Congress, Constitutional Law, Courts, Free Speech, Justice, Politics, Religion, Supreme Court, Uncategorized

Pastors Take on the IRS

Respectfully Submitted by Lawrence Rafferty (rafflaw)-Guest Blogger

In light of the ever-increasing influence on National and local politics by churches and clergy, I was interested in the recent news that over 1,000 churches will be challenging the IRS by telling their parishioners who they want them to vote for in the upcoming national elections.  The event is dubbed “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” by its organizers and it is designed to challenge the IRS on its prohibition of churches from intertwining politics and religion, as a requirement of maintaining their tax-free status.

‘ “It is a head-on constitutional challenge.”  The Johnson amendment in Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code prohibits tax-exempt charities and churches from intervening in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate. The IRS has been reluctant to revoke churches’ tax-exempt status for violating the more than 50-year-old IRS rule, but the agency has issued written warnings to dozens of churches.” Raw Story

The event is slated for October 7th and the organizers claim that they are trying to force the IRS to pull the tax-free status from churches to test the constitutionality of the IRS on what the churches claim is a restriction on the pastors and churches right of free speech.  Of course, not all churches back this challenge of the tax-free laws.  “Americans United for Church and State has pushed back against the event, sending letters to 60,000 houses of worship that urge them to obey federal tax law.  “People don’t join churches because they want to be told how to vote,” said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United. “Our letter reminds religious leaders about what the law requires, why it makes sense and how it could affect them.”  Raw Story

While I back the pastors rights of free speech, I do not agree that churches and religious clergy have the right to free speech from the pulpit and the right to a tax-free status.  If any church wants to tell its followers to back or vote a specific political party, they have the absolute right to do that under the Freedom of Speech.  The real question is can these same churches still claim their tax-free status?

Do Churches and clergy violate the Separation of Church and State when they take advantage of the tax laws as a religious entity, but yet preach for specific God or church friendly candidates from the pulpit?  I know this issue not only brings politicians into conflict, but as we have seen above, it even brings churches into conflict with one another.  Is the solution just banning all political speech from the pulpit, or should the IRS drop all churches tax free status?

Does this discussion put Jefferson’s wall of separation between church and state in jeopardy?  Was Justice Black in error when he backed the Jeffersonian concept in the 1947 Supreme Court decision in Everson V. United States, that also discussed the Reynolds v. United states decision?  “Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups, and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect “a wall of separation between church and State.” Reynolds v. United States, supra, at 164.”  Cornell.edu

I realize that many pastors and members of the clergy for a variety of faiths, routinely “violate” this IRS rule now.  I have actually been in church and heard priests preach for specific candidates or political parties, as well as preach for or against certain government issues.  It personally makes me feel uncomfortable to hear the church being used for such political and partisan purposes.  How does it make you feel?  Is the Separation of Church and State worth protecting?

I also disagreed when priest or nuns run for political office because of the religious vows of obedience to the Bishops and the Pope that they are required to take.  Should any citizen be concerned when any member of the clergy runs for political office?  Without a strong wall separating the Church from the State, can anyone’s religion be safe?  What do you think?

78 thoughts on “Pastors Take on the IRS”

  1. The issue is not whether the church has to pay taxes. The issue with the IRS is whether contributions to the church are tax deductible to the donors. If the IRS rules against the church, the donors lose the ability to deduct their donations on Sched A of the form 1040. For those in the 35% tax bracket, that means that the previous $1,000 donation that only cost $650 now will cost $1,000!!! And certain other trust and post-death contribution schemes will no longer be tax advantaged either.

  6. bettykath 1, September 23, 2012 at 8:09 pm

    rafflaw 1, September 23, 2012 at 6:53 pm

    bettykath,
    I am sorry if I have you arguing with yourself! 🙂
    ——————
    Not to worry. It’s an indication of a good topic on which I could debate either side.

    =====================
    Matt,

    Don’t underestimate the IRS. They are quite capable of going after those who can’t afford a tax lawyer. I had a year when I made no money, zilch. I lived verrrry frugally off of savings. They assessed me taxes, penalties, and interest and provided absolutely no reason for it. I didn’t pay b/c I didn’t owe anything. Finally got hold of a real person, maybe that’s an overstatement, a very nasty person, who also couldn’t provide any documentation or rationale. He disappeared. The IRS didn’t. They took money out of every SS check until they were satisfied. Hundreds of dollars paid on…what? savings on which I had already paid taxes?
    ================================================
    bettykath, kiss mine.

  7. JMQuinn 1, September 23, 2012 at 8:07 pm

    Americans United for the Separation of Church and State is opposed to this and taking it to the IRS. They are religious people, mostly Christian, who support SOCAS.

    http://www.au.org/media/press-releases/colorado-ministry-should-lose-tax-exemption-for-partisan-political-intervention
    ==================================
    The IRS doesn’t amount to squat. They won’t even go after people who use died gasoline (agricultural fuel) in their on road trucks.

    The IRS is a useless governmental piece of garbage.

  11. No tax exemptions for churches. When churches decide, they can use my tax dollars to evangelize not only for their religious beliefs but also WHO THEY SAY GOD WANTS PEOPLE, GOD DEMANDS THAT PEOPLE VOTE FOR, I say that a stupid exemption is being abused. Churches should have to give back all of the money they have saved with this exemption and any money they have taken from the government in grants or in any other way.

  12. raff, Many years ago pre-Roe v Wade I had many arguments with myself about abortion until I found the answer that worked for me. No abortion for me but it’s my decision. I’m not smart enough to decide for anyone else, and, for d…. sure, a bunch of suits in Washington or a state capital aren’t smart enough either. It clarified for me that personal positions and state policy can be two different things. Personal positions can be anything you want (even if illegal if you’re willing to pay the consequences) but they shouldn’t dictate state policy which has to leave room for differing personal positions.

    I haven’t gotten to that point on the current topic.

  13. rafflaw 1, September 23, 2012 at 6:53 pm

    bettykath,
    I am sorry if I have you arguing with yourself! 🙂
    ——————
    Not to worry. It’s an indication of a good topic on which I could debate either side.

    =====================
    Matt,

    Don’t underestimate the IRS. They are quite capable of going after those who can’t afford a tax lawyer. I had a year when I made no money, zilch. I lived verrrry frugally off of savings. They assessed me taxes, penalties, and interest and provided absolutely no reason for it. I didn’t pay b/c I didn’t owe anything. Finally got hold of a real person, maybe that’s an overstatement, a very nasty person, who also couldn’t provide any documentation or rationale. He disappeared. The IRS didn’t. They took money out of every SS check until they were satisfied. Hundreds of dollars paid on…what? savings on which I had already paid taxes?

  15. Seeing that many religious outfits are in the business of rendering unto God what is Caesar’s…
    … Isn’t it about time that these outfits render unto Caesar what has been God’s, then?

  16. lottakatz 1, September 23, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    As to the more pure concept of control I don’t think that’s an issue at all. My tax rate does not control me except that I know I have to pay it or someone at IRS will notice and put me through some mess if I don’t.
    =====================================================
    You might be surprised. They don’t know squat.

  17. Taxes only control a business if the tax laws that apply to a business are complex. The people that own the tavern in my closest mall are independents and their taxes are relatively simple compared to the national chain grocery store or the franchise owned by an offshore clothing store in the same mall. Taxable income is figured differently for each.

    The Catholic church is run financially like a offshore multinational, various geographic and hierarchical divisions get the contributions and Rome ends up with some of it. Their business model (as well as other nationwide churches could change based on the tax law applied or how it was written.

    Taxing churches could work well if the law crafted was a simple % cut at point of origin, period. No business model needs to change to take advantage of anything.

    As to the more pure concept of control I don’t think that’s an issue at all. My tax rate does not control me except that I know I have to pay it or someone at IRS will notice and put me through some mess if I don’t. A flat tax on every church and church organization (using the same definition applied today and used to gain exemption) would do the trick and there wouldn’t be any more coercion than there is today for a church to do ‘something’ to appease the taxman. It would in fact free up churches to participate in the political process as much or as little as they and their congregants liked. I don’t see a problem at all with a tax.

  19. Well said Kraaken.
    AY,
    I am not a fan of religous leaders or officials running for public office while they are a minister, bishop, cardinal, etc. I can remember the grief Kennedy took for being Catholic and people being afraid that he might “answer” to the Pope. Of course, a priest or nun might have a vow of obedience and therefore there could be a conflict of interest, IMO. Isn’t Romney a Mormon “Bishop”? Or is he a former bishop?
    Bron,
    are the union halls exempt from taxation?

  20. Very simple answer. Separation of Church and State. One does not interfere with the other. The government doesn’t involve itself in religion, and the church doesn’t involve itself in politics. The church gets a tax break by upholding that part of the agreement. Since the church has abrogated that agreement, the IRS needs to send them all tax bills and the government needs to see that those bills are collected, church, synagogue, or mosque. One dances to the tune and pays the piper. In this case, the religious institutions have lost the cover of tax-free status by their actions.

Comments are closed.