A Wrecked Church!

[AreYouReady?]

Originally Posted by Sam

by allowing a "church" to be tax exempt,
couldn't that be considered an establishment of religion by the state?

No because the Internal Revenue Service is part of the Federal Reserve, which is not an elected governmental department.

Federal Reserve Board: As the nation’s central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.

http://factcheck.org/2008/03/federal...ank-ownership/


Is the Federal Reserve not under Constitutional Authority thus the reason why they can make rules and regulations regarding the finances of a church?

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by StillStanding

Yep! Here is the quote:

"I write this in hopes of setting a few facts straight for the record. 1.) The church has never been affliated with the ALJC or the UPC. 2.) The church was set up as a 501c3. 3) The church has always had a board of trustees. 4.) The church has always had bylaws. 5.) The original bylaws are not, I repeat, are NOT the bylaws that are in place now or are being used now. The bylaws were changed after the Bishop became ill and mentally incapacitated. They have been changed multiple times to fit the WILL of the daughter. 6.) One by one the board members were slowly replaced by "yes men". They follow her and her "boyfriend's" every instruction. This is when the bylaws and everything else was changed. 7.) The daughter had complete control of the dad including his medicine. She is a former nurse. She also has power of attorney of the entire estate. 8.) As per the previous points, this left other members of the family POWERLESS."

I was assuming this was correct!

So, if there's profit being made on the rental property that should be taxed correct?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by AreYouReady?

No because the Internal Revenue Service is part of the Federal Reserve, which is not an elected governmental department.

Federal Reserve Board: As the nation’s central bank, the Federal Reserve derives its authority from the U.S. Congress. It is considered an independent central bank because its decisions do not have to be ratified by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branch of government, it does not receive funding appropriated by Congress, and the terms of the members of the Board of Governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.

http://factcheck.org/2008/03/federal...ank-ownership/


Is the Federal Reserve not under Constitutional Authority thus the reason why they can make rules and regulations regarding the finances of a church?

Well.... A A A A A C T U A L L Y... the IRS is a private corporation registered in the US Virgin Islands and isn't even lawfully a governmental entity... buuuuut... we'll just let that one slide on by...




The IRS does not make rules and regulations regarding churches, period. the IRS in their publication for churches states so. The courts have routinely held that government is prohibited by the 1st Amendment from even defining what a church is or is not.

A CORPORATION, on the other hand, and ESPECIALLY a 501(c)3 Corporation, are a whole nuther ball of wax. THOSe things are created by the state or federal government upon application with the state or federal Secretary of State. And as creations of the civil government, are subject to whatsoever 'reasonable and prudent' rules and regulations the government comes up with.

Churches are outside the jurisidiction of federal or state control as far as finances go.

Personal incomes, by the way, are a separate issue. (The Tax Man cometh!)

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

So, if there's profit being made on the rental property that should be taxed correct?

Depends on who's name is on the deeds to those properties.

If the 501(c)3 corp's name is the deed holder, then they would qualify as income, but not necessarily taxable.

By the way, RENTAL INCOME is pretty much non-taxable, once you take out for depreciation. This is why people who properly invest in rental real estate make lots of money and pay little to no taxes.

[CC1]

Churches are going to face tougher scrunity regarding their non profit status for a lot of different reasons. One of them is an agenda against churches but another reason is abuse of non profit status.

They recently cracked down on Yoga studios in California because they were claiming to be "churches" and were claiming non profit status.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by CC1

Churches are going to face tougher scrunity regarding their non profit status for a lot of different reasons. One of them is an agenda against churches but another reason is abuse of non profit status.

They recently cracked down on Yoga studios in California because they were claiming to be "churches" and were claiming non profit status.

What's sad is that churches are already exempt from reporting. But once you claim 'non profit' you open a big ole can of worms, and lots of people will get burned because of unscrupulous charlatans.

Of course, if the tax structure wasn't so whacked out to begin with, none of this would really matter.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by CC1

Churches are going to face tougher scrunity regarding their non profit status for a lot of different reasons. One of them is an agenda against churches but another reason is abuse of non profit status.

They recently cracked down on Yoga studios in California because they were claiming to be "churches" and were claiming non profit status.

Abuse of non-profits is likely a much larger reasons than an agenda against churches. I think most people who have an agenda against churches have that agenda because of abuse in the first place.

[StillStanding]

Christ Church in Nashville built a new building in 2005 that included a gym and work-out area. They had sports leagues rent the gym, and they charged a small monthly fee for church members to use the workout facilities for extra income to help meet their expenses.

The IRS came in and told them they had to pay taxes on the portion of the building used as a gym and workout area! They now lease it out to the YMCA and let them deal with the tax issues. They are still responsible for the back taxes, plus penalty and interest, for the past years of the gym's existence.

BTW, the new building had a book store with a coffee shop inside, and they had to shut down the bookstore and move it back into the main building to keep from paying taxes on it too!

If the "wrecked church" is indeed a 501(c)(3) organization, there could be enough abuse of their non-profit standing that the IRS could come in and do major damage!

[ILG]

I would just like to say how glad I am that there have been so few posts telling members, past members and others to "quit whining, stop gossiping, you are bitter, you are backslid" yada yada yada. These issues need to be discussed because it seems that the only thing that stops abuse is exposure.

[Rapture 1]

Still Standing, all correct I believe, except that the church was in ALJC for many years. The pastor was also in ALJC, dropped out a few years ago, joined UPC for a short while, then dropped out of that. When someone checked about the church not being in ALJC, he hadn't payed the fees. And of course he wasn't the one paying the bills!