Skip to main content

View Diary: The Hate Subsidy (45 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think there is a case (4+ / 0-)

    (I want to say California Franchise Tax Board v. Cmr but I need to look) that stands for the proposition that the tax exemption for churches is not required by the First Amendment ( the Bob Jones case above also says about the same thing).  This is really important because if, as the Puplit Freedom day people want, the genesis of the tax exemption ( no pun intended) is in the First Amendment, then the other strings on tax exemption that are imposed by statute (such as the private inurement prohibition and the limits on political activity and lobbying) would not be applicable to churches.  I think the IRS has resisted this interpretation and won to date, although the Religious Right is looking for a test case.

    •  I wasn't trying to imply that the first (0+ / 0-)

      amendment required the tax exemption, but only that those drafting the tax code desired, rightly or wrongly, to protect religion and churches from the potentially destructive power of taxation. It was not a quid pro quo for any good that they allegedly do, for, unlike most exempt orgs, they are not required to do any

      That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

      by enhydra lutris on Mon Nov 26, 2012 at 08:54:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (150)
  • Community (71)
  • Baltimore (68)
  • Bernie Sanders (49)
  • Freddie Gray (38)
  • Civil Rights (38)
  • Elections (27)
  • Hillary Clinton (27)
  • Culture (24)
  • Racism (23)
  • Labor (20)
  • Education (20)
  • Economy (19)
  • Rescued (19)
  • Media (19)
  • Law (19)
  • Science (16)
  • Politics (15)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Barack Obama (14)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site