existence of a god or higher power. You say you believe in the existence of religions, why wouldn't you, they exist. It is impossible to deny this. Whether you choose to subscribe to what these religions preach is another matter entirely.

(2) Every aspect of a childs life is influenced by decisions made by their parents up until a certain point in their life. This even extends to the food they eat. Young children do not have the experience to decide their religion and will only do so later in their lives. It is not the fault of any religious institution for "indoctrination" as you put it. It is down to the parents.

Now when you say that there is no evidence to support the claims of a religion what exactly do you mean?

I'm not aware of the tax staus of any religious institution and cant comment on this. If they are not tax compliant why havent sanctions been applied.

prinz · 26-06-2010 07:02PM

Usual concoction of minsinformed nonsense mixed with a bit of anti-religious bile.

Mike 1972 · 26-06-2010 07:19PM

prinz wrote: »

Usual concoction of minsinformed nonsense .

So why dont you enlighten us all by dispelling it Oh wise one

prinz · 26-06-2010 07:24PM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

So why dont you enlighten us all by dispelling it Oh wise one

I'm wise enough not to píss into the wind, if you pardon the expression. If people enjoy revelling in ignorance there are times when I won't bother trying to enlighten them.

chughes · 26-06-2010 07:25PM

prinz wrote: »

Usual concoction of minsinformed nonsense mixed with a bit of anti-religious bile.

Does this mean that any opinion that's not pro-religious is anti-religious bile ?

prinz · 26-06-2010 07:26PM

chughes wrote: »

Does this mean that any opinion that's not pro-religious is anti-religious bile ?

No it doesn't.

26-06-2010 07:31PM

orourkeda wrote: »

(1) Now maybe I'm missing something here. Generally speaking, a central tenet of any religious belief is the existence of a god or higher power. You say you believe in the existence of religions, why wouldn't you, they exist. It is impossible to deny this. Whether you choose to subscribe to what these religions preach is another matter entirely.

That is exactly my point. The original quote had tried to argue that because I don't believe in religions, I shouldn't expect them to pay taxes. I believe in religions, because they obviously exist. I say they shouldn't be subject to special treatment, therefore they should be taxed. It's not really that hard to understand, is it?

orourkeda wrote:

(2) Every aspect of a childs life is influenced by decisions made by their parents up until a certain point in their life. This even extends to the food they eat. Young children do not have the experience to decide their religion and will only do so later in their lives. It is not the fault of any religious institution for "indoctrination" as you put it. It is down to the parents.

As I put it? No, as they put it. There's a reason why it's called "doctrine", you know. Don't try to imply that bringing someone up from birth to believe in something without evidence and without questioning it is not indoctrination.

Yes, it is down to the parents, but even parents who believe but barely practice bring their kids up to believe in a god, and baptise them in the case of Christianity. Catholicism tells parents to bring their children up in the church, as I'm sure many other religions do.

orourkeda wrote:

Now when you say that there is no evidence to support the claims of a religion what exactly do you mean?

Religions cannot demonstrably prove their claims that supernatural beings exist, that there is an afterlife, that this that or the other event really happened. I can't believe I have to again explain religion's own terms. "Faith" is believing something for no good reason. If there was rational, objective, demonstrable evidence, it wouldn't be called faith.

orourkeda wrote:

I'm not aware of the tax staus of any religious institution and cant comment on this. If they are not tax compliant why havent sanctions been applied.

I'm not aware either. I'm merely arguing that, in the case that they are not taxed, they should be.

prinz wrote:

Usual concoction of minsinformed nonsense mixed with a bit of anti-religious bile.

If you're talking about my posts, I welcome argument. However, please do not say I am misinformed, as my entire extended family and my mam are all religious and I was brought up a practising Catholic. I have been on four pilgrimages to Lourdes as well as multiple others to various religious sites around Europe. Additionally, unlike the majority of Catholics, I own and have read the Bible.

chughes · 26-06-2010 07:33PM

prinz wrote: »

No it doesn't.

Thank you for clarifying that. I would sincerley hate to think that anyone would think my opinions are based in bile. My view expressed in an earlier post is representative of my views of religion in general but I know that for many people, religion is a very important part of their lives.

prinz · 26-06-2010 07:36PM

Deleted User wrote: »

If you're talking about my posts, I welcome argument. However, please do not say I am misinformed....

Not exclusively talking about yours, but as you bring it up you have repeatedly claimed that religions (oh wait no sorry, there you seem to ave a special spot for Christianity and in particular Roman Catholicism) are being given special treatment or are exempt from the rules that apply to everyone else. They aren't.

26-06-2010 07:40PM

prinz wrote: »

Not exclusively talking about yours, but as you bring it up you have repeatedly claimed that religions (oh wait no sorry, there you seem to ave a special spot for Christianity and in particular Roman Catholicism) are being given special treatment or are exempt from the rules that apply to everyone else. They aren't.

I did not claim that they are given special treatment or that they are exempt. I have said that they should not be, regardless of whether they are or not at present (because I actually don't know if they are or not).

I was brought up a Catholic, and the RCC is the religion I know the most about given that it is the most widespread in Ireland, so obviously I will use it as an example.

Mike 1972 · 26-06-2010 07:54PM

prinz wrote: »

I'm wise enough not to píss into the wind,

So why post at all then ?

Or did you just feel like spouting bile ?

prinz · 26-06-2010 07:57PM

Deleted User wrote: »

I did not claim that they are given special treatment or that they are exempt. I have said that they should not be, regardless of whether they are or not at present (because I actually don't know if they are or not).

Deleted User wrote: »

You can believe what you want to believe, but just because you're a religious fruitcake doesn't mean you are exempt from the rules that are forced upon everyone else.

Sounds to me like you are saying they are exempt in some way from rules forced on everyone else.

Deleted User wrote: »

Now, may I ask, why should religions should be exempt from taxation?

Again you are implying special treatment here. Should other NFP organisations be taxed too in your opinion? The RCC and AFAIK all religious bodies which operate on a non-profit basis are exempt from Corporation Tax once they meet charitable organisation status. Priests and other employees do pay income tax where applicable under the PAYE/PRSI system and yes the Church will remit PRSI they owe as employers. What other taxes would you have them pay?

prinz · 26-06-2010 07:59PM

Mike 1972 wrote: »

So why post at all then ?
Or did you just feel like spouting bile ?

You never know, somebody might actually go find out some facts for themselves. I can easily point out what a lot of it is, i.e. nonsense, but I wasn't going to waste my time correcting each inaccuracy, there's football to be watched.

26-06-2010 08:13PM

prinz wrote: »

Sounds to me like you are saying they are exempt in some way from rules forced on everyone else.

I just said I'm not.

prinz wrote:

Again you are implying special treatment here.

I'm really not. I don't know how much clearer I can make it.

prinz wrote:

Should other NFP organisations be taxed too in your opinion? The RCC and AFAIK all religious bodies which operate on a non-profit basis are exempt from Corporation Tax. Priests and other employees do pay income tax where applicable under the PAYE/PRSI system and yes the Church will remit PRSI they owe as employers. What other taxes would you have them pay?

None, because you've just confirmed that they pay tax. As I said before, I didn't know if they were.

I do maintain that religions have a negative effect on society, however it is slightly unrealistic to force higher taxes upon them as I had suggested before.

prinz wrote:

You never know, somebody might actually go find out some facts for themselves. I can easily point out what a lot of it is, i.e. nonsense, but I wasn't going to waste my time correcting each inaccuracy, there's football to be watched.

That's a shame. I thought we were having fun.

thetonynator · 26-06-2010 10:42PM

sock puppet wrote: »

Why not enforce a similar ban next Friday? It's only two Fridays a year so you couldn't possibly have any objections could you?

No I wouldn't. I wouldn't have any problem with the pubs being closed for religious feasts of other denominations that have high numbers of active members in Ireland.

up for anything wrote: »

Excellent idea! Even better would be to have pubs closed Monday and Friday every week.

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry if my post seems a little all over the place - I'm exhausted.

Nice logical leap there. I know it's difficult for the religious to even begin to comprehend the concept of non-belief, but as I am a patient person, allow me to explain: I don't believe a god exists, I believe religions exist. How hard was that?

Your point would only make sense if I was arguing that religions do not exist, which is clearly absurd.

People mostly do not choose to become religious; for the most part Irish people are indoctrinated from birth and have no choice. In a minority of cases, people realise that there is no evidence to support religion's claims and they become atheist, but the notion that religious belief (for the most part) is a choice is simply not true. Religion requires faith, not rationality, so the majority of people who are brought up in one faith remain in that faith. I would argue that they take advantage of this via donations, which almost nobody who considers themselves a member of that faith will refuse.

Just like taking advantage of a drunk person is considered a bad thing, taking advantage of someone who doesn't know any better than blind faith I would say is also a bad thing. Now, this is not directly related to taxation, but I feel that society should tax religions because of what I would consider to be a net negative effect on humanity as a whole; exploiting faith is only one reason, but in the case of the RCC, covering up child abuse and discouraging condom use (especially with regards to Africa) also count. Additionally, until the religious can present a good argument against taxation, their institutions should be taxed.

It is merely my opinion that religious texts are ludicrous, but it is fact that certain ones are self-contradictory. However, I am not all-knowing. On the contrary, there is a great deal which I do not know, but I don't want to be responsible for causing this thread to degenerate into a debate on the existence of a god. I will say that the state should not operate on the assumption that a god exists and give religions some kind of undeserved special status.

Now, may I ask, why should religions should be exempt from taxation?

If you read the thread your questions have been answered several times in the thread.

owenc wrote: »

What do they need the money for but?

Upkeep of schools, parishes, allowing the priests to live.

owenc wrote: »

LOL why do they own all this stuff?? The catholic church is a supposed to be a church which is a place for worship, and they come out with this.. thats a discrace it should be owned by the government not by them, i mean catholic healthcare.:rolleyes:

If the government in a country won't provide adequate healthcare, what is wrong with a church providing it???

Alexandria Glamorous Trauma wrote: »

This made me laugh... hehe...

They do some good though? Be it their reasoning for going that route or not.

WTF? Ignorant post. If people want to drink on Xmas day, how does that make them sad? Same for good friday...??

What I said about Christmas day was purely that regardless of the church or state position on it, the pubs would be closed anywya, and people who want to drink on Christmas day generally do it at home.

The Good friday question has been answered twice already in the thread, go read it before abusing people.

Religion and tax.

Comments