Sunday, November 24, 2013

Federal District Court declares at least one religious income tax exemption unconstitutional.

Courtesy of The New Civil Rights Movement:  

A federal district court judge has declared “unconstitutional” a portion of U.S. law that allows “a minister of the gospel” to not pay income tax on a specific portion of their compensation. 

U.S. District Court Judge Barbara B. Crabb of the Western District of Wisconsin ruled that the so-called “parish exemption,” which allows religious ministers to avoid paying taxes on the value of their housing granted to them by their religious employers, “violates the establishment clause” of the U.S. Constitution and must be discontinued. 

The law, 26 U.S. C. § 107(2), has been on the books since 1954. 

The tax exemption was estimated to cost U.S. taxpayers $2.3 billion from 2002-2007 alone, likely more in the years since. 

Heralding it as a “major federal court victory,” the Freedom From Religion Foundation, which brought the lawsuit along with their co-presidents, Annie Laurie Gaylor and Dan Barker, offered an explanation of yesterday’s ruling. 

Ministers may, for instance, use the untaxed income to purchase a home, and, in a practice known as “double dipping,” may then deduct interest paid on the mortgage and property taxes. 

“The Court’s decision does not evince hostility to religion — nor should it even seem controversial,” commented Richard L. Bolton, FFRF’s attorney in the case. “The Court has simply recognized the reality that a tax free housing allowance available only to ministers is a significant benefit from the government unconstitutionally provided on the basis of religion.” 

Crabb wrote: “Some might view a rule against preferential treatment as exhibiting hostility toward religion, but equality should never be mistaken for hostility. It is important to remember that the establishment clause protects the religious and nonreligious alike.” 

The 1954 bill’s sponsor, Rep. Peter Mack, argued ministers should be rewarded for “carrying on such a courageous fight against this [godless and anti-religious world movement].” 

“I agree with plaintiffs that §107(2) does not have a secular purpose or effect,” wrote Crabb, adding that a reasonable observer would view it “as an endorsement of religion.” 

Crabb wrote that “the exemption provides a benefit to religious persons and no one else, even though doing so is not necessary to alleviate a special burden on religious exercise.” 

All taxpayers are burdened by taxes, Crabb noted. “Defendants do not identify any reason why a requirement on ministers to pay taxes on a housing allowance is more burdensome for them than for the many millions of others who must pay taxes on income used for housing expenses.” 

One study has estimated that in total, combined religious tax exemptions cost American taxpayers $71 billion each year.

And now with this one declared unconstitutional I am not sure what the argument would be to protect the rest of the exemptions. Does that mean that we will soon see the day when churches are taxed just like ever other big profit making, politically connected, corporation? Because THAT would be awesome!

Gee I wonder how Sarah Palin will work THIS into her book tour?

22 comments:

  1. Anonymous4:40 AM

    Heads will be exploding in 3_2_1_!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous8:39 AM

      Franklin Graham for one....

      Delete
  2. Anonymous5:05 AM

    Can you imagine how much Anchorage Mega-Church (mega wealthy) political and social advocate Jerry Prevo would have to pay in Anchorage? They wouldn't have to institute a city tax that Dan Sullivan is suggesting.

    Ted Stevens got nabbed for stupid renovations on his Girdwood home, in comparison, Prevo walks over the whole of the Municipality, even his part-time music teachers get free housing. His drunk son's divorce revealed their sophisticated realty efforts to exploit tax loopholes - just doesn't make any sense. So an asshole in 1954 instituted this law to reward non-secular institutions? Talk about State-sponsored faith.

    ReplyDelete
  3. tklohman5:14 AM

    Yeah, the can pay taxes just like Walmart, BP and all the other big corporations do. ::Snort::

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous6:00 AM

    This is likely why the republican congress members continued to filibuster any and all of Obama's judicial appointments. They only want judicial appointees to be leaning right and allow only republican presidents to make the appointments. It took a long time but I'm so glad that Harry Reid used the nuclear option.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Leland6:06 AM

    There is one woman in the company from which I retired who is adamant that "Freedom of Religion does NOT mean freedom FROM religion!" Yells it at me every time the subject is even hinted at. (Yeah, I know. Another idiot.)

    I would love to see her face when she finds out about this little thing. I can bet she will scream louder than Palin!

    I can hear her now. "God Damned atheists! Another attack on Christians!" I hope I'm there when she says that. I will laugh my ass off!

    (I just wish I could laugh my GUT off! Wouldn't it be nice if we could do that?)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous6:17 AM

    Our minister chooses to receive 50% of his income as non-taxable. If his housing and other expenses do not meet the 50%, he has to pay taxes on the remainder. Of course, he always manages to hit the 50%.

    Not only active ministers, but retired ones as well still get the tax exemption, even if they never perform any religious services. It's about time they pay like everyone else.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous6:49 AM

    Finally, some relief! The absurdity of the religious exemption is realized (at least in some form!). Prevo is a grifter extraordinaire and when it came to light his son also was playing every tax dodge angle the game should have been up. I am so thankful to see some action in the courts!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Sharon7:16 AM

    Oh baby......can you just imagine what the Mormons would pay? How about Scientology....millions and millions.
    They own tons of property and operate as landlords for hundreds of businesses. It is about time, lord have mercy...Obama's last 3 years are gonna be sheer hell for the GOP. Just think of the ads for 2014 and how many of them will just die due to exploding heads!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:52 AM

      Isn't it fun to have a President who no longer has to worry about winning an election?

      Now if we can only get some more seats in Congress to turn blue we'll all have to pop more popcorn and settle in for the fireworks!

      Delete
  9. linda8:04 AM

    you all realize that this is only one federal district court, right? this will no doubt be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court and if they take it the outcome could be just the opposite. just saying - too soon to get all excited about this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My thoughts exactly. Sounds good, but really doesn't mean much at this point.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous11:01 AM

      Linda, it's the first of it's kind, worthy of acknowledgement.

      Delete
  10. Anonymous8:17 AM

    I'd love to see the expression on Cardinal Whatever-his-name's face when he gets a tax bill for that charming little bit of New York City real estate that St. Patrick's Cathedral sits on. Payback for those 12 years I suffered through in NY archdiocese Catholic schools. As overweight as my small town pastor is, a tax bill would probably cause his demise. hmmm

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous8:27 AM

    Sharon, there is a business end of the LDS church (much as I bad mouth them) that does pay taxes. That is the portion of the church that bought that huge chunk of forest in Florida last month. This ruling only applies to ministers who use a tax exemption to fund their personal housing. It has nothing to do with temples, churches, synagogs or the like.
    None of the LDS "ministers" are paid one thin dime nor are the given a housing allowance. They all serve gratis and all males are required to do something within the "church".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I find it a bit ironic that to illustrate this story Gryphen chose a picture symbolic of one religion that has no paid ministry and hence exists largely outside the scope of the issue addressed in the ruling.

      Delete
  12. Anonymous8:32 AM

    I used to work at a pawnshop. We had a regular customer who was always buying high end rifles from us -- assault rifles, .223's with high powered scopes and tripod -- definitely not your typical hunting setups. The really odd part, that irked me, was that he always used his minister's tax exemption number to avoid paying Idaho's %6 sales tax. I guess he needed a huge cache of high end assault weapons to carry out god's work?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous11:00 AM

      Sounds like God's work. (Snark)

      Delete
  13. Anonymous8:50 AM

    Have not read the above comments as yet, but there is a church in Anchorage, AK - Baptist Temple - run by a Jerry Prevo - that should be taxed to the hilt! School, his employees/minister's homes, and the church and other buildingas on their property.

    He runs the church, but also leads his congregation to the Republican side of things - gets them out to protest - dresses them in red t-shirts - carrying their bibles, etc. When they appear before the Anchorage Assembly/Municipality of Anchorage - they all deliver the same message - repeat and repeat!!! It's so obvious they have been trained by their leader!

    They are a church very entwined w/government on the state and local levels. Against the law AND the IRS should be watching every move they make!

    Plus, the Anchorage Municipality should be charging ALL churches real estate taxes on all the properties they own! Anchorage is missing out on a huge income that would lead to reducing personal real estate taxes on single-family homes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10:59 AM

      Agreed. They are the Anchorage version of Koch

      Delete
  14. Anita Winecooler12:22 PM

    I'm all for it. Especially when the church uses the pulpit to foster their political agendas and influence elections. How is that a separation of church and state?
    They may argue that paying taxes involves some Government oversight, and it may, but are Churches above the law?

    It's a step in the right direction, but I would imagine they'd use the same loopholes the uber rich use to avoid paying taxes in this country, or scrap the "buying" part and start renting.

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.