The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has reached a settlement with a prominent atheist organization, agreeing to crack down churches and religious groups for infringements of its prohibition against ‘electioneering.’
As previously reported, the Freedom from Religion Foundation (FFRF), headquartered in Madison, Wisconsin, sued the IRS in 2012, asserting that many non-profit religious organizations have been “blatantly and deliberately flaunting … electioneering restrictions,” but the government has not enforced its rules pertaining to the matter.
According to the IRS website, “Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to all campaigns including campaigns at the federal, state and local level. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.”
However, while candidates may not be promoted or opposed, churches and ministries that obtain 501 (c)(3) status may speak out on political and moral issues and/or generally encourage others to vote.
“Under federal tax law, section 501(c)(3) organizations may take positions on public policy issues, including issues that divide candidates in an election for public office,” the IRS outlines. “However, section 501(c)(3) organizations must avoid any issue advocacy that functions as political campaign intervention. Even if a statement does not expressly tell an audience to vote for or against a specific candidate, an organization delivering the statement is at risk of violating the political campaign intervention prohibition if there is any message favoring or opposing a candidate.”
Well damn!
If you are like me you undoubtedly think this kind of thing should have been happening for years now, but I think we know that the Religious Right is going to lose its collective mind.
The conservatives are already on the warpath against the IRS, and this will surely push them over the edge, with renewed calls to abolish the agency.
All in all it is going to be great theater, though I wonder if they will actually ever be able to remove a church's tax exempt status without rioting in the streets?
And since this comes as a result of efforts from an Atheist organization? Well they really could not hate us anymore than they already do anyway.
Episcopalian here. Good for the IRS! About time they went after those churches who electioneer! They're not supposed to be getting into any political battles, either for or against. That's not their job.
ReplyDeleteRC here- and I agree completely.
DeleteI think that law has been in place for awhile WHY hasn't it been enforced? I think Unless a church CAN PROVE it helps Homeless or has a food panty something like that it should be taxed especially if its spewing anti-gov bs from the Pulpit! Some years back when the prop8 lost in Ca churches were sending out people to picket against it! (Mormons were behind it) Why do you think Sarah's church of Scientology b/c A Church? For tax purposes. Wasn't a church when Manson was one. Its time to start enforcing the laws we already have. MOST (but not all) Churches are "self-enriching" corps and anyone can make a "church" all you need is three or more people, THIS blog could be a CHURCH!!! (as the law is now)
DeleteCatholic here... I agree with this completely.
DeleteThere are currently 1874 separate Churches in this City.
Look at politics in Chicago....Prints and Reverends in certain areas are deliberately invited to special events by the politicos to curry favor and get them to Pimp for voters.
Presbyterian here, It's about time! I can't think of a church I;ve visited during my travels that didn't include politics as part of the Reverends talks. There is always a suggestion of "He's a good man" even if he wrote the Monsanto act and made a gigantic profit from the tobacco companies during the time of the tobacco act. Politics are an awful business and churches should stear clear or pay. I hope it's retroactive.
DeleteIt's so sad when the government refuses to let rich white people teach poor people to vote for certain people. Gosh, really makes me cry.
ReplyDeleteI wonder how this will affect Mitt Romney's LDS foundation donations. You know, the ones where he puts 20% of his income to his foundation, keeps the interest, and defers the church's receipt of the $$$.
ReplyDeleteAfter Prop 8 there is NO WAY they can't tax the LDS churches.
I think the same thing happens with the "church" of Scientology. Tom Cruz deducted all his donations, and the cult members made him a handcrafted designer suv.
DeleteThe way I read it, this only pertains to candidates, not propositions on the ballot. So essentially, churches can still electioneer from the pulpit.
DeleteI'd like to see this as a positive step, the camel's nose as it were, towards restricting churches' politicking even more.
Mexico has this right. Their churches are forbidden from saying one word about anything pertaining to any sort of politics.
Good, long past time for this.
ReplyDeleteGood news, but I find it hard to believe this will really happen. They need to completely abolish this particular exemption, electioneering or not.
ReplyDeleteAMEN! (*giggle*)
DeleteTotally agree!
DeleteSome of the churches and pastors have been looking forward to a battle for a while. I hope they lose.
ReplyDeleteHopefully the IRS has the staff and resources to enforce this now. Can't wait to read about the first, of hopefully many, churches that get caught and loose status and/or have to pay penalties.
ReplyDeleteNext up! IRS need to go after PACs that function as a "private ATM" for certain people, allowing them to charter private planes etc, while saying they are somewhere else. No more PACS. If we want to give to a candidate we can do it. PACS should only be for people who have ACTUALLY WON a Primary.
DeleteHow sad is it, that so many will not realize how ridiculous it will be, for them to say, "I want my tax funded government to abolish the IRS."
ReplyDeleteSo many who whine about things that anger them, and want to see "government" action to stop such things, are against taxation in the first place.
It makes you feel like you are arguing with a baby whose answer to your challenges is to poop their pants, and drool.
Or they depend on the largesse of the federal government. You would be surprised how many people I know who are well off, have resources others don’t, property, fishing businesses etc. who chose to not purchase health insurance but depended on the community spaghetti feed to pay their medical bills.
DeleteWHOOHOO !!!!
ReplyDeletehardyfukin'har har ... suk it domestic taliban
All I can say is “ABOUT TIME!"
ReplyDeleteSEE???!!! There IS a war on Christians! (My A$$! :D )
ReplyDeleteABOUT FRIGGIN' TIME that the IRS is doing this!!! At the very latest, it should have been enforced after gwb (sic) became dictator-in-chief!
It's about time. If they want to enjoy tax free status as a religous organization, then no politics.
ReplyDeleteWhat about Prevo's church? Baptist group in Anchorage that gets very involved w/politics! Church and state? He should be shut down!!!!
ReplyDeleteYEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteWhile I would not go to a church that electioneered from the pulpit or the church bulletin, I wouldn't mind seeing all churches that own property paying taxes whether they meddle in elections or not. Maybe at a slightly lower rate if they stay away from politics than businesses but still paying taxes. Pseudo-Christianity has become a big business in this country; it has nothing to do with charity and good works.
ReplyDeleteBeaglemom
Actually I think ALL non profits should be taxed if they cannot prove they donate 80% of what they take in.
DeleteI agree. They should all pay property taxes (although assessing the value of a church might be tricky) they shouldn't pay income taxes unless they are electioneering in any way. They should also be held to the same standards as other non-profits, I.E. no more than 10% in administrative costs, the rest going to whatever charity they are supporting.
DeleteLONG overdue.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, the GOP has decimated the budget for the IRS, making enforcement that much more difficult. And, when a suit filed by one or more religious/political organizations eventually reaches the Supreme Court, the Catholic boys will no doubt find in favor of the churches.
semi-related:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/07/23/anti-abortion-group-harasses-unitarian-churchs-moment-of-silence-for-dead-member/
Sorry, Ammosexuals: Maryland’s New Gun-Safety Law IS Working (Video)
ReplyDeleteIn 2013, Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley signed one of the nation’s toughest gun control laws. One year later, supporters of the law say that it is working.
The act went into effect on October 1, 2013. According to WBOC TV, gun deaths in Maryland are down some 24 percent in the first five months of 2014. Vincent Demarco, of the group Marylanders to Prevent Gun Violence, says that the act is not solely responsible for the reduction in gun deaths, but it has played a major part.
Of course, gun advocates have a different perspective.
http://aattp.org/sorry-ammosexuals-marylands-new-gun-safety-law-is-working-video/
Megachurches Prove Mega-Influential in GOP Primaries
ReplyDeleteThe influence of religious conservatives might be waning nationwide, but the movement only stands to grow in Congress.
Already this year, three candidates with close ties to massive churches won decisive Republican primaries. A fourth — Pastor Jody Hice — could win a Tuesday GOP primary runoff in Georgia and come to Congress in November.
Their victories come as public opinion has shifted dramatically on some social issues, notably same-sex marriage, denounced by most religious conservatives. The rise of the tea party and libertarian factions in the Republican Party has also diluted the influence of social conservative activists in the GOP.
But in the case of these faith-figures-turned-pols, the candidates’ close relationships to their churches played a factor — perhaps the deciding one — in their victories.
http://atr.rollcall.com/religious-right-congress-jody-hice-georgia-2014/?dcz=
Other non-profit 503c3 corporations are not allowed to politic or lobby, so why should churches who claim 503c3 exemption be allowed to.
ReplyDeleteIf you want the exemption, you have to play by the rules that govern the exemption. Period.
If they feel they are "entitled" to some different treatment, let them create some new tax code category. Everyone in the same category should have to play by the same rules. Period.
How hard is that to understand?
It's about time. And all the churches; be they red or blue leaning.
ReplyDeleteChurches need to get the F**k out of politics!!
ReplyDeleteIt's a start, but it's about damn time! Especially the pro one cause churches with crucifixes on their lawns that count how many surgical abortions were done since Roe V Wade.
ReplyDeleteI've been saying this for ages. Imagine the dent it would put on our National Debt? The priests at my ex RCC church all drove luxury cars with all the bells and whistles. How is that necessary when a more practical car will do?
How much you want to bet the old harridan thinks this is actual support?
ReplyDeleteI just have a question. Say the churches are taxed and help the needy like in feeding them, whose saves money without food stamps being distributed?
ReplyDeleteNone of these churches provide enough food to eliminate the need for food stamps. It's a drop in the bucket. One bag of food does not do much to help a family that needs food stamps to survive.
DeleteSo no, let the churches pay their taxes.
And shut up about politics. All politics.
I just have a question. Say the churches are taxed and helps the needy like for food, who actually saves if food stamps are not distributed anymore?
ReplyDeleteChurches need to get the F**k out of B¡[h like you T.S
DeleteI have mixed thoughts on the teaching of gun SAFETY and handling in schools, but the outcome MIGHT be safer homes that contain guns because the children would know when to police the adults. . .
ReplyDeleteToo bad it isn't retroactive.
ReplyDeleteLike when the Catholic church threatened to excommunicate anyone voting for Kerry.
I can see Congress cutting even more of the IRS budget. First it was auditing tax returns (so their elitist 1%ers can get away with tax fraud) and next it will be the 501 (c) (3) enforcement.
Darrell Issa is frothing at the mouth and beating his chest against the bars to get his next investigation under way.
Hallelujah! What took them so long?
ReplyDeleteWhat would really help all of this CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM! Follow the MONEY in any election - our politicians are purchased by the highest bidders - oh, I mean 'contributors' Cut the campaign BS and that would help. Now the US supreme court (lower case intentional) with the Citizens United case saying that corporations can 'speak' per the First Amendment through their treasuries made all of this much much worse. Our supreme court was nominated by purchased presidents and appointed by a purchased senate - is it a wonder that many of these 'justices' tow the party line? What is wonderful to see is a Justice who is able to vote against the political philosophy of the politicians who got him/her the seat on the court.
ReplyDeleteWhat we are seeing are symptoms of a sick patient - the United States Government. Putting salve on gang green wont heal it - only sufficient treatment will. Perhaps Amendments to the US Constitution will be the best path - the government has amply shown in the past dozen years that it is incapable of self- reform, so We The People must reform them from the Amendment process available within our own Constitution:
Article. V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments,
which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article*; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.