16 ms·
Montreal is taxing churches (2017)
- Gatsky 6y agoOk but personally I would have started with the people in the Panama papers.
- quickthrower2 6y agoYou can’t tax people with money!
- colordrops 6y agoMakes sense to me, and should be done in the US as well. Providing a tax exemption is in a way the opposite of a separation of church and state. The state is giving them special treatment.
- ekianjo 6y agoIn Japan post temples are clearly for profit operations (charging people outrageous amounts of money for about anything) and they are also not taxed by the government. Which is why you have a plethora of sects.
- NotSammyHagar 6y agoYes, it's obvious that a religion gets special treatment over say a club and it is unneeded.
- xupybd 6y agoHow about tax exemptions for clubs too. If it's a group of people pooling money for non commercial activities why should that be taxed?
- seesawtron 6y agoAs long as clubs give free entry, sounds reasonable to me that club dancing would be considered a social, community-like activity to bring people closer to each other (literally too) and make them feel joyful.
- alasdair_ 6y agoBecause people exploit the rules massively (the Church of Scientology is one example of many). More importantly: these religious buildings still call the police when there is a break in and call the fire service when there is a fire. They expect all of the benefits from paying taxes without actually doing so.
- olliej 6y agoThese sound like property taxes, but that aside, your example could register itself as a non profit organization. The important distinction between non-profits and churches in the US is that churches do not have to demonstrate that they aren’t a just a profit generating company (see Scientology, many evangelical churches) - they don’t have to provide any documentation at all. I’m fine with churches being untaxed non-profits, as long as they actually demonstrate that.
- morelisp 6y agoFormalized clubs do get some tax benefits. Most people are only familiar with 501(c)(3)s but there are many kinds of 501(c)s; specific tax benefits and allowed behavior to maintain them vary. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)_organization https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/501(c)_organization
- ars 6y ago> Yes, it's obvious that a religion gets special treatment over say a club That isn't true. Non-profits are not taxed either.
- seesawtron 6y agoAre there any countries where the religious groups are NOT exempt from taxes? I'd be curious if this has been done and those religious groups still managed to remain "open to public" while surviving on private donations.
- laurencerowe 6y agoBritain nationalised church property during the reformation.
- skissane 6y agoIt is more complex than that. The Church of England started out as the English branch of the Roman Catholic Church. In that form, it was scarcely a private body – it was the state religion, intimately entwined with the state, with the power to levy taxes, and it ran its own court system with jurisdiction over issues which today would be viewed as essentially secular in character (validity of marriages; inheritance of personal property; crimes committed by clergy), and the state would recognise and enforce that court system's decisions. The property of such a state religion is hardly "private property", it is arguably "public property". For centuries, the King and Pope had intermittently fought over control of it (a situation not unique to England, but repeated across mediaeval Europe). Henry VIII did not see himself as carrying out a state takeover of the Church, but simply as settling that traditional conflict between Pope and King decisively in his own favour.
- solresol 6y agoTo put this in perspective, in Switzerland your employer takes your church donations out of your salary. Your taxes directly fund the church. _That's_ the opposite of separation of church and state. In the USA, tax deductions to churches is giving the same treatment as a charity.
- colordrops 6y agoDo churches not use US infrastructure and services? We are implicitly taxed on behalf of churches.
- alpaca128 6y agoBoth are wrong. Churches should prove they act as non-profits just like any other organisation. Because especially in the US a lot do not exactly oppose profits.
- Svip 6y agoCharity organisations usually get tax exemptions too. Maybe make that the only tax exemption, and have religious organisations prove that they are charities.
- skissane 6y agoUnder English common law, religious organisations are charities by definition. A charitable trust is a trust which serves a "charitable purpose", and the "advancement of religion" has long been recognised as a charitable purpose, going back to at least 1601 [1]. (Originally all charities were trusts, and so charity law formed part of trust law; later, people began using other legal structures for charities, and the rules which defined a charity in trust law were extended to apply in those other cases too.) Most jurisdictions which inherited English common law, have maintained the classification of "advancement of religion" as a charitable end. To give just one example, look at how the IRS defines "charity" in the US [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charitable_trusts_in_English_law#Charitable_purpose https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charitable_trusts_in_English_l... [2] https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-purposes https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-purpose...
- lightgreen 6y agoThey don’t have to be charities. It should be enough if they are nonprofit (which most churches are I hope).
- Galaxeblaffer 6y agoNo one really knows since they don't have to tell anyone how they get money or how they spend them
- lightgreen 6y agoIt doesn’t matter because in order to get nonprofit status they’d need to fill some forms explaining how it is managed, financial statements, maybe perform external audit if they are large enough etc. If they are not willing to do that work, they won’t be eligible for nonprofit tax exemption.
- ars 6y ago> The state is giving them special treatment. No it's not. All non-profits are untaxed. If you are going to charge churches, then charge all non-profits. Personally I think that's a bad policy.
- thefounder 6y agoMany churches are not non-profits. In fact they have quite big profits.
- GreenWatermelon 6y agoand many are not. so the right thing is to evaluate them on case by case basis.
- thefounder 6y agoThey should just register as charities. No more special cases.
- ars 6y agoIf you check the law that's exactly what already happens. https://www.thebalancesmb.com/are-there-advantages-to-being-a-faith-based-nonprofit-2501882 https://www.thebalancesmb.com/are-there-advantages-to-being-... "There are no direct legal benefits associated with being identified as an FBO."
- lazyasciiart 6y agoThat's because it's a legally meaningless phrase. Being a church, however, is legally different and gets benefits like not having to register before claiming charitable status.
- pravda 6y agoBut non-profits have to pay property tax, right? I don't think religious institutions have to pay property taxes. Ok, I looked it up: “states subsidize religions to the tune of about $26.2 billion per year by not requiring religious institutions to pay property taxes for property worth about $600 billion. This subsidy is of particular interest because property taxes pay for services such as firefighting and police, which religious institutions use the same as corporations and private citizens.”
- skissane 6y agoThe article makes clear that churches in Montreal are still getting their tax exemption if they stick to purely religious activities (prayer, worship, etc). They are only being taxed when they use their property for not explicitly religious activities like charitable uses, community groups, etc. Do those people applauding this really want to applaud a policy that gives tax exemptions to specifically religious activities but denies them to activities that are less explicitly religious in character? It seems the opposite policy to what they actually want.
- roenxi 6y agoOpinions on the cheering side are likely diverse; but a good argument for it is wanting a consistent tax code where people are treated consistently without reference to what they are thinking. I am not at all sympathetic to the idea that we allow good works to go tax-free only when religious people do them. That isn't fair. No exemptions for churches is fair, although they should have gotten more notice if this article is representing the situation comprehensively. People doing charitable work probably shouldn't be paying taxes. People doing community work probably shouldn't be paying taxes. I'm even nervous about taxes on business since things like supermarkets are primarily involved with is getting food to people cheaply - discouraging that seems foolish. The basis of that taxation status shouldn't be linked to religious affiliation.
- skissane 6y agoWell, I know that here in Australia we mostly have what you want – there are few special tax exemptions for religious groups. Most of the religious exemptions from taxation in Australia are simply applications of the general tax exemptions for charities and non-profits, combined with the fact that religions are legally categorised as both. The main specific exemption I know of relates to fringe-benefits tax (FBT). Not all charities and non-profits get FBT exemptions or concessions, only some. Religious institutions fall into one of those categories that do get FBT relief, but so do other non-profits like hospitals, aged care facilities, health-related charities, charities targeting poverty/homelessness/etc. But a charity which promotes the advancement of arts and culture, for example, would not get any FBT relief, although it would be eligible for other tax exemptions due to charities and non-profits. Also, there is at least one area in Australian tax law where religious groups are disadvantaged: deductible gift recipient (DGR) status. Donations to religious groups are not tax-deductible when used to fund their core religious functions, only when used to fund their programs to help the poor, etc. By contrast, there are various other categories of charities and non-profits for which all donations are deductible (e.g. Scouts; Girl Guides; public libraries, museums and art galleries; some environmental groups; etc).
- josefx 6y agoThe headline is a bit misleading, purely church things are still exempt, side projects a church may be doing are not. A mega church raking in millions: tax free. A small town church running community projects on the side: taxed for every bit of good it does.
- forgotmypw17 6y agoChurches get a bad rap these days, for many reasons. I want to take a minute to defend them. Right away, I want to say that I am not defending religion-driven bigotry, nor megachurches, nor abuse. I don't know about Canada, but in the U.S. churches are still where communities meet, where people connect with the spiritual world, and also the ones doing most of the "heavy lifting" on any kind of charity activity. They are also generally nice and reasonably centrist-progressive, meaning treating everyone respectfully, nor expecting you to sit through a sermon like the old days. (I heard of one place where this may have been the case, but never saw it myself.) Food Not Bombs might have a weekly freegan cookout, but most of the e.g. feeding people, distributing donated clothes, counseling without having to do paperwork first, food banks, and so on, are done by churches, or church-like organizations, or by people who met at church. There are some exceptions, like in Western Mass and a few places in the Catskills. Source: Traveled around the U.S. with no base income. I don't go out of my way to take advantage of these things, but I'll go if a friend is going.
- IshKebab 6y agoThat's presumably because the US is so Christian. In other countries there are plenty of non-Christian charities. In general people aren't good because religion tells them to be.
- Karishma1234 6y agoNo one has made a claim that religion is the only motivation for good. In USA not just churches but also hindu temples and buddhist temples get tax exemptions (like any other non profits). As a Hindu and as a victim of Church sanctioned violence in Portuguese colonies I am no fan of Church, and yet I do not think it makes any sense to tax a charitable organization just because it is religious in nature.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ggggtez 6y ago> where people connect with the spiritual world In the USA, this is quickly becoming an obsolete understanding of religion. Regular church attendance is down from 70% to just over 50% in the last 20 years, according to Gallup. People are leaving the churches. The real question is what will replace them. If people need community, build community centers. There are other solutions that do not rely on continuing to provide tax exemptions to organizations that more and more people are fleeing.
- dmarchand90 6y agoWhat's bizarre to me is that they are tax free for worship (in my mind fair enough). But get taxed for hosting community services, e.g., foodbank. Definitely think usage in charitable functions warrants tax exemption as much as service
- randompwd 6y agoI don't think it's that bizarre. I find it quite subversive when a church group does 'community events' when there are other organisations which those church members could join to achieve the same result, without flying the banner of $ideology. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Souperism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Souperism for a more blatant historical take.
- ficklepickle 6y agoThat article says the practice was actually very rare, even though it features very prominently in literature from the period. Maybe not the best example.
- randompwd 6y agoSure, thus my sentence saying 'blatant', not 'common' or 'widespread'.
- kanobo 6y agoAll orgs that have the ability to enrich their employees should pay their fair share. I'm looking at you churches, charities and california golf courses... The fact that mega churches got PPE forgiveness loans would make my blood boil if I was a small business who didn't make the cut.
- noisy_boy 6y agoMuch needed step considering most religions are more business-like than faith-focused.
- ars 6y agoYour definition of "most" is rather suspect here. Obviously the "business-like" religions get lots of press, but in the real world they are a tiny minority.
- charliebrownau 6y agoIs it only going to target Christians or is it finally going to tax Judism ISLAM and all region based venues
- wsh 6y agoThis article was published in 2017. Have there been any more recent developments?
- mxcrossb 6y agoFor the way the article is worded, it sounds like a lot of noise is being made about some select reinterpretations of a law by bureaucrats. I would be shocked if the situation hadn’t changed.
- bzb3 6y agoWill this also affect synagogues?
- causality0 6y agoThis is quite strange. In most jurisdictions both churches and nonprofit organizations are exempt from taxes.
- 082349872349872 6y agoNext thing you know, they'll enforce smoking bans in church? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TncdhLGjFTE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TncdhLGjFTE
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- abellerose 6y agoMy whole life was destroyed by religion. I suffered conversion therapy and could never get on hormone blockers young; because of the nonsense faith results in from people with authority over administering a medical treatment. As an adult I'm now trying every year to afford surgeries I cannot afford while my peers save for homes. Also parents disowned me and I have ptsd from the physical & mental abuse. Nice to see religion coming to an end before my shorter life from it. Of course it will out last me but I'm hopeful; as the younger generation is aware of the countless injustice while malevolent people attempt to disguise religion as what the "community" needs. The facade known as religion should rot to nothingness with all the people that forced it upon others. edit: Yah religious patrons don't like it when victims of religion speak out. Similar you all don't ever remedy the victims of what you support exist in this cruel world because of people like you.
- AdrianB1 6y agoI am an atheist, but I don't understand your blame on religion.
- abellerose 6y agoHow so? Do you need more detail from me or do you think people denying others of medical treatment because of their religion isn't deserving blame on religion. Do you have any idea why conversion therapy existed at all? I find your statement about being an atheist irrelevant a well. I'm agnostic and I find atheists to be just as irrational compared to religious people. You cannot prove their is a god and similar to proving there isn't a god. I do prefer how doctors that are atheist don't deny medical treatments for patients because of their religious beliefs.
- hypersoar 6y agoSome commenters are pointing out that all nonprofits are tax-exempt in the United States. This is true, but religious organizations enjoy an extra benefit. Secular non-profits have to apply for 501(c)3 status and then file an annual return. Churches and the like are presumed to be 501(c)3 organizations and have no filing or disclosure requirements, and the IRS is loath to investigate them.
- iso947 6y agoThat’s sounds like corruption could easily happen, what’s the justification?
- paulie_a 6y agoDo you want to be the one to persecute churches? That's what you will be perceived as.
- heavenlyblue 6y agoMaybe we just need an equivalent of liberally-minded Trump who could just do that.
- iso947 6y agoWhy would “you must prove you aren’t fiddling the books Just like any charity” be persecution in a non theocratic state?
- zajio1am 6y agoWhere i live, secular non-profits has tax excemptions (almost similar to churches) without need to apply for them. While disguised business enterprise may happen, that is something that has to be proven by state. This seems to me reasonable. So perhaps US should loose the rules for secular non-profits to be on the same level as churches?
- jonny383 6y agoMuch needed. USA should follow. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/mormon-church-has-misled-members-on-100-billion-tax-exempt-investment-fund-whistleblower-alleges/2019/12/16/e3619bd2-2004-11ea-86f3-3b5019d451db_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/mormon-church-...
- Findeton 6y agoI am an atheist but I don't see how this is tech related or why it should be in HN.
- aliswe 6y agoAgree the content is very divisive but ah well I guess censoring is also not sustainable.
- jakeogh 6y agoPerhaps they should worship the government?
- hbarka 6y agoI acknowledge this is anecdotal but in the Bay Area CA I drive by many churches (of different faiths) occupying large areas of land on prime hilltop real estate. I’m astonished by this.
- steve19 6y agoGiven the extreme wealth in the bay area, I am astonished you find it astonishing. Billionaires and multi millionaires would have funded these churches. Most churches and other religious organisations run on a tight budget and deter important costs like building maintenance because of lack of funds. I have seen crumbling Catholic churches, and I have seen the Vatican Meusum. Two extremes of wealth.
- refurb 6y agoMuch of that land has been owned by the churches for 100+ years. The land was probably on the edge of town and not so prime back then.
- wrnr 6y agoMormon church biggest land owner in Florida.
- onetimemanytime 6y agoChurches are almost a 2000 year old thing. Back in the day, rich person wanting to have the papers in order for the life after, would donate his fortune along with 45,000 acres to the church. Now there exists a major city and an acre goes for $50 million or whatever. And so on...if we could turn the clock back and buy land on Manhattan or Las Vegas we'd be rich (on paper at least too)
- chrisseaton 6y agoPresumably they were there before the rest of the area was so built up?
- AdrianB1 6y agoI am astonished by your astonishment: churches were one of the first buildings to create a nucleus of a new city, so you can say they created the value of that estate out of an empty hilltop in the middle of nowhere.
- jay_kyburz 6y agoI don't mind charities being exempt from paying municipal taxes on church land, but I do object to things like Sanitarium making Weetbix and Peanut butter, selling it in the supermarket, and not paying any company tax on profits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitarium_Health_and_Wellbeing_Company https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitarium_Health_and_Wellbein...
- danschumann 6y agoWasn't there just a post about not posting political stuff? How does this interest tinkerers or hackers?
- mmglr 6y agoIMO this post should not be on HN. Per the guidelines [1] "stories about politics" are off-topic. I would consider this political for obvious reasons. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- seesawtron 6y agoHere's the complete guideline: "Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon" Did you purposefully leave out the full sentence? I would argue it is/was a new phenomenon. Nevertheless, would like to hear why you think HN should be exempt from political discussion anyways? We see thought-provoking discussions here each day. This is one of the positive aspects of HN that I value that it allows you to be politically and socially aware of ideas to get you out of your role as an "engineer" or "hacker".
- mmglr 6y agoI wasn’t intending to be malicious by leaving out the full sentence. Fair point about being a new phenomenon.
- busterarm 6y agoYes, hackernews will never pass up the opportunity to discuss highly divisive content that will cause community drama. Let's post about rent control while we're at it and really set off some flamewars.
- seesawtron 6y agoI thought you were against censorship as your bio says: "Censors have never been on the right side of history. If you support censorship, consider that you may be advocating evil." If this was a sarcastic bio, then forgive me for misunderstanding.
- neya 6y agoChurches are one of the biggest business entities in any part of the world. Most churches are structured like a proper business entity (Eg. they have equivalent of directors, CEOs and managers) and have revenue targets and KPIs set. Most churches are also located in some of the prime real estate of top tier cities and I always wondered how they were able to afford paying $1500+/Sq.M in a prime, central area. About the charity work - I know for a fact the charity work the churches do cost less than 10% of the income they make, I got this number from a former church member who was a top level guy in his church. Given that churches are anyway structured like a business entity internally and manage money like a proper business, why shouldn't they be taxed as one? It makes no sense to not tax them no matter how you try to justify it. If they did get an exemption, so should Mc Donald's for giving away a free Cola bottle with every $20 meal you get.
- HPsquared 6y agoWell... The government has managers, KPIs, prime real estate etc as well - is it a business too?
- BookHeretykow 6y agoActually yes. Why government should have prime real estate? Why government officials should not pay taxes? Because it's government? Honestly, this is just a job. This is just a building that serve some purpose. This is kinda business which provides you something in exchange of mandatory subscription ️
- simonh 6y agoSo churches should be taxed because they use effective organisational structures and are well run? That’s a new one. You could say the same of well run charities.
- neya 6y agoYou know the point I'm making - It's a business entity because it makes money and manages money like any other business. Why shouldn't it be taxed?
- ranman 6y agoEveryone commenting about how great churches are? You’re absolutely delusional. The gross majority of these organizations are bigoted and racist. I grew up in the southern United States and experienced all manner of churches. I don’t care how great your church is. Give me 20 minutes with your congregation and I’ll find the racists and bigots. These assholes promote terrible mental and physical health. They don’t believe women have a right to make family planning decisions and they protect rapists. They push political agendas under the guise of religious belief. Half of them don’t have education past high school. Religion is a vestigial structure and a hideyhole for the worst parts of humanity. This is not an exaggeration. I have lived this. I have watched others live through this. The USA will ultimately be destroyed by completely ignorant Christians who are able to fake some semblance of rational thought. Stop defending these institutions as “for the public good”. Tax them out or existence and let secular / non religious organizations take their place. It is absolutely absurd to pretend Christians, Muslims, Hindus, or whoever are special because of the particular brand of imaginary edicts they subscribe to. None of us are special. We are all just stupid meatbags on a rock. I commend all the lives saved in the name of God but let’s not pretend or equivocate. Christianity in the USA is a net drain on society and it has no place in a rational conversation. Anyone who thinks, believes, or sells otherwise? You’re a lunatic.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- stormdennis 6y agoI grew up in the southern United States and experienced all manner of churches. They’re universally bad. How many churches are you an expert on, exactly?
- ranman 6y agoWell I was raised by a famous “pastor” who traveled around and “preached” to both receptive and dismissive congregations across the US. I experienced more churches than most people. I’m telling you this whole Christianity thing is a scam. sudo apt-get remove religion It’s a mental cancer.
- LatteLazy 6y agoThe issue with this is always the same: which taxes ddo you want them to pay? Since most churches don't make a profit in the strict accounting sense, their won't be much Corp tax. And (AFAIK) they already pay payroll taxes (the main place church money. You could maybe tighten that up and make sure everyone is declaring benefits (use of the private jet) properly. But the USA just made that whole mess much more generous for CEOs so presumably a mega pastor would benefit from the same allowances. So what's the plan here, sales tax?
- keiferski 6y agoTo briefly make a few points: - Fundamentalism and literalism is a fairly modern phenomenon which is mostly a Protestant reaction to the Enlightenment and the lionization of scientific, empirical knowledge over other forms of knowledge. Early Christian leaders didn't believe in literalism. In the Middle Ages, there was a fourfold method of interpreting scripture. And so on. Church father Origen (184-253 CE), due to his familiarity with reading and interpreting Hellenistic literature, taught that some parts of the Bible ought to be interpreted non-literally. Concerning the Genesis account of creation, he wrote: "who is so silly as to believe that God ... planted a paradise eastward in Eden, and set in it a visible and palpable tree of life ... [and] anyone who tasted its fruit with his bodily teeth would gain life?" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_literalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_literalism - There have been near-infinite forms of Christianity (and every other religion) since their founding. To say that "Christianity is XYZ" is simply wrong. It has embodied entirely different values at different times and the Christianity of 2020 would be nearly incomprehensible to the Christian of 1600 or 1000 or 500. This is true even today. - Many of what are considered "humanistic" or "secular" values are more-or-less directly traceable to the influence of Christianity. Universal value of human beings, that is, that everyone has fundamental dignity, rights, the ability to vote (democracy), and similar human rights concepts that have Western origins are almost direct extensions of Christian thought. In many ways, modern secular Western democratic society is post-Christian one, in the sense that it's a direct extension, not a radical departure. - The concept of secularity has been redefined and come under attack in the past few decades. See writers like Charles Taylor, who have argued that secularity hasn't resulted in less religious beliefs, but merely their multiplication and changing of form. This falls in line with other social trends. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Secular_Age https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Secular_Age TLDR: It's complicated.
- Cantbekhan 6y agoSlightly off topic but I think it would be interesting to observe the German example as I think it's a good "fair" system. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_tax#Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_tax#Germany " The church tax is only paid by members of the respective church. People who are not members of a church tax-collecting denomination do not have to pay it. Members of a religious community under public law may formally declare their wish to leave the community to state (not religious) authorities. The obligation to pay church taxes ends once such a declaration has been made. Some communities refuse to administer marriages and burials of (former) members who had declared to leave it. " In many European countries, everyone (community member or not, believer or firm atheist) has to pay full taxes to pay for the churches/synagogues and mosques. Including the salary of priests. This in addition of them also not being taxed due to their special status. Despite not living in a theocracy, many are forced to participate directly in a cult that might be of zero interest to them.
- AdrianB1 6y agoIn some countries, like mine, churches are funded by taxpayer money and they are also allowed to have commercial activities with no taxes at all. In a way there is the irony of atheists providing support for churches, but it's just one of the ways the democracy fails with majority rules (55% religious vote that non-religious people pay taxes for churches) and governments as immoral institutions that exist to rule over people, not to care about them.
- jariel 6y ago"As a result, many churches in Montreal that host community groups, such as food banks, or Girl Guides or Boy Scouts, are facing mounting tax bills." Those evil grifters, we need to clamp down.
- ykevinator 6y agoBut god is not real and belief in god is anti science. It is sad when smart people choose comfort over logic. I am not anti church or anti religion, I am anti logic. The world is trending in the right direction and eventually issues like this article will be gone, but in the mean time, compassionate people should find a better way to serve the less fortunate and their communities than in houses of worship dedicated to a bronze age religion. God is not real.
- chunkyslink 6y agoThey pay taxes in the UK and we still have functioning communities and community groups.
- koheripbal 6y agoDo other non-profits pay taxes (eg food banks)? Do mosques and temples also pay tax?
- elongatedMusku 6y agoPlain horrible.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ZikPhil 6y agoLeave it to Americans to come to a post about Canada to leave USA facts. Enjoy your constitution.