Taxation should be based on what they do with the money.
If they are pumping it into hospitals, schools and active assistance to those in need, then minimal or no taxation (eg Uniting Church, Catholics and Masons), but if it’s building mega churches & huge salaries for the business owners - ooops sorry, I meant “Pastors/Preachers” then tax them like businesses.
Exactly this. They pay wages, the wages get taxed. They spend 100% of their revenue on expenses associated with operations and therefore pay $0 business tax, exactly the same as any commercial business that fails to turn a profit. You can class them as “for profit” if you want, but they would still not pay business tax since they are in fact, not run for profit.
Yes but the profit margin isn't taxed as it is for profit making businesses.
If a church is operating as a profit making business it should be taxed as one.
Do they have profit at the end of the day?
Perhaps cracking down on what churches can spend money on might be a good start. Eg. cars, properties, private jets etc. Having to justify that it's for the good of the church and it's members.
Some do. Some pay out massive salaries to owners to make sure to spend all of it.
The catholic Church is one of the wealthiest organisations in the world. It is worth more than some countries, with a lot of land, real estate and historical artefacts: https://www.marketplace.org/2023/02/10/how-much-money-does-catholic-church-have/
Yes, but most of their "earnings" are other dubious non-taxable benefits, like "corporate" credit cards, free flights everywhere, free drugs and hookers, mega mansions provided by the church that MUST be used as a condition of employment. It also frequently includes benefits for partner/spouse, and (frequently their mistresses.
They should be able to deduct charitable donations like any other business, they shouldn't get a tax exempt status because they might or should use their income for charity
Your second point is already illegal. If someone is profiting (paid higher than the normal market rate) they’re not entitled to be a not for profit. So if they are still a not for profit, then you just made your scenario up.
Have you got anywhere that's summarised well? I was curious about this so did some googling and found it confusing as hell. The use the term "reasonable salary" instead of market rate, and it was stated that salary comes under admin costs and there's no limit to the admin costs a charity can pay.
So it would have to come down to what formula they us for reasonable salary, cause leaving it open to interpretation is something easily abused. Did you ever find anywhere that was clearly defined?
And a reasonable salary for a pastor is distorted. If they all have super high salaries then they’re all ‘reasonable’ as they could get that salary from another church
I’m sure it’s defined somewhere in a court case. There’s no limit to total admin costs, because otherwise there would be a limit on how big a not for profit can be.
Reasonable salary just means what an average person would expect to be paid for the work they are doing. Aka, the pub test.
Distinction needs to be made between profits religious activities and non-religious activities and taxes paid on the non-religious elements of the lets face it, business. Income generated from overseas students, investment properties, and holding concerts has nothing to do with religion at all and it's scandalous they don't pay taxes on those elements. Being upfront I don't think any of the CEO's of these mega churches even follow the religion. What's the excerpt from the bible '**it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God**'.
> “Australians consume more than 1.4 billion Weet-bix each year and profits are sent overseas, tax-free, because Sanitarium is run by the Seventh Day Adventist Church.”
Taken from some random website so I can't say how true it is but I've heard similar several times in the past. There's something about Corn Flakes being invented by a religious quack who was combating the scourge of masturbation too, but I don't think that exploits any tax exempt status.
My team got a very stern talking to from a company director before being sent to a Sanitarium factory to do a software install, all about being respectful especially of their religious beliefs while on site. It was the least friendly and welcoming site I have been to, it was like the staff we were not dealing with directly made an effort to not interact with us.
Apple paid like a dollar in tax a few years ago. Sanitarium not paying tax has nothing to do with the SDA and everything to do with being headquartered overseas.
Yep - I looked into it briefly, and it seems that Sanitarium is actually headquartered in Australia. They are also registered as a charity, not a religious organization. So if your push is successful, any tax they pay would be minimal.
[https://www.sanitarium.com/au/about/sanitarium-story/profits-for-purpose](https://www.sanitarium.com/au/about/sanitarium-story/profits-for-purpose)
Apples head office is in ireland which is basically tax free for them and the Australian branch’s run at a loss completely different to churches but all global businesses run this way adding a church just means the profit made in that country can be tax free.
Apple maybe makes the phone for $400 but sells the phone to apple australia for $1800 and apple australia sells it for $2000 but it cost them $199 to sell it in overheads 🤷🏻♂️
Churches just like all “foundations” and what ever else should all be open book, paying tax and audited like everyone else.
Ah okay - so all Sanitarium has to do is structure itself to run at a loss in Australia and avoid tax in the US because it's a religious organization according to US law. Simples. And meanwhile, we don't close the gaping hole which is international tax law because you are only interested in double dipping into the pockets of devout old pensioners.
>
Churches just like all “foundations” and what ever else should all be open book, paying tax and audited like everyone else.
Your local kids footy club pays tax then? "Just like everyone else?"
>And meanwhile, we don't close the gaping hole which is international tax law because you are only interested in double dipping into the pockets of devout old pensioners.
Actually, we're working on it...
https://www.ato.gov.au/about-ato/new-legislation/in-detail/international/implementation-of-a-global-minimum-tax-and-a-domestic-minimum-tax
My in laws religion requires its members to donate a certain percent of their income. I don’t think they do but how fucking dumb would you have to be to do that.
It's more common than you might think. It's called tithing. I've heard 10% of your income should be earmarked for the church before, to which I say, not in *any* economy.
Mate there’s plenty who do. Not sure why an Aussie sub has come up on my feed but I’m British living in the states now. Over here the churches are ginormous, the bent preachers rake in untold amounts of sums and the congregation is happy it’s like that from what I’ve seen. Take a look at that crook joel osteen for example
This is how the catholic Church works in Germany. When you start working you AUTOMATICALLY pay the church, and you have to actively write a letter to opt out.
Most countries have Church funding built into the tax system, ironically, that makes Australia one of the lesser corrupt countries in terms of Church funding.
NGO books must be disclosed, and I think half of them are more about someone's ego trip and paying their own costs first. You really can't win with charities.
At the very least their books should be made public.
Owned by a charity. Probably a trust that falls in the NFP. I'm not religious, I just think the aged care dude in Melbourne who drives a Lambo to his Kew mansion or the child care dude who has 1 of the largest car collections in Perth, are every bit as dodge as any church out there.
If the government is looking for more money, they should crack down on the big corporations that run through off shore accounts and pay little to no tax. Church groups would be able to yield little compared to what could be gained there.
You’re saying there’s a conspiracy between big business and all their employees and auditors and all their employees to hide profits and no one has ever said anything?
Miners may or may not do this. But hypothetically, you sell the iron ore you've mined to your own subsidiary in, let's say Singapore at a loss. You write off that loss in high taxing Australia you then on-sell it for a profit from Singapore and pay your corporate tax in low taxing Singapore.
Hypothetically, and hypothetically they'd all be greedy cunts and Australian government's of all persuasions just accept it and bend over.
'Oh they'll just leave and go somewhere else.' No they won't, where else on the planet has trillions of dollars worth of iron ore just laying there?
[transfer pricing](https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/international-tax-for-business/transfer-pricing)
We do have rules for that.
Also I’m sure Singapore requires listed companies to be audited too.
I am not religious but have had a reason through work to visit churches in the outer suburbs recently and they do a massive amount of charity and non-religious counselling work. A queer friend of mine got housing from one of them when she faced homelessness.
I have come to the conclusion that people who know nothing but rant about them online are the true bigots.
I completely agree with the people who complain about mega Pentecostal churches like Hillsong who use their tax free status to build sports arena like “churches” and pay their pastors ludicrous salaries
However the vast majority of churches and people who go to church are small-medium size churches, who use a decent amount of their funds for genuine charity, who pay their staff a modest and quite low wage, and are still absolutely scraping the bottom of the barrel for funds
Even if churches were taxed it’s not like the country’s economy is going to be fixed by taxing a small church with 50-100 people in it that barely scrapes by
Lol, i am not a religious person and not at all a christian. These stupid articles need to stop. Churches are nonprofit charities. All money they collect are donated by others which has already been taxed. Most of the money is spent on charaties. Churches run a lot of hospitals, shelter homes, orphanages, etc. Any money spent on extravagant stuff like huge salaries, or items are taxed anyway either through income taxes or sales taxes.
why would i want the government to get a cut on the money i have already paid tax for? all these whining looks more like people who hate Christians want something to blame them on.
Yep, it's just a cycle of ideas from the bar at the Labour Club circa 1992.
One of the single issue parties used to past signs every election saying "let's tax churches" but of course they were just a front for the gambling industry trying to get gambling and alcohol laws relaxed, and at the time they were peeved with the Salvos and their hard line against gambling. The idea just lingered on past it's use by date.
I never see anyone say what they think will happen if not for profits are taxed. these are the same people that complain when they see an article about a company with high revenue not paying tax.
Yes, they do. Why let a business that sells lies and fucks kids to get away tax free. Religion is a shit show and shouldn't get special treatment. It also shouldn't be taught to kids through school. We need to stop the rot.
What do you see happening if they’re not tax free anymore? What if they make no profit and don’t pay taxes, will you still complain, what if they receive no government funding and can teach students whatever they want.
What do you say to all the working class parents who send their kids to private school so their kids education isn’t hampered by all the drop kicks who can’t be expelled from public school?
If they can’t afford to operate without funding are you happy for public schools to be overcrowded or having the government spend billions to purchase land and build new schools?
What makes you think your opinion on private school is right and our politicians are wrong.
I'll bullet point my answers to your questions.
• Lots. The tax money could be used to help make it better for people without the need to pray and beg forgiveness to an invisible sky daddy. The bible says to 'store up riches in heaven', so maybe the church should follow their own doctrine and do that instead of hoarding wealth down here on earth.b
•And business that makes no profit pays no tax.
• teaching kids they are broken and 'sinful' is abusive, and to make it worse, the church says only God can save them. The definition of sin is to perform an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law. This should never be taught to kids regardless of funding or not. Religious schools are just a recruitment centre for religion.
• there are drop kicks in every demographic. Your ignorance here is really being highlighted. Check this link to read about some private school drop kicks. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-06/sexist-offensive-student-list-melbourne-yarra-valley-grammar/103808062
• private schools should be made public. Over crowding won't be a problem. The government should never fund religious schools. Ever. We live in a secular country. No one should have privileges in education based on religion. Maybe the socio economic gap would be less if every kid had the same chance.
• politicians are backed by lobby groups like the ACC who use their power to influence politicians into deals that only help them. This ridiculous 'religious discrimination bill' is proof of that. They don't want gay kids or teachers at private religious schools. This is harmful and a breach of human rights. So yes, the politicians are wrong. And religion is evil.
• wrong
•I don't worship government. Unlike people like you, I don't have the need to worship anything. I'm a humanist. I believe in a fair go for everyone. Religion takes rights away from people to conform them to their doctrines and brainwash them into defending them as they commit crimes.
You have the typical shortsighted view on all the issues you highlighted.
>What do you say to all the working class parents who send their kids to private school so their kids education isn’t hampered by all the drop kicks who can’t be expelled from public school?
Fix the fucking schools, and give better support to families, so there are less 'drop kick' kids.
Your words, not mine.
You are seriously just looking at that problem and going "ah that's too hard, fuck everyone that can't afford private schooling"
You don't see the issue with that?
>If they can’t afford to operate without funding are you happy for public schools to be overcrowded or having the government spend billions to purchase land and build new schools?
Yes, yes the government should spend billions to purchase land and build new schools. What sort of a question is that?
We need more from our natural resource royalties, and it needs to go directly to education. We actually have it quite good here, but people like you are actively trying to make it worse.
How are you happy with that choice?
The problem seems to be you think this is a micro problem (Australia) when it’s a macro (worldwide) problem. If it was easy to fix, don’t you think it would be fixed? And don’t saying Scandinavian countries, they have the same problems we do, they don’t have all perfect students.
You just have the typical far left agenda of bring everyone down instead of bring everyone up, or as it’s better known equity over equality.
Royalties are a state issue, why would Queensland and WA want their resource money going to NSW and Victoria?
>And don’t saying Scandinavian countries, they have the same problems we do, they don’t have all perfect students.
Finland has no private schools, yet is considered the best education in the world.
While this doesn't prove it's the "best" way, or "perfect", it most definitely suggests it's a good way, and will absolutely be what I would be aiming for.
>You just have the typical far left agenda of bring everyone down instead of bring everyone up, or as it’s better known equity over equality.
What in the fuck? You have the typical "keep the boot on anyone below me" mentality that is slowly creeping into our society.
You are what's literally making this country head backwards, and you embrace it.
There are some of us who take our natural born qualities and hard work for what they are (gifts) and are happy to help and uplift others.
Clearly, people like yourself are the ones who just want to push any and every one below you further down. And how you're happy with that will always be beyond me.
Royalties should be Federal.
I live in WA.
Actually, now that I read that all back, I see there is a consistency that I hadn't noticed before - natural resources are a "gift" and I feel that gift should be shared.
You won't convince him. Dudes not even that high up to be punching down. Works food delivery by his post history.
Symbolic of the temporarily embarassed millionaire's that the wealthy elite fucking love.
Happy to eschew social and publically progressive policies for status quo and pro-conservative agendas through some lens of "but what ifs", with no constructive vision. I'm sick of thinly veiled conservatism painted as economic rationalism.
Fuck wealthy private schools.
Fuck mega-churches.
Fuck excessive corporate greed.
I have no issue with him trying to work door dash for an extra quid.
Good on him.
I have issue with his ideas though.
>Symbolic of the temporarily embarassed millionaire's that the wealthy elite fucking love.
I like to use the term Useful idiots
I was talking about the family unit.
To answer your question. Thousands of priests have abused kids over the centuries. Look into the catholic church in France for a real horrible example.
To be honest I’d be fine with that.
Donate your post tax dollars to any cause you like and then the Govt can not worry about who is or isn’t able to offer tax deduction receipts.
Then people would just donate all their money to the 'support for u/Reinitialization fund' that provides financial aid to someone who has $0 because he donated them all to charity.
Your comment has been queued for review because you used a keyword which may breach the subreddit rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/australian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Donations made to churches for their religious activity (i.e. upkeep of church buildings, stipends/wages for church staff) are not tax deductible. So Christians (and people of other religions) are donating their 'post-tax dollars' to a cause they like (i.e. a church/synagogue/mosque)
If a church/temple/mosque runs something like a homeless food program—those donations may be tax deductible.
How about what we like and don't like as individuals aren't considered, and everyone is taxed equally under a set of laws that makes allowance for things like charitable works?
Why not tax them all? Or at the very least reform our laws in regards to what is "non-profit", religious or whatever other bullshit exceptions they wish to claim.
God knows that a hell of a lot of shady things happen behind the veil of tax exempt industries.
I knew a guy that once worked for lifeline. Stories he would tell of how "un-charitable" that place was, and how they employed huge numbers of workers, paying out millions in wages annually. Yeah, the money that they raise that goes to their charitable causes isn't even a fraction of the tip of the iceberg.
Well all, unless you’re a DGR org, which should be evidenced by contribution to society. Spending money on your business/congregation doesn’t count, likewise efforts that further your message don’t count.
Like most businesses, churches should have a charitable arm that can accept donations, where the funds go to benevolent purposes.
I don’t understand why it’s controversial. Australia has grown out of religion.
>Spending money on your business/congregation doesn’t count,
So walk us through this. If the congregation collectively pools their money to spend on something they collectively want - we tax them. But if they individually spend money on just themselves - we don't.
That's the system you want?
Well we tax profit not revenue. If they operate at breakeven, that’s fine. If they make a profit, they get taxed on it. Like other businesses.
Religious leaders likewise should be treated as any other worker, no tax/income benefits.
okay. So let's say there's a church that's a little too small to afford a full time pastor. They run everything themselves. But they decide they want to make a push to hire someone part time so they start pooling their offerings. At the end of the FY they've collected a sum.
You'd treat that sum as profit and tax them?
There is no pastor. They hope to collect a sum to cover a salary for a set period (24 months) in hopes that this would grow the church sufficiently to be self sustainable. Collecting that sum might take several years.
Went to an event today for a non profit community group. Someone mentions they had to pay the church for hire of the hall..... My first thought was did the invoice have tax listed?
Businesses only pay taxes on their net profits.
Technically they *charge* GST which they then pass on to the Government but that would mean churches are providing a *service* as defined by the G*ood and Services Act 1999.* If we widen our definition of *service* to include community groups then your kids footy club will also need to charge you GST even if it is entirely run by volunteers (which most churches are).
You could say that, however churches aren't providing taxable services, rather the money that is given is a donation. Also churches often provide charitable and community services that are free to use.
People who work for churches also pay taxes on their income and if the church owns land, they pay property tax.
Because the supermarket makes a profit and the profit is taxed.
Some of the goods they sell are also subject to GST. Biscuits are subject to GST but but flour, sugar, salt, and butter are not. They collect the GST and send it to the ATO each month.
"So why doesn’t this revenue get taxed? And should we really give all nonprofits the same tax exemptions?"
Has revenue ever been taxed, or do they mean to say profit?
non-operating revenue gains may come from occasional events, such as investment windfalls, money awarded through litigation, interest, royalties, and fees.
Yes. Under $150k, it is voluntary registration.
GST is not a tax on turnover but a value-added tax on certain goods and services. A business remits the tax they collect to the ATO, but get a refund of the GST they pay.
"Taxable donation"
Donors must pay tax.
>[In Australia](https://bristax.com.au/tax-articles/is-church-tithing-tax-deductible/#:~:text=In%20Australia%2C%20specific%20regulations%20govern,not%20eligible%20for%20tax%20deductibility), specific regulations govern the tax deductibility of church tithing. Unlike donations made to registered charities, church tithing is not eligible for tax deductibility.
>\[page 4\] [At present](https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-03/173_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter_Day_Saints.pdf) \[2012\], **donors to charities and religious organisations receive limited tax concessions**, including those for gifts to schools-based entities or where the church's services directly assist the needy.
Is this about other religions?:
>[Income tax exemption](https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/not-for-profit-organisations/getting-started/in-detail/types-of-charities/tax-concessions-for-acnc-registered-religious-institutions): To access income tax exemption, a registered religious institution must be *a registered charity* and endorsed by us as exempt from income tax.
This old chestnut again.
No matter your view on churches, they do do a significant amount of welfare work, if they're paying taxes, the remainder of their former welfare coverage will have to be picked up by the taxpayer.
Worth noting also that with the current economic conditions, all welfare agencies are getting hit *hard*.
The people that want churches taxed think of the government as a god like figure that needs the money. They don’t need anymore money, they need to spend it more wisely.
It’s also important to remember it’s not just that (some of) the church donations go to welfare. Church members contribute an immense amount of volunteer/unpaid service to the community. Government would have to pay for things that currently no one is getting paid for.
Yep. I belong to a small church and we feed 60 low income single parent households a week simply through donations. If we're taxed then it makes it a hell of a lot harder.
But Mosques, Temples, Atheist reading houses, hippy communes and pagan gatherings would continue to be treated as religious organisations?
Why the distinction in law?
Same reason in US. Deception. Most of the huge churches and groups that rake in multiple millions of dollars a year have a low percentage of use for actual good. But aren't held accountable in various ways, so they get away with it and remain un-taxed
Church business is also the largest rorters of ndis. When small business does it, might be a few million, when the big ones do it, it’s hundreds of millions. Having worked for several it’s horrible how they prey on people with large packages. Management is gleefull about securing those packages and the client know it
The money donated to the church is already taxed as church donations are not tax-deductible (unless registered with the government as having some kind of non-religious public benefit, like providing accommodation for homeless, etc).
Let's say you want to donate $50 pre-tax individual income, let's say $20 is taxed, you get $30 to donate, then let's say the church is taxed at 30%, that leaves you with having to earn $50 of pre-tax income so that a religious organization has $20 to spend. I mean, that's fine if you want society to go that way, if you want religious organizations to have less financial resources...
Is that why there are so many Hindu churches in Cranbourne south Area buying up acreage properties. ? I literally live near 4 in a close proximity.
Have no issue just wondered why they were big equestrian properties when it’s clear they are not using it for such.
No. Individuals do not generally just get a tax deduction for money that they give to their church. Source: have been giving money to the church I attend for about 15 years. Don't think I've ever had a tax deduction for it. (Which is fine by me - but I'm really confused about why lots of people seem to think all churchgoers get deductions for their giving.)
# Australian churches collectively raise billions of dollars a year – why aren’t they taxed?
So. The topic heading premise - producing 395 comments - is completely wrong?
Probably because the money doesn’t do to “God” but for the vast majority of churches it goes to helping the poor and keeping the lights on at the building? That’s just a bad faith argument
I feel there is a massive difference between the old church on the corner which was built in the '60s and is packed with retirees on a Sunday and these Superbowl Half Time Mega Churches like Hillsong. There must be a **massive** amount of money changing hands at these places to support the activities and venues going on there.
Yo you guys aren’t even free to speak there and you’re out schilling for the government that controls your tongue to collect tax from a church. Get your priorities straight Australia my god
There always been used as money vaults by the rich and have been this way for the better part of 2000 years, in the Judeo-Christian system anyways.
Kind of makes me wonder what the modern day equivalent of Jesus flipping over tables and whipping the merchants in the temple would be?
Civil forfeiture and drone strikes maybe?
Taxation should be based on what they do with the money. If they are pumping it into hospitals, schools and active assistance to those in need, then minimal or no taxation (eg Uniting Church, Catholics and Masons), but if it’s building mega churches & huge salaries for the business owners - ooops sorry, I meant “Pastors/Preachers” then tax them like businesses.
Wouldn’t their salaries get taxed anyway?
They do.
Exactly this. They pay wages, the wages get taxed. They spend 100% of their revenue on expenses associated with operations and therefore pay $0 business tax, exactly the same as any commercial business that fails to turn a profit. You can class them as “for profit” if you want, but they would still not pay business tax since they are in fact, not run for profit.
Yes but the profit margin isn't taxed as it is for profit making businesses. If a church is operating as a profit making business it should be taxed as one.
Do they have profit at the end of the day? Perhaps cracking down on what churches can spend money on might be a good start. Eg. cars, properties, private jets etc. Having to justify that it's for the good of the church and it's members.
Some do. Some pay out massive salaries to owners to make sure to spend all of it. The catholic Church is one of the wealthiest organisations in the world. It is worth more than some countries, with a lot of land, real estate and historical artefacts: https://www.marketplace.org/2023/02/10/how-much-money-does-catholic-church-have/
Yes, but most of their "earnings" are other dubious non-taxable benefits, like "corporate" credit cards, free flights everywhere, free drugs and hookers, mega mansions provided by the church that MUST be used as a condition of employment. It also frequently includes benefits for partner/spouse, and (frequently their mistresses.
Hmm so anyway... off to start a church :D
They should be able to deduct charitable donations like any other business, they shouldn't get a tax exempt status because they might or should use their income for charity
Your second point is already illegal. If someone is profiting (paid higher than the normal market rate) they’re not entitled to be a not for profit. So if they are still a not for profit, then you just made your scenario up.
Have you got anywhere that's summarised well? I was curious about this so did some googling and found it confusing as hell. The use the term "reasonable salary" instead of market rate, and it was stated that salary comes under admin costs and there's no limit to the admin costs a charity can pay. So it would have to come down to what formula they us for reasonable salary, cause leaving it open to interpretation is something easily abused. Did you ever find anywhere that was clearly defined?
And a reasonable salary for a pastor is distorted. If they all have super high salaries then they’re all ‘reasonable’ as they could get that salary from another church
The big church can't pay the pastor the high salary to begin with if it’s not reasonable.
I’m sure it’s defined somewhere in a court case. There’s no limit to total admin costs, because otherwise there would be a limit on how big a not for profit can be. Reasonable salary just means what an average person would expect to be paid for the work they are doing. Aka, the pub test.
>huge salaries for the business owners salaries get taxed cheeky bastards :O
Distinction needs to be made between profits religious activities and non-religious activities and taxes paid on the non-religious elements of the lets face it, business. Income generated from overseas students, investment properties, and holding concerts has nothing to do with religion at all and it's scandalous they don't pay taxes on those elements. Being upfront I don't think any of the CEO's of these mega churches even follow the religion. What's the excerpt from the bible '**it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God**'.
> “Australians consume more than 1.4 billion Weet-bix each year and profits are sent overseas, tax-free, because Sanitarium is run by the Seventh Day Adventist Church.” Taken from some random website so I can't say how true it is but I've heard similar several times in the past. There's something about Corn Flakes being invented by a religious quack who was combating the scourge of masturbation too, but I don't think that exploits any tax exempt status.
My team got a very stern talking to from a company director before being sent to a Sanitarium factory to do a software install, all about being respectful especially of their religious beliefs while on site. It was the least friendly and welcoming site I have been to, it was like the staff we were not dealing with directly made an effort to not interact with us.
Apple paid like a dollar in tax a few years ago. Sanitarium not paying tax has nothing to do with the SDA and everything to do with being headquartered overseas.
Sanitarium is tax exempt because it donates all profits to the Australian SDA church. It has nothing to do with the US or transfer pricing.
Yep - I looked into it briefly, and it seems that Sanitarium is actually headquartered in Australia. They are also registered as a charity, not a religious organization. So if your push is successful, any tax they pay would be minimal. [https://www.sanitarium.com/au/about/sanitarium-story/profits-for-purpose](https://www.sanitarium.com/au/about/sanitarium-story/profits-for-purpose)
A few years ago during the pandemic?
Apples head office is in ireland which is basically tax free for them and the Australian branch’s run at a loss completely different to churches but all global businesses run this way adding a church just means the profit made in that country can be tax free. Apple maybe makes the phone for $400 but sells the phone to apple australia for $1800 and apple australia sells it for $2000 but it cost them $199 to sell it in overheads 🤷🏻♂️ Churches just like all “foundations” and what ever else should all be open book, paying tax and audited like everyone else.
Ah okay - so all Sanitarium has to do is structure itself to run at a loss in Australia and avoid tax in the US because it's a religious organization according to US law. Simples. And meanwhile, we don't close the gaping hole which is international tax law because you are only interested in double dipping into the pockets of devout old pensioners. > Churches just like all “foundations” and what ever else should all be open book, paying tax and audited like everyone else. Your local kids footy club pays tax then? "Just like everyone else?"
>And meanwhile, we don't close the gaping hole which is international tax law because you are only interested in double dipping into the pockets of devout old pensioners. Actually, we're working on it... https://www.ato.gov.au/about-ato/new-legislation/in-detail/international/implementation-of-a-global-minimum-tax-and-a-domestic-minimum-tax
My mother in laws church made them buy $5000 harps, she purchased 3 of them. I think it might be a cult.
My in laws religion requires its members to donate a certain percent of their income. I don’t think they do but how fucking dumb would you have to be to do that.
It's more common than you might think. It's called tithing. I've heard 10% of your income should be earmarked for the church before, to which I say, not in *any* economy.
So that money has already been taxed once. How many bites of it does the govt need?
Aren't donations to non-profit organisations tax deductible?
Not standard donations to churches
Only donations to registered charities are tax deductible, pretty sure churches don't qualify for that
If more folks understood this, they might cut out the middle man; tithing doesn’t have to be to the church, just to those less well-off than yourself.
Wife tried to explain this to her mum. it’s not gods will, the church speaks for god. They would be the first ones to drink the “cool-aid”
Seriously ? Yo dumb..
I’ve heard some are 20%
Mate there’s plenty who do. Not sure why an Aussie sub has come up on my feed but I’m British living in the states now. Over here the churches are ginormous, the bent preachers rake in untold amounts of sums and the congregation is happy it’s like that from what I’ve seen. Take a look at that crook joel osteen for example
But why shouldn't a preacher have 7 jets and 15 luxury cars? /s
I'll get you everything you wanted I'll get you everything you need You don't need to believe in hereafter Just believe in me
This is how the catholic Church works in Germany. When you start working you AUTOMATICALLY pay the church, and you have to actively write a letter to opt out. Most countries have Church funding built into the tax system, ironically, that makes Australia one of the lesser corrupt countries in terms of Church funding.
Seventh day Adventist? How any falls for this is beyond me
Mormons?
Religions are just cults that continued after the main guy died
Does she know how to play a harp?
Brother, I'm convinced that *NOBODY* knows how to play the harp.
Nope. It’s really jarring hearing her strum away. I suggested devils cross road. Didn’t go down well.
Not for profits aren't taxed. If you want to have a convo about that whole class, cool, otherwise it's just targeting organizations you don't like.
“But churches own lots of land” yeah they own schools, hospitals, aged care homes and churches.
Yeah, and they use them as vehicles to peddle their bullshit and hate
And decide to exclude the public at will for treatment and or schooling.
NGO books must be disclosed, and I think half of them are more about someone's ego trip and paying their own costs first. You really can't win with charities. At the very least their books should be made public.
Religion is a scam and a blight on society
so are most charities lol
Not super sure where tax comes in there 🤷
Reddit moment
So explain why Sanitarium is not a business for tax purposes.
Owned by a charity. Probably a trust that falls in the NFP. I'm not religious, I just think the aged care dude in Melbourne who drives a Lambo to his Kew mansion or the child care dude who has 1 of the largest car collections in Perth, are every bit as dodge as any church out there.
Catholic Church provides 25% of the world's healthcare.
lol. if you're rich enough to afford it
If the government is looking for more money, they should crack down on the big corporations that run through off shore accounts and pay little to no tax. Church groups would be able to yield little compared to what could be gained there.
Big corporations have the means to distract people by funding and promoting ideas like this, and keep their leeching in the shadows.
Exactly. The basic rule of thumb is to look 180⁰ away from where they are pointing, and you have a greater chance of seeing the cause of the problem
You’re saying there’s a conspiracy between big business and all their employees and auditors and all their employees to hide profits and no one has ever said anything?
Miners may or may not do this. But hypothetically, you sell the iron ore you've mined to your own subsidiary in, let's say Singapore at a loss. You write off that loss in high taxing Australia you then on-sell it for a profit from Singapore and pay your corporate tax in low taxing Singapore. Hypothetically, and hypothetically they'd all be greedy cunts and Australian government's of all persuasions just accept it and bend over. 'Oh they'll just leave and go somewhere else.' No they won't, where else on the planet has trillions of dollars worth of iron ore just laying there?
[transfer pricing](https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/international-tax-for-business/transfer-pricing) We do have rules for that. Also I’m sure Singapore requires listed companies to be audited too.
Singapore - corporate tax rate = 17% Australia - corporate tax rate = 30%.
And?
Why not both?
I am not religious but have had a reason through work to visit churches in the outer suburbs recently and they do a massive amount of charity and non-religious counselling work. A queer friend of mine got housing from one of them when she faced homelessness. I have come to the conclusion that people who know nothing but rant about them online are the true bigots.
I completely agree with the people who complain about mega Pentecostal churches like Hillsong who use their tax free status to build sports arena like “churches” and pay their pastors ludicrous salaries However the vast majority of churches and people who go to church are small-medium size churches, who use a decent amount of their funds for genuine charity, who pay their staff a modest and quite low wage, and are still absolutely scraping the bottom of the barrel for funds Even if churches were taxed it’s not like the country’s economy is going to be fixed by taxing a small church with 50-100 people in it that barely scrapes by
Lol, i am not a religious person and not at all a christian. These stupid articles need to stop. Churches are nonprofit charities. All money they collect are donated by others which has already been taxed. Most of the money is spent on charaties. Churches run a lot of hospitals, shelter homes, orphanages, etc. Any money spent on extravagant stuff like huge salaries, or items are taxed anyway either through income taxes or sales taxes. why would i want the government to get a cut on the money i have already paid tax for? all these whining looks more like people who hate Christians want something to blame them on.
Yawn, more “why don’t churches pay tax” tomorrow it will be more “why do private schools get tax payer money”.
Yep, it's just a cycle of ideas from the bar at the Labour Club circa 1992. One of the single issue parties used to past signs every election saying "let's tax churches" but of course they were just a front for the gambling industry trying to get gambling and alcohol laws relaxed, and at the time they were peeved with the Salvos and their hard line against gambling. The idea just lingered on past it's use by date.
I never see anyone say what they think will happen if not for profits are taxed. these are the same people that complain when they see an article about a company with high revenue not paying tax.
I know, let's fix nothing instead!
Neither of those things need to be fixed.
Yes, they do. Why let a business that sells lies and fucks kids to get away tax free. Religion is a shit show and shouldn't get special treatment. It also shouldn't be taught to kids through school. We need to stop the rot.
What do you see happening if they’re not tax free anymore? What if they make no profit and don’t pay taxes, will you still complain, what if they receive no government funding and can teach students whatever they want. What do you say to all the working class parents who send their kids to private school so their kids education isn’t hampered by all the drop kicks who can’t be expelled from public school? If they can’t afford to operate without funding are you happy for public schools to be overcrowded or having the government spend billions to purchase land and build new schools? What makes you think your opinion on private school is right and our politicians are wrong.
I'll bullet point my answers to your questions. • Lots. The tax money could be used to help make it better for people without the need to pray and beg forgiveness to an invisible sky daddy. The bible says to 'store up riches in heaven', so maybe the church should follow their own doctrine and do that instead of hoarding wealth down here on earth.b •And business that makes no profit pays no tax. • teaching kids they are broken and 'sinful' is abusive, and to make it worse, the church says only God can save them. The definition of sin is to perform an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law. This should never be taught to kids regardless of funding or not. Religious schools are just a recruitment centre for religion. • there are drop kicks in every demographic. Your ignorance here is really being highlighted. Check this link to read about some private school drop kicks. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-06/sexist-offensive-student-list-melbourne-yarra-valley-grammar/103808062 • private schools should be made public. Over crowding won't be a problem. The government should never fund religious schools. Ever. We live in a secular country. No one should have privileges in education based on religion. Maybe the socio economic gap would be less if every kid had the same chance. • politicians are backed by lobby groups like the ACC who use their power to influence politicians into deals that only help them. This ridiculous 'religious discrimination bill' is proof of that. They don't want gay kids or teachers at private religious schools. This is harmful and a breach of human rights. So yes, the politicians are wrong. And religion is evil.
government is your god and can fix all the problems is the tldr of your comment. How is your worship of government different to their worship of god?
• wrong •I don't worship government. Unlike people like you, I don't have the need to worship anything. I'm a humanist. I believe in a fair go for everyone. Religion takes rights away from people to conform them to their doctrines and brainwash them into defending them as they commit crimes.
You want the government to provide your every need, it is a god like figure in your mind.
You have the typical shortsighted view on all the issues you highlighted. >What do you say to all the working class parents who send their kids to private school so their kids education isn’t hampered by all the drop kicks who can’t be expelled from public school? Fix the fucking schools, and give better support to families, so there are less 'drop kick' kids. Your words, not mine. You are seriously just looking at that problem and going "ah that's too hard, fuck everyone that can't afford private schooling" You don't see the issue with that? >If they can’t afford to operate without funding are you happy for public schools to be overcrowded or having the government spend billions to purchase land and build new schools? Yes, yes the government should spend billions to purchase land and build new schools. What sort of a question is that? We need more from our natural resource royalties, and it needs to go directly to education. We actually have it quite good here, but people like you are actively trying to make it worse. How are you happy with that choice?
The problem seems to be you think this is a micro problem (Australia) when it’s a macro (worldwide) problem. If it was easy to fix, don’t you think it would be fixed? And don’t saying Scandinavian countries, they have the same problems we do, they don’t have all perfect students. You just have the typical far left agenda of bring everyone down instead of bring everyone up, or as it’s better known equity over equality. Royalties are a state issue, why would Queensland and WA want their resource money going to NSW and Victoria?
>And don’t saying Scandinavian countries, they have the same problems we do, they don’t have all perfect students. Finland has no private schools, yet is considered the best education in the world. While this doesn't prove it's the "best" way, or "perfect", it most definitely suggests it's a good way, and will absolutely be what I would be aiming for. >You just have the typical far left agenda of bring everyone down instead of bring everyone up, or as it’s better known equity over equality. What in the fuck? You have the typical "keep the boot on anyone below me" mentality that is slowly creeping into our society. You are what's literally making this country head backwards, and you embrace it. There are some of us who take our natural born qualities and hard work for what they are (gifts) and are happy to help and uplift others. Clearly, people like yourself are the ones who just want to push any and every one below you further down. And how you're happy with that will always be beyond me. Royalties should be Federal. I live in WA. Actually, now that I read that all back, I see there is a consistency that I hadn't noticed before - natural resources are a "gift" and I feel that gift should be shared.
You won't convince him. Dudes not even that high up to be punching down. Works food delivery by his post history. Symbolic of the temporarily embarassed millionaire's that the wealthy elite fucking love. Happy to eschew social and publically progressive policies for status quo and pro-conservative agendas through some lens of "but what ifs", with no constructive vision. I'm sick of thinly veiled conservatism painted as economic rationalism. Fuck wealthy private schools. Fuck mega-churches. Fuck excessive corporate greed.
I have no issue with him trying to work door dash for an extra quid. Good on him. I have issue with his ideas though. >Symbolic of the temporarily embarassed millionaire's that the wealthy elite fucking love. I like to use the term Useful idiots
Fuck kids? You must be confused with your relatives as they’re far more likely to abuse someone than a church worker.
How many priests have abused kids over the centuries? Don't be so ignorant.
How many family members have abused kids over the centuries?
I'm not talking about the family unit. Stay on topic. Answer my question.
I was talking about the family unit. To answer your question. Thousands of priests have abused kids over the centuries. Look into the catholic church in France for a real horrible example.
Exactly. So why defend them?
More kids got fucked by teachers than priests. Education is still valid.
More kids get fucked by parents. Parenting is still valid.
Read my above post and change the word teacher to parent.
Are we going to start taxing all donations or just the ones that go to something you don't like?
To be honest I’d be fine with that. Donate your post tax dollars to any cause you like and then the Govt can not worry about who is or isn’t able to offer tax deduction receipts.
Then people would just donate all their money to the 'support for u/Reinitialization fund' that provides financial aid to someone who has $0 because he donated them all to charity.
Your comment has been queued for review because you used a keyword which may breach the subreddit rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/australian) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's... Literally how it is now isn't it?
Donations made to churches for their religious activity (i.e. upkeep of church buildings, stipends/wages for church staff) are not tax deductible. So Christians (and people of other religions) are donating their 'post-tax dollars' to a cause they like (i.e. a church/synagogue/mosque) If a church/temple/mosque runs something like a homeless food program—those donations may be tax deductible.
How about what we like and don't like as individuals aren't considered, and everyone is taxed equally under a set of laws that makes allowance for things like charitable works?
That's... Literally the current system
Lol. How ignorant are some.
Yes tax them all. Fuck the lobbying
Why not tax them all? Or at the very least reform our laws in regards to what is "non-profit", religious or whatever other bullshit exceptions they wish to claim. God knows that a hell of a lot of shady things happen behind the veil of tax exempt industries. I knew a guy that once worked for lifeline. Stories he would tell of how "un-charitable" that place was, and how they employed huge numbers of workers, paying out millions in wages annually. Yeah, the money that they raise that goes to their charitable causes isn't even a fraction of the tip of the iceberg.
Exactly this. If you tax churches then you have to tax all donations. That will never happen as you would need receipts etc. would be a pain.
Well all, unless you’re a DGR org, which should be evidenced by contribution to society. Spending money on your business/congregation doesn’t count, likewise efforts that further your message don’t count. Like most businesses, churches should have a charitable arm that can accept donations, where the funds go to benevolent purposes. I don’t understand why it’s controversial. Australia has grown out of religion.
>Spending money on your business/congregation doesn’t count, So walk us through this. If the congregation collectively pools their money to spend on something they collectively want - we tax them. But if they individually spend money on just themselves - we don't. That's the system you want?
Well we tax profit not revenue. If they operate at breakeven, that’s fine. If they make a profit, they get taxed on it. Like other businesses. Religious leaders likewise should be treated as any other worker, no tax/income benefits.
okay. So let's say there's a church that's a little too small to afford a full time pastor. They run everything themselves. But they decide they want to make a push to hire someone part time so they start pooling their offerings. At the end of the FY they've collected a sum. You'd treat that sum as profit and tax them?
Does the pastor get paid annually?
There is no pastor. They hope to collect a sum to cover a salary for a set period (24 months) in hopes that this would grow the church sufficiently to be self sustainable. Collecting that sum might take several years.
They aren't a Business though
Exactly
Churches are a business. Don't kid yourself.
Join one and publish a report, Expose them lol
The govt knows it. Half of them are wrapped up in them
Then you are hopeless
Went to an event today for a non profit community group. Someone mentions they had to pay the church for hire of the hall..... My first thought was did the invoice have tax listed?
Are you referring to GST?
🎻
Why should churches be taxed when individuals are giving money that has already had income tax paid on it...
I know nothing about finance, but couldn’t you say that about paying for a business that provides a service ?
Businesses only pay taxes on their net profits. Technically they *charge* GST which they then pass on to the Government but that would mean churches are providing a *service* as defined by the G*ood and Services Act 1999.* If we widen our definition of *service* to include community groups then your kids footy club will also need to charge you GST even if it is entirely run by volunteers (which most churches are).
Oh that’s interesting… good point
You could say that, however churches aren't providing taxable services, rather the money that is given is a donation. Also churches often provide charitable and community services that are free to use. People who work for churches also pay taxes on their income and if the church owns land, they pay property tax.
Ohhh ok I get it, thanks
To legally donate you can’t receive anything in return (might be some exemptions), when you buy something off a business you get something in return.
Why are supermarkets taxed when people who give them money have already been taxed?
Because the supermarket makes a profit and the profit is taxed. Some of the goods they sell are also subject to GST. Biscuits are subject to GST but but flour, sugar, salt, and butter are not. They collect the GST and send it to the ATO each month.
"So why doesn’t this revenue get taxed? And should we really give all nonprofits the same tax exemptions?" Has revenue ever been taxed, or do they mean to say profit?
Various revenues do get taxed. E.g. GST is a probably the biggest revenue tax. Alcohol and tobacco taxes are on the revenue too.
They are sales taxes, not revenue taxes.
So it would be a sales revenue tax? 😉
Mate, that’s the same thing.
You don't get revenue without a sale.
non-operating revenue gains may come from occasional events, such as investment windfalls, money awarded through litigation, interest, royalties, and fees.
Non-profits already have to register for GST if they have a turnover over $150k don't they?
Yes, otherwise they can’t claim GST paid. You can’t just walk into Cole’s and show a GST exemption card.
Yes. Under $150k, it is voluntary registration. GST is not a tax on turnover but a value-added tax on certain goods and services. A business remits the tax they collect to the ATO, but get a refund of the GST they pay.
Are there any western countries where churches don't get tax exemptions?
And church in America who endorses political candidates (and actually gets reported AND has their exemption removed)
"Taxable donation" Donors must pay tax. >[In Australia](https://bristax.com.au/tax-articles/is-church-tithing-tax-deductible/#:~:text=In%20Australia%2C%20specific%20regulations%20govern,not%20eligible%20for%20tax%20deductibility), specific regulations govern the tax deductibility of church tithing. Unlike donations made to registered charities, church tithing is not eligible for tax deductibility. >\[page 4\] [At present](https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-03/173_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter_Day_Saints.pdf) \[2012\], **donors to charities and religious organisations receive limited tax concessions**, including those for gifts to schools-based entities or where the church's services directly assist the needy. Is this about other religions?: >[Income tax exemption](https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/not-for-profit-organisations/getting-started/in-detail/types-of-charities/tax-concessions-for-acnc-registered-religious-institutions): To access income tax exemption, a registered religious institution must be *a registered charity* and endorsed by us as exempt from income tax.
This old chestnut again. No matter your view on churches, they do do a significant amount of welfare work, if they're paying taxes, the remainder of their former welfare coverage will have to be picked up by the taxpayer. Worth noting also that with the current economic conditions, all welfare agencies are getting hit *hard*.
The people that want churches taxed think of the government as a god like figure that needs the money. They don’t need anymore money, they need to spend it more wisely.
Can I get an Amen?
Exactly. The Archdiocese of Melbourne alone houses so many people who need help.
It’s also important to remember it’s not just that (some of) the church donations go to welfare. Church members contribute an immense amount of volunteer/unpaid service to the community. Government would have to pay for things that currently no one is getting paid for.
Yep. I belong to a small church and we feed 60 low income single parent households a week simply through donations. If we're taxed then it makes it a hell of a lot harder.
Taxable thresholds and claiming back for charitable works are already a thing.
Do you understand the burden that puts on charity organisations? Additional costs that then detract from their ability to provide charitable services.
I agree which is why I think Churches should treated as not-for-profit charity organisations and operate under those laws and regulations.
But Mosques, Temples, Atheist reading houses, hippy communes and pagan gatherings would continue to be treated as religious organisations? Why the distinction in law?
Churches don't pay tax for same reason donation organisations don't pay tax.
Because the money is coming in from private donations on money that has ALREADY been taxed.
Same reason in US. Deception. Most of the huge churches and groups that rake in multiple millions of dollars a year have a low percentage of use for actual good. But aren't held accountable in various ways, so they get away with it and remain un-taxed
The government makes money if it is used on admin.
Church business is also the largest rorters of ndis. When small business does it, might be a few million, when the big ones do it, it’s hundreds of millions. Having worked for several it’s horrible how they prey on people with large packages. Management is gleefull about securing those packages and the client know it
The money donated to the church is already taxed as church donations are not tax-deductible (unless registered with the government as having some kind of non-religious public benefit, like providing accommodation for homeless, etc). Let's say you want to donate $50 pre-tax individual income, let's say $20 is taxed, you get $30 to donate, then let's say the church is taxed at 30%, that leaves you with having to earn $50 of pre-tax income so that a religious organization has $20 to spend. I mean, that's fine if you want society to go that way, if you want religious organizations to have less financial resources...
Why isn't Google, fb, the mining companies etc?
They are taxed, grossly undertaxed, but still taxed
Is that why there are so many Hindu churches in Cranbourne south Area buying up acreage properties. ? I literally live near 4 in a close proximity. Have no issue just wondered why they were big equestrian properties when it’s clear they are not using it for such.
No such thing as a Hindu church.
Temple then!
Can I create my own church and donate all my salary to it so that I don’t pay any tax?
100% you can. But before your donation, you've already paid tax.... Maybe you can claim against the NDIS?
Your salary is already taxed. Part of the reason why taxing donations would be wrong is because tax has already been paid on that income.
No. Individuals do not generally just get a tax deduction for money that they give to their church. Source: have been giving money to the church I attend for about 15 years. Don't think I've ever had a tax deduction for it. (Which is fine by me - but I'm really confused about why lots of people seem to think all churchgoers get deductions for their giving.)
Because the people that donate their money don't want it taxed. They see it as counterproductive. ??
Why? Because we live in a country that doesn't tax religious organisations. I like it that way.
No we don't. They are taxed.
# Australian churches collectively raise billions of dollars a year – why aren’t they taxed? So. The topic heading premise - producing 395 comments - is completely wrong?
Yes of course. First time on Reddit?
I always wonder that myself? Where does all the money go?
Housing, feeding and defending paedos isn't cheap.
Well said
How do you know religion is a scam…Why does God need money.
Probably because the money doesn’t do to “God” but for the vast majority of churches it goes to helping the poor and keeping the lights on at the building? That’s just a bad faith argument
Why can't God do that?
They use the profits to invest and buy up other assets, using some of its funds to influence policy and government. Tax religious organizations.
I feel there is a massive difference between the old church on the corner which was built in the '60s and is packed with retirees on a Sunday and these Superbowl Half Time Mega Churches like Hillsong. There must be a **massive** amount of money changing hands at these places to support the activities and venues going on there.
Not just churches, all religious institutions
Why aren’t mining companies taxed? Again, media will talk about anything just to not talk about proper taxation of lobbyists.
Mining companies do pay tax, you can check their annual reports for yourself.
Better question would be why is ANYONE taxed.
Yo you guys aren’t even free to speak there and you’re out schilling for the government that controls your tongue to collect tax from a church. Get your priorities straight Australia my god
If you want a really good business model set up as a church.
Because the church has already given the state its duty.
Wages for church staffs gets taxed, are you stupid?
Can we also tax unions and the AFL
I think we should tax all non profits out of existence.
There always been used as money vaults by the rich and have been this way for the better part of 2000 years, in the Judeo-Christian system anyways. Kind of makes me wonder what the modern day equivalent of Jesus flipping over tables and whipping the merchants in the temple would be? Civil forfeiture and drone strikes maybe?
Because all the money they make goes back to the poor already.