Posted by Bob Janova at 4:14pm Mar 28 '13There's a good argument for charitable institutions to be tax-free – not just income/corporation tax (which as non-profits they'd not be paying anyway, but other taxes like commercial property rates. And if something that is having a genuine benefit to society (so it passes a secular charitable status test) happens to have a religious element, well then that's fine.
But I don't see why you should get an exemption simply for being religious. There are lots of religious institutions that have zero or negative impact on society as a whole: it's crazy that you are subsidising the likes of Westboro Baptist, or that I'm subsidising the Finsbury Park mosque.
And then if you exempt 'religion' you have to define exactly what a 'religion' is, and when it is just a cult. Should Muslims get an exemption? What about Druids? Or voodoo witches? What about Jedi? Wherever you draw that line, it will be arbitrary and unfair. Far better to simply apply a charitable status test based on whether an institution is actually doing good, without considering its religious aspect.
But I don't see why you should get an exemption simply for being religious. There are lots of religious institutions that have zero or negative impact on society as a whole: it's crazy that you are subsidising the likes of Westboro Baptist, or that I'm subsidising the Finsbury Park mosque.
And then if you exempt 'religion' you have to define exactly what a 'religion' is, and when it is just a cult. Should Muslims get an exemption? What about Druids? Or voodoo witches? What about Jedi? Wherever you draw that line, it will be arbitrary and unfair. Far better to simply apply a charitable status test based on whether an institution is actually doing good, without considering its religious aspect.
No - Bob Janova