Bill calls for fee instead of taxes f...

Bill calls for fee instead of taxes for nonprofits

There are 9 comments on the The Indianapolis Star story from Jan 16, 2008, titled Bill calls for fee instead of taxes for nonprofits. In it, The Indianapolis Star reports that:

Hospitals, museums, fraternal clubs and many other nonprofit organizations now exempt from property taxes could have to chip in under a bill in the Indiana House.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Indianapolis Star.

papa geo

United States

#1 Jan 16, 2008
I believe that all property in the state should be assess a fee for fire and police services to help defray the cost the protection the provide.
tax free holy rollers

Indianapolis, IN

#2 Jan 16, 2008
What's wrong with taxing churches? You're going to tax a nonprofit club, but not tax a money-making church? Don't they require public services as well? I'm not seeing the reason for the great "don't tax churches" taboo.

“Victory is Mine”

Since: Jun 07

Greenwood

#3 Jan 16, 2008
When you walk around with your eyes closed you won't see the car you're about to walk in front of either.

Churches that have to pay taxes will be forced to cut back in the charity services that they already provide to the community...
tax free holy rollers wrote:
What's wrong with taxing churches? You're going to tax a nonprofit club, but not tax a money-making church? Don't they require public services as well? I'm not seeing the reason for the great "don't tax churches" taboo.
BearsFanInIndy

Indianapolis, IN

#5 Jan 16, 2008
I would suggest an easier test: find out who the highest paid person is in an organization. If the amount that person is paid is over $100,000 - then the organization can afford to pay taxes
cyberdependent

Indianapolis, IN

#6 Jan 17, 2008
ToolRulesAll wrote:
Churches that have to pay taxes will be forced to cut back in the charity services that they already provide to the community...
<quoted text>
So? Other non-church entities will be forced to cut back in the charity services that they already provide to the community too, so what makes it acceptable for a secular charity to be forced to cut back services but not a faith-based charity? Why the difference in treatment when there isn't a difference in the way they serve the community?
Mike

Indianapolis, IN

#7 Jan 17, 2008
This is as bad an idea as can come from elected officials. When it comes to non-profit hospitals, all politicians see are big buildings. They conveniently turn their brains off to the millions (sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars) of free care that non-profit hospitals provide each year. Just reasd their annual reports, or give them a call. They'll tell you.

I am a member of the Knights of Columbus. We have a big building that primarily houses our bingo operation. We donate the proceeds from the bingo to charity, and we do service projects in the community (which politicians are always invited to, but they just show up to get a picture taken and they don't help out). I imagine politicians want that, too.

I think we should tax politicians' salaries at a 100% tax rate.
Mike

Indianapolis, IN

#8 Jan 17, 2008
tax free holy rollers wrote:
What's wrong with taxing churches? You're going to tax a nonprofit club, but not tax a money-making church? Don't they require public services as well? I'm not seeing the reason for the great "don't tax churches" taboo.
Separation of church and state, friend. Which I presume you support. It works the other way around. Under that principle, religious groups are not subject to the whims of the state. They are "exempt".
Federalist

Jamestown, IN

#9 Jan 17, 2008
The power to tax is the power to destroy.

A lot of these organizations would be put out of "business" if this were to happen. Most just barely break even.

I think they need to really look at tax incentives and whether or not they really do help.
BearsFanInIndy

Indianapolis, IN

#10 Jan 17, 2008
Mike wrote:
<quoted text>
Separation of church and state, friend. Which I presume you support. It works the other way around. Under that principle, religious groups are not subject to the whims of the state. They are "exempt".
That theory would mean that churches and religious organizatons would be above the law. That is not the case. A church school or daycare is subject to the same regulation as any other private school or daycare. Why shouldn't the church be treated like any other land owner?

The freedom of religion claus means that the government cannot establish a state religion. It cannot target religious organizations for laws or regulation, but it does exempt religious organizations from following the law - including tax law.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Lewisville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
kevin richey (Dec '16) 12 min Gobacktoschool 16
Poor perfoming afternoon crew @ quickpix Fri Customer 48
lol lol. mind ya biz Thu Doug 4
It's all about who you know.. Oct 17 ThatsTooFunny 1
Whitney kissee Oct 17 Wowjustwow1984 1
white trash Haley Oct 16 Huh 2
courtney white (Feb '17) Oct 15 KH 40

Lewisville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Lewisville Mortgages