Really? That's not how we tax any businesses. You want to create new IRS regulations that tax churches more than any other business?
Businesses are taxed on profit. Legitimate churches have no profit, therefore, there's nothing to tax.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Hope Media Group and WAY-FM to merge
- Thread starter Mediafrog+
- Start date
- Status
Really? That's not how we tax any businesses. You want to create new IRS regulations that tax churches more than any other business?
Businesses are taxed on profit. Legitimate churches have no profit, therefore, there's nothing to tax.
A
AnyHuman
Guest
Maybe move some of this conversation to the off-topic board. I can imagine people at Hope/Way gawking at this thread in disbelief.
All the donations, I get, is used to help keep me on the air. I don't collect an income or profit from this LPFM station. Not allowed to.
Dan <><
P.S. People have told me how much this broadcast has helped them in some way. They also thank me for bringing it to Selma Alabama. Excited to be serving this community with something we really needed.
In closing: The Church, God and His Word, Christian Radio and the people that support it are here to stay. We're not leaving anytime soon.
Dan <><
P.S. People have told me how much this broadcast has helped them in some way. They also thank me for bringing it to Selma Alabama. Excited to be serving this community with something we really needed.
In closing: The Church, God and His Word, Christian Radio and the people that support it are here to stay. We're not leaving anytime soon.
Last edited:
For you. For billions around the world, it does.
Okay, you are an athiest and a misanthrope. We get it.
At least in this country, your rights extend just short of the tip of my nose. So let me find guidance, inspiration and humanity from my belief. If you don't need any of that, it is your choice.
For the moment, this is related to the tax exemption that church operated organizations get. The discussion is whether belief-based organizations should be tax exempt and that covers many religious stations, from K-love to a neighborhood LPFM.
There are over a thousand US radio stations that are owned by tax-exempt religious groups, both churches and lay church members and whose purpose is to promote the faith through teaching, music and other activities.
The reason whey we call this "Radio Discussions" is that we can discuss all aspects of broadcasting. The financial status of religious stations is the core of this discussion, and it is a valid subject.
Whether religious groups are granted tax exemption is part of this discussion, as any change would affect abouut 10% of all US radio stations.
You are allowed to collect an income. Technically you cant profit though. I work for a non profit and you best believe they pay me
But an industry association that promotes "adult entertainment" can certainly be registered as a non-profit.
But as many or more believe that some form of religion makes their life more worthwhile and purposeful.
I disagree with almost everything Pacifica stands for, but I acknowledge their right to be a tax-exempt non-profit organization.
Your atheistic opinion.
And a non-profit is an entity that does not distribute any excess over costs to the owners.
You are un-leveling the playing field. Were churches not registered as non-profits, donations would no longer be tax deductible. That would affect the donations of many, many church contributors.
Personally, in my neighborhood I'd rather have The Waltons than the Kardashians. Unfortunately, I got the Kardashians anyway.
Last edited:
A few religious organizations have broadcasting operations. How religion is classified under tax law would impact the landscape (and not just in the reserve band) of radio. You would think companies like iHeart and Entercom would entertain the idea of launching Christian themed formats (just like Urban1 does now with KROI).
That's because of how things are differently classified in 501(c) organizations. Any income in excess of expendituress would be taxed (no organization, whether for-profit or non profit purposely ends the year breaking even). It's simply not called "profit" due to their privileged designation.
Furthermore, it's not just "profits", but property tax, sales tax, and other perks (like not having to report financial information to the IRS) that churches have been benefiting from. They don't have to pay taxes on gains from investments or interest they receive. Also, people and companies can deduct "donations" to religious non-profits as charitable contributions.
There is a lot of money that is being left behind by allowing religious organizations to continue as non-profits.
There are several things I can think of that are taxed, yet they would improve local communities more than any religion could.
I'm neither of those things. Explain to me how asking for religions to lose their non profit status makes me dislike people? If anything, I want churches to pay taxes so we can offer better social services in our community for the betterment of society.
Also, I'm not an atheist.
And nobody is stopping you. Taxation is not censorship.
You said it yourself, an Industry association.
Atheists don't seem to have that problem. I'd reckon that anyone who doesn't feel that their life is worthwhile is in need of a mental health specialist and not a priest, imam or a rabbi.
But for the purposes of this discussion, were talking about religion.
How Pacifica operates and how the benefit society is for another discussion.
That's not even an atheist view point.
But it would increase the availability of taxes that can be used to improve schools, parks, and social programs that improve the quality of life.
Last edited:
Not so fast Jack!
LINK
There is an ongoing shift in America. We may not witness it, but it's very possible that the next generation may strip religion from its tax exemptions as it's place in society begins to be widely questioned.
This could likely result in an increase of commercialized Christian programming while educational institutions raid the reserved band.
There is no less efficient way to use money than letting it be handled by any government. Nearly everywhere in the world, government employees are more protected with less performance demands than those in the private sector.
If you put the religious aspect aside, compare a Catholic education with a public school one. And their cost per student is much lower than the tax funded public school student costs.
And people who donate to religious charities and churches will simply look elsewhere to donate if the tax deduction is important to them. The government will not benefit, and the many religious charities will suffer.
That will significant effect immigrants (at their highest percent of US population ever) who depend on their church, mosque or temple for many kinds of aid in a new country.
All they would do is spend the money prior to the year ending.
The same goes for the Red Cross or the SPCA or Planned Parenthood.
For the government to spend far less efficiently?
We still seem to have "In God We Trust" on our paper currency. When I see a significant campaign to remove that, we can revisit the subject.
The fact that religion is not a subject of either conservative radio talk shows or for TV ones like The view or CNN, MSNBC or FOX seems to indicated that this is a one-sided argument that is only controversial among a tiny, tiny part of the population.
Most of the non-church-going population is not anti-religion. They are best described as passive, and many find faith later in life.
And, most significantly, any party or candidate who opposes religion in any way will not be elected, whether in liberal CA or conservative SD.
Let's keep replies condensed, shall we? No need to reply three times to three separate posts.
But of course, neither of us can say so for sure because churches don't have to report.
That's the point!
Taxation = "tis but a scratch."
And like I said earlier, any religious "business" (or their members) are welcomed to start an secular non-profit for these purposes. Just leave religion out of it.
I don't know why everyone seems to be stuck on this.
Probably more efficient than letting the money get used to spread ancient hearsay.
But of course, neither of us can say so for sure because churches don't have to report.
Yes they are. But that's not an argument for religious tax exemption. If anything, it's an argument for government accountability.
In that case, just push for homeschooling since it's more efficient than either.
You mean like other organizations that actually have worthy goals?
That's the point!
They won't suffer. Religion is a multibillion dollar worldwide industry.
Taxation = "tis but a scratch."
There's non-religious aid also available. Several immigration lawyers without religious affiliations available in this town as well willing to work pro-bono.
And like I said earlier, any religious "business" (or their members) are welcomed to start an secular non-profit for these purposes. Just leave religion out of it.
They're welcome to try it. But even just taxing their property alone (especially in this state) would be massive.
Organizations with actual causes that help fill voids left by the government or help raise the quality of life for the people they serve.
Considering churches don't have to report, it's impossible to say.
Like I said earlier, "Soon..."
A tiny population that is destined to grow.
Asking for the tax code to be changed is not anti-religion.
I don't know why everyone seems to be stuck on this.
Again, you're stuck in a "now" world point of view.
It will take several generations for any significant change, assuming the trend you mention continued. And, as long as an election can be decided based on religion or religious principles, any politician approaching this subject is standing on the third rail.
I worked Christian radio and dealt with lots of churches and many national and regional ministries. I came to know 'stereotypes' of many denominations and many pastoral personalities. For the most part they are all very genuine good people simply trying to help people and not necessarily trying to covert people. I had a few ministries pay from their pocket that had their day job paycheck. I found the most sincere were smaller and generally broke.
In the pastoral personality realm, there are a few who are simply crooks. There are some that are simply power hungry. Their eyes light up as they talk about their growth and there's always an edge about how they managed to get people to do that. Then there are the ones with not much money. Some pastor a church for gas money. There's a whole bunch of this type. Most people think they're cheap.
What I saw that was rather eye-opening for me is the effect religion had on people. You might be surprised to know the big risk takers, former addicts, alcoholics and other assorted things tend to go to charismatic denominations. Most such denominations have very defined parameters with ample demonstration of 'God at work' and it seems this is just what keeps these folks in line. In other words, and this sounds bad, but church is their daddy and keeps them in line. .
Those who have pretty much steered clear from risky behavior tend to go with more mainline denominations. Denominations are about as diverse as you can get.
Churches and ministries (almost all) do a great deal for people in their area, There are those that help elderly, help the poor with food or paying their light bill. When the food stamp office directs you to the Ministerial Alliance Food Bank for food to get you by until the food stamps kick in says something. Chances are that corner thrift store is because of a church or ministry. Many times churches let clubs and other non-profits use their facilities free (mostly) to maintain good PR in the neighborhood.
The tax exempt church and ministry (most of them) really do a great deal for their communities and actually help people with a tendency to be a loose cannon to act within the parameters accepted by society in general. If anything, religion gives a code of conduct that promotes good versus negative. At least this is what I observed from several years working in Christian Radio.
While this seemingly would not change if tax-exemption was disallowed, I disagree. So much funding comes because you can write it off your taxes. That includes donating clothing, that old washing machine and such.
I known from being the director of a ministry that you do file a return with the IRS and it's quite extensive, accounting for every penny. And salaries are not sky high. The advisor said we need to pay on the low side to middle of what the same position in the for profit world would pay or risk scrutiny of the IRS. The people getting rich in the ministries and churches are about as many as their are jocks in radio making the big bucks...most overworked and underpaid.
This has been a very civil discussion and I appreciate this. I fully disagree with BamaTX but I support him in making his feelings known.
In the pastoral personality realm, there are a few who are simply crooks. There are some that are simply power hungry. Their eyes light up as they talk about their growth and there's always an edge about how they managed to get people to do that. Then there are the ones with not much money. Some pastor a church for gas money. There's a whole bunch of this type. Most people think they're cheap.
What I saw that was rather eye-opening for me is the effect religion had on people. You might be surprised to know the big risk takers, former addicts, alcoholics and other assorted things tend to go to charismatic denominations. Most such denominations have very defined parameters with ample demonstration of 'God at work' and it seems this is just what keeps these folks in line. In other words, and this sounds bad, but church is their daddy and keeps them in line. .
Those who have pretty much steered clear from risky behavior tend to go with more mainline denominations. Denominations are about as diverse as you can get.
Churches and ministries (almost all) do a great deal for people in their area, There are those that help elderly, help the poor with food or paying their light bill. When the food stamp office directs you to the Ministerial Alliance Food Bank for food to get you by until the food stamps kick in says something. Chances are that corner thrift store is because of a church or ministry. Many times churches let clubs and other non-profits use their facilities free (mostly) to maintain good PR in the neighborhood.
The tax exempt church and ministry (most of them) really do a great deal for their communities and actually help people with a tendency to be a loose cannon to act within the parameters accepted by society in general. If anything, religion gives a code of conduct that promotes good versus negative. At least this is what I observed from several years working in Christian Radio.
While this seemingly would not change if tax-exemption was disallowed, I disagree. So much funding comes because you can write it off your taxes. That includes donating clothing, that old washing machine and such.
I known from being the director of a ministry that you do file a return with the IRS and it's quite extensive, accounting for every penny. And salaries are not sky high. The advisor said we need to pay on the low side to middle of what the same position in the for profit world would pay or risk scrutiny of the IRS. The people getting rich in the ministries and churches are about as many as their are jocks in radio making the big bucks...most overworked and underpaid.
This has been a very civil discussion and I appreciate this. I fully disagree with BamaTX but I support him in making his feelings known.
- Status