Feed the poor.

Tax them!! They allocate their money to high salaries for their pastors and big buildings. Less than half the tithes go to social improvement for the poor and underprivileged.

Christians, especially, are given to proselytizing wherever they go and doing whatever they do. Their charitable works are often just cover for their missionary zeal. The place to draw the line is easy for me. If someone who is availing themselves of the "charitable" services of an organization and can tell it is a faith based organization rather than just a group of concerned citizens providing the services then that charitable activity should not be tax-exempt. I don't care if they feed 1,000 hungry people a day. If they so much as put up a sign that says "St. Mary's Soup Kitchen" or "1st Methodist Downtown Homeless Shelter" let alone requiring people to listen to a sermon then that activity should not be tax exempt. Why should the ordinary tax-payer support the recruitment of lost souls for a church? Providing a safety net for the indigent is the responsibility of Society not hit and miss charities. If churches are interested in helping the poor they should just pay their taxes giving Society the wherewithal to more efficiently and uniformly help the underprivileged.

a good book on this subject is "god vs the gavel" it goes thru the criteria judges and regulators use for deciding where the line is.

You can't legislate away religion, as tempting as it sounds. I get the idea behind tax exempt status as a protection for freedom of thought and association, but somehow there needs to be some mechanism for 1)Keeping individuals from profiting lavishly off their positions in church hierarchy, and 2) penalizing any sort of political lobbying or campaigning. I am just not sure logistically how to make that operational and fair. Oh, and there is a 3) that is, respecting charity work but not rewarding the use of charity status as a front for proselytizing, as is nauseatingly the case with 700 Club, Focus On The Family, and even the Salvation Army.

Tax exemption happened when churches were poor and a way to help those within. Now I think the whole tax exempt thing anywhere is pointless and just abused. Churches use it to get around paying billions of dollars a year. That is insanity.

Separation of church and state is always a good starting place. From there it's up to you and your own beliefs.

True-Salvation Army being the best example. Christian faith based. Guess you would have to research their profit structure to see if they are charity worth. I think Goodwill is not faith based, where Lutheran Charities is.

Individuals get tax deductions for charitable contributions. Donations made buy an organization towards charitable contributions should also be tax deductible. But a church is a religious organization, not a charitable organization. If a church wants tax exemptions then they should have to file and Report their charitable contributions towards registered charities or real property donations. They should not get tax-exempt status just because they're in church. This has never made any sense to me and I have yet to hear one reasonable argument supporting the idea that having a common belief system relating to the origin and purpose of human life automatically makes you charitable.

Some churches are just personal banks for the people running the show. They’ve come a long way from the days of taking the family in to socialize and throw a dollar in the collection plate to help keep the lights on. There has to be a way to tax those outright thieves. I don’t see any reason to tax an assembly of people who get together and share their beliefs, but when pastors are getting rich and paying no tax and owning millions in tax free property, it isn’t fair to the rest of us.

I personally believe there should be no tax breaks, exemptions, write offs, credits, or any other words or names associated with changing your tax burden. All of those benefit the rich disproportionately and ultimate raise the rates on everyone else. Come up with a fair bracket system that will be lower for everyone, and those that are currently abusing the loophole system will pay their fair share.

I can’t get past your first urge to Tax ‘Em! ...with ‘doze ‘em’ a close second.. Here in the US, I believe their excuse for not being taxed has been due to their ‘separation from state,’ with the state/ government being the taxing authority. As they’ve for decades now crossed that line - isn’t it time to pay up?

Can you imagine how fast that would shut em down … or at least shut em up..? It’s been interesting asking a politician about that, though I rarely would/ do, as it’d be the kiss of death to even entertain the idea. Though, what a revenue stream for those Republican Deficit Hawks

I say its time for the state and government to stop paying religions any money at all! No tax exemptions. Maybe they should even sell of some of those nice churches on prime real estate!

It should be project specific. Give exemptions to the charity projects that these organisations implement. So tax exemption for the project and not the organisation.

Do politicians get taxed? I know the official Australian Defense forces or ADF isn't. Now there is lines but that is in percentage. So it isn't surprising that Of-course if you make 100 grand in your charity less is taken by tax than a million. Is it unfair to not tax defense forces? If you're making a certain amount it is fair to. Churches should probably go same deal.
Whatever the case tax should go to solving problems, making roads, supporting hospitals, science, education, creative grants are usually paid by company not government. If you want to grow more put money into agriculture. Defense forces are interesting because the number of people alone in it racks up a lot of money a year so you'd want to see spending after that point. I'm going to stop now before I write the draft of an essay.

Religious exemption from taxation is a necessary part of religious freedom. This principle was established in the very early days of our republic. The state cannot use its taxing authority to repress or promote religious practice. This includes atheism and agnosticism. We are free to practice as we wish. All such practice is exempt. The concept of legimacy is avoided and the US IRS has established guidelines to use when examining whether a claimed religious practice can be considered legitimate for tax exempt status. The process is purposely subjective and courts have been very broad in their rulings when matters of conscience are involved. There is an IRS publication that explains all of this along guidelines for establishing a church or other religious organisation for tax exempt status.

A genuine charity should:-

1. Not be directly connected to any religion
2. Use it's collections for the benefit of the unfortunates it claims to help - admittedly charities have genuine administration costs, but their financial records should be fully open to public scrutiny and their charity status should depend on the genuine nature of the aid they give

A church collecting money of which 'some' might, possibly, go to good causes - but some go to the church - and exactly what goes where is nicely hidden, is NOT charity.