DU LAWYERS: Church in N.C.

[Hosnon]

What's the case law on tax exempt status? I seem to just find that general support is ok but specific support (candidate/legislation) is not ok.

[freesqueeze]

1. No Lawyer Here ... Never Could Pass a Bar

But I read that this had happened only ONCE, church having tax free ride revoked, when the feds were looking closely at some atheist group in Texas about a year ago.

I wouldn't hold our breath.

I think most extremist churches are OK with shrinking their flock to a smaller, more devout, group of robotons. They all aspire to the Charles Manson model...small in number, but willing to kill for God.

[onenote]

2. not a tax lawyer, but I think the NC church may have crossed the line

I'm not a tax lawyer, but my general understanding is that Churches are broadly barred from endorsing political candidates, making donations or engaging in fundraising on behalf of candidates, distributing statement supporting or opposing a political candidate, or becoming invilved in other activities that may be beneficial or detrimental to any political candidate.

To the extent the pastor of the NC church, in his role as pastor, endorsed Chimpy during the election, I think he crossed the line. And even though the election is now over, dis-inviting Democrats to be members of the Church certainly would seem to constitute an "activity" that would be "detrimental" to Democratic candidates.

I still haven't seen a very clear description of exactly what the pastor did/said and when he did/say it. But I sure hope someone goes after him.

Here's an example of a situation where a church lost its exemption:
In 1992, the Church at Pierce Creek placed an ad in the Washington Times which stated: "Christians Beware: Do not put the economy ahead of the Ten Commandments. Did you know that Gov. Bill Clinton -- supports abortion on demand -- supports the homosexual lifestyle and wants homosexuals to have special rights -- promotes giving condoms to teenagers in public schools? Bill Clinton is promoting policies that are in rebellion to God's laws ... HOW, THEN, CAN WE VOTE FOR BILL CLINTON?" After auditing the church, the IRS revoked the church's tax exemption. The U.S. District court upheld the IRS's revocation of exempt status, stating, "While plaintiffs probably are correct that the revocation has imposed a burden on their ability to engage in partisan political activity .. they have failed to establish that the revocation has imposed a burden on their free exercise of Religion."The United States Court of Appeals subsequently upheld this decision.

onenote

[calimary]

3. Interesting thread over in LBN that might be informative...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1449835

It seems other people aren't taking this lying down, either. And they shouldn't. This church ABSOLUTELY crossed the line. So says this lifelong Catholic.

[Eloriel]

4. Not a lawyer, either, but I know a little about this

Churches are incorporated as 501(c)(3) organizations -- a term from the IRS regs. Other 501(c)(3)s include charities and "educational" organizations -- United Way, N.O.W., Sierra Club, NARAL, etc. (Now, many of these ALSO have 501(c)(4) lobbying organizations and 501(c)(5) PAC affiliated organizations as well, but tax handling for these is very different. The funds between the 3 types for each organization MUST be kept very separate.)

But all these 501(c)(3)s are specifically prohibited from advocating for or against any candidates or party or they could be forced to become a lobbying arm or a PAC witout the same tax advantages (and PACs are the only type or org which can advocate for or against individual candidates and/or political party(ies).

Since I learned about all this (by serving on a state N.O.W. PAC some years ago), other types have been developed, including the hot new 527s, and I frankly don't know all that much about any of them.

IMPORTANT NOTE:
Now obviously, the U.S. is using the tax code to implement one aspect of the separation of church and state. So this is an extremely important thing to look at (as well as other social policy we may be implementing via the tax code) any time any revisions -- especially wholesale sweeping changes like a flat tax -- are being advocated. While it would be nice to make the tax system "more fair," we don't want to get rid of some of its provisions without making sure they're provided for elsewhere.