3 ms·

1. If you're going to tax universities, then you need to tax churches too. Good luck. 2. If you're going to tax non-profits, then why have non-profits? 3. Do

1. If you're going to tax universities, then you need to tax churches too. Good luck. 2. If you're going to tax non-profits, then why have non-profits? 3. Do we really want to penalize fiscally responsible organizations when even governments are going bankrupt? What values are we trying to support here?

Animats 11y ago
"If you're going to tax universities, then you need to tax churches too. Good luck." Right. There are some very wealthy churches. In the United States alone, the Catholic Church has an operating budget of $170 billion. That's bigger than Apple.
- dkidd 11y ago
  I assume you're getting the $170 billion figure from this article: http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2012/08/catholic-church-america http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2012/08/catholic-chu... I think it's worth noting that over $147 billion of that number is spent by Catholic hospitals ($98.6 billion) and universities ($48.8 billion). The number more representative of what most people mean when they refer to "churches" would be Parish disbursements ($11 billion). $11 billion is nothing to sneeze at, but when you consider that there are about 17.5k parishes in the US (many of which have schools) it's a less impressive number.
vilhelm_s 11y ago
You don't have to treat universities and churches the same., the tax code specifically defines which organizations are tax exempt. Churches and universities are "501(c)(3) organizations", i.e. "Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office." You can just amend that law to delete "educational", which would remove the tax exemption for universities, but keep it for churches. It is already the case that there are organizations which don't pay out dividends to owners (so they are "non-profit"), but which are not tax-exempt. One example which has been discussed on Hacker News is foundations set up to accept donations in order to fund development of open-source software.

Animats 11y ago

"If you're going to tax universities, then you need to tax churches too. Good luck." Right. There are some very wealthy churches. In the United States alone, the Catholic Church has an operating budget of $170 billion. That's bigger than Apple.

dkidd 11y ago
I assume you're getting the $170 billion figure from this article: http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2012/08/catholic-church-america http://www.economist.com/blogs/newsbook/2012/08/catholic-chu... I think it's worth noting that over $147 billion of that number is spent by Catholic hospitals ($98.6 billion) and universities ($48.8 billion). The number more representative of what most people mean when they refer to "churches" would be Parish disbursements ($11 billion). $11 billion is nothing to sneeze at, but when you consider that there are about 17.5k parishes in the US (many of which have schools) it's a less impressive number.

vilhelm_s 11y ago

You don't have to treat universities and churches the same., the tax code specifically defines which organizations are tax exempt. Churches and universities are "501(c)(3) organizations", i.e. "Corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation (except as otherwise provided in subsection (h)), and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office." You can just amend that law to delete "educational", which would remove the tax exemption for universities, but keep it for churches. It is already the case that there are organizations which don't pay out dividends to owners (so they are "non-profit"), but which are not tax-exempt. One example which has been discussed on Hacker News is foundations set up to accept donations in order to fund development of open-source software.