- Reaction score
- 27,104
- Points
- 1,090
c_canuk said:Dataperson
Tax exemption doesn’t mean you have to pay for the tax exempt groups, it means that those who are tax exempt don’t have to pay the government anything just to exist. If the church doesn’t consume any government resources, what right does the Government have to tax them?
Bingo fundraisers aren’t to fund keggers, it’s usually to provide building upkeep which keeps your property value up. If it’s not for building up keep it’s a charitable works project.
The reason churches get charity tax exemption is because they are charities, just because you don't want to be a part of a particular charity doesn't mean it shouldn't be given tax exempt status.
I go to a church (very infrequently) that even though it needs almost a million in capital repairs (old stone building from the 1800s or earlier) is still providing a safe haven and hot lunch program for a school in the worst part of Saint John.
This school is where some misfit children get their last chance before the system gives up on them. Some of these children are too much burden for other schools, either behaviourally or because they have disabilities that make them difficult to accommodate.
Providing a safe place free from persecution and a free hot meal (the only one some of these kids get each day), is reasonable cause to grant tax exemption.
The minute churches loose tax exemption status is the minute they all close, the property tax alone on the churches which are a part of our country's heritage would be too much for people to maintain as well as provide funds for charitable works abroad.
You’d have church members meeting in basements while the structures(that were put up board by board and paid for by previous generations of members of that church) sitting empty, demolished or sold off as commercial space. I feel that is pretty unfair and grounds to claim persecution.
Look up the definition of "opportunity cost". By exempting one group you raise the cost to other groups. I do not support charitable deductions for religious institutions - if they are worthwhile their adherents will fund them anyways; if not, well, why should the state subsidize it?
But you assume a church has greater rights than any others. Anyone else unable to pay their taxes sells and moves. Why should any one business, person or organization claim a greater set of rights? If a church can't afford their buildings, well, sell it and move somewhere cheaper.
If you choose to belong to such a group, more power to you. I respect that choice. But do not expect me to subsidize it, directly or indirectly.
EDIT: TO remove gratuitous personal attack.