Tax the Churches?
I'll readily admit for some pastors leading a congregation has become an easy source of income rather than a true spiritual calling. I'll readily admit preaching services in a glistening hundred-million-dollar chapel has very little to do with religion. I'll even readily admit that those churches spend far less than they should on the Lord's work and far more than they should on indulgences.
But would a broad taxation of religion do any good? No.
Regardless of what you believe, there are quite a few churches which help their surrounding communities. Taxing churches can only hurt those who are in need of aid by decreasing funding for food, clothing, and counseling currently offered by theological institutions. San Francisco has learned the hard way that it is better to run churches offer programs than attempt a state takeover.
---
Maybe one should consider taxing not-for-profit charities. A rather foolish idea until one looks at the salaries involved in running a charity. Take for example, the American Red Cross, probably the most well-known charity in the United States. According to the latest numbers available their CEO earns an impressive $446,867 per year.
Brian Gallagher, the CEO of the United Way, rakes in an even more astonishing figure. He was paid $982, 768; keep in mind his salary is funded by donations and grants to the United Way organization, the same way the pastor of a mega-church earns money from donations.
Yet, even as charities are shelling out hundreds of thousands of dollars per year on their CEOs, does anyone doubt their worthiness to be tax exempt? No.
Keep in mind that charities also spend money on their fundraising activities. In 2008 the Saint Louis Zoo Foundation spent $975,375 on such activities while only spending slightly more ($990,853) on all of their programs combined. Factor in the $821,766 spent on administration and all of a sudden, the Saint Louis Zoo Foundation only spent 35% of their operational budget on their programs.
Still, should charities become taxed organizations? No, because the overwhelming majority are responsible organizations which help the community. A few bad eggs have and always will exist; it is irrational to impose blanket taxes on all charities because of the actions of a few.
---
Why then, should we tax the churches?
It seems that, at least, a main argument is that churches sometimes require individuals receiving benefits to adhere the certain religions guidelines – such as saying a prayer before eating a free meal at a soup kitchen. Wouldn't taxing those churches which have that requirement be a violation of the first amendment? That would effectively put a regulation on churches and how followers practice their religion.
Even with the arguments above, isn't the idea churches have a right to their own doctrine enough to stop this foolish tax?