• themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, but well-connected companies use regulatory capture to structure taxes as a burden on their competition.

        Consider for a moment how churches would be taxed. Maybe they are taxed on their assets. That would disproportionately affect larger churches with valuable real estate holdings, like the Catholic and Mormon churches. Maybe the donations they receive are taxed. That disadvantages newer churches which don’t have corporate investments or endowments. Tax land? Hurt cemeteries. Tax salaries? Favor Quaker meeting houses where there is no specific pastor.

        Look, I don’t think churches should be involved in politics. Any that donate to candidates or endorse a party should lose their tax exempt status, because they are no longer churches. But a blanket removal of all tax exemptions for religious organizations is a threat to religious freedom. It would allow the religious leaders in government to play favorites and pick winners, kind of like they do now already.

          • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Is that what I said?

            Tax code is applied by politicians. Do you really expect Christian Conservatives to fairly tax Muslims and Sikhs and Hindus at the same rates as their own churches? Freedom of Religion cannot exist when political leaders are able to tax competing religions into oblivion.

    • mateomaui@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      To some degree, agreed, but your original assertion is still wrong. Unless you count all the devoutly religious people in Congress, and they already have that representation.