Foxy... my response is that a modern nation needs taxation to supply what is expected of it.

Of course, posters such as Stern and AGIR, would have us live in a genuine Brutopia where the individual would live by their boot straps, but most people, even Tories, are more generous than that.

It is only sensible to continually test what should be supplied against what is supplied.

No citizen, or organisation, should be above the state, which is after all, just our collective body.

So, by all means, let us examine all tax rorts, dodges, lurks and 'legitimate' exemptions.

Like you, I do not assume that religion is the only candidate, but unlike all the others, only religion has an as-of-right exemption, and that seems to be very out-of-order in a secular nation-state.

Suze, I understand your suggestion that the Catholic Church should sell the wealth amassed in the Vatican and give the proceeds to its charities. I would suggest, though, that this is overly simplistic. Having such wealth and cultural capital stored in one place generates enormous revenue from tourism, some of which goes towards the maintenance of the Vatican, some to the administration of the Church and the bulk towards the Church's charitable missions.

I'm sure there are many who would argue that this isn't true - that it is laundered away to top up the coffers of wealthy churchmen - but, without the Church's ledgers, they have only conjecture to work on. I certainly don't have the ledgers, but that is the official line offered by guides and volunteers at the Vatican. With our notion of justice, we plebs must assume that it is true unless we have evidence to the contrary.

As for the exclusivity of religions' tax-exemptions, aren't the bulk of their exemptions derived from their non-profit status? These same exemptions, then, apply to community sporting groups and other non-profit organisations in society. As TBC said, there is scope for considerable investigation here - not just for churches.

In the several other threads on this topic, I have outlined my point of view. I agree that the profit-generating sectors of religious organisations need to be taxed as businesses. Of course, if their entire profits are passed on to their charitable services, there won't be much tax. But at least we know that their profits are going back into the community, often (but not always, I concede) in a more efficient and honest manner than would be implemented by the tax-collecting government.

Otokonoko... there was a major tax case recently (last year?) where an undertakers business was deemed to be tax free because they gave their profits to a publisher who produced Bibles to be used to help convert people to Christianity... a 'good works' project.

Ticks the charity box... but hardly a priority for the broader community is it?

Such dealings are not dodgy, but maybe they should be?

I agree wholeheartedly. In a sense, they are directing their profits from one business into another business. The sale of the bibles would then generate further profit. Where does that profit go? These things can be filtered through layer after layer of business ventures, that dollars can slowly disappear into the aether.

If, on the other hand, they were using their proceeds to buy food for their homeless shelter, or to fund a cancer ward, or to keep the flying doctors in the sky, or to train nurse practitioners in regional areas, I would have no problem with their profits being tax-free. Hell, I wouldn't even mind if they made the homeless people say grace before they ate. Their mission is ultimately evangelical, but I think evangelism needs to be detached from humanitarianism. Tax the money that would go towards prayer books, but don't tax the money that would go towards the food, shelter and clothing provided to people in genuine need. If those people 'find God' through the good works of His servants, that's all well and good. If they have God forced down their throat along with every meal, and their meal sizes shrink to fund that venture, that's not so good.

So in a secular state it is OK for the Government to give every child Mao's little Red Book but not to give then books on human history and cultural development as some agnostics disagree with the relavence of cultural development. The fact is Classical Chinese teaches they were descendant from Noah. The arguments to ban the Bible are weak and based on an agnostic world view.

They keep on telling themselves that "Christianity is an irrelavent impost on society" until they believe it. The fact is our society has developed from the moral and ethical principles of Judeao-Christian world view.

New overstock or seconds products given by business or industry to Charity for sale at lower prices than retail perhaps should incurr a GST on the sale if they already do not. However most retail Charities pay sales staff full wage and give them full time employment as compared to volunteers.

Dear TBC,

Thank You for responding to my post
and explaining your position.

I think that we're agreed on this issue.
Tax excemption priviliges should be
looked into for all institutions,
(regardless of what categories they fall
into).