No, but not because they should be exempt, but because taxation is theft.

I made a version of this with more answer choices so that people can express more fine-grained opinions, and to prevent confusion over what counts as yes or no.

I vote No, but only on the condition that the Johnson Amendment is actually enforced.

The First Amendment tolerates neither governmentally established religion nor governmental interference with religion. But let's assume you don't care about the First Amendment. There are good reasons why churches, like nonprofits and other charities, should not be taxed.
The exemption is made in recognition of the benefit which the public derives from church activities. In the US, we have a long tradition of religious freedom. The majority of churches are quite small and barely cover their own operating costs- taxing them further would likely drive them out of business.
When people answer "yes", they're probably thinking of predatory televangelists and megachurches, but the vast majority of churches simply minister to a small congregation of parishioners weekly and provide a third place for people to gather in the community.
Tax them and we lose the benefits they provide, we would get very little in terms of tax benefits, and we'd lose a ton of small operating churches. Or they'd just refile as non-profits, if you're coming at this from an anti-theist perspective.

@TiredCliche

The First Amendment requires that congress must “make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”.

If anything, I’d argue this entails that churches MUST be taxed the same as any other organisation because otherwise congress has made a law establishing a state religion by favouring religious organisations over non-religious organisations.

@DaisyWelham

The Supreme Court has heard that argument and disagreed.

@TiredCliche Yeah because the USA’s legal system is a joke and they brazenly ignore the constitution for political reasons.

Also, this is the internet, not the USA, so what SCOTUS has to say on this isn’t particularly relevant to the broader question.

@DaisyWelham I think SCOTUS's arguments carry more weight than an internet rando, in that they show that your interpretation is legally incorrect, but fine. Dismiss SCOTUS. #1, Taxing something is "interfering with the free exercise thereof." #2, "all religions" can't be the "state religions". #3, non-believers are free to set up untaxed nonprofits, charities, and churches of their own. There are a bunch of different secular "churches" that exist, and they are not taxed. Your argument fails from every angle that I can think of.

@DaisyWelham (For instance, a state religion is one like in the UK, where the head of government is also literally the head of the state church. Nothing like this exists in the US.)

@TiredCliche Im not asking whether they're required to or not - SHOULD they? morally.

@Seeker Yeah! It always baffles me how often people replace “Should X happen?” with “Is it currently legal for X to happen in America?” 🤦🏻‍♀️

@Seeker I already wrote two paragraphs about secular reasons why churches should not be taxed.

@DaisyWelham

If anything, I’d argue this entails that churches MUST be taxed the same as any other organisation because otherwise congress has made a law establishing a state religion by favouring religious organisations over non-religious organisations.

I agree that this is correct. However, tax-exemption doesn't just apply to churches. It applies to all 501(c)(3) organizations, so the government isn't actually taxing churches in a different way from similar non-religious organizations.

@PlasmaBallin

I think the problem arises when churches are given charitable status effectively by default, when some of them clearly are run more like businesses. With the rise of Tevangelists then some churches are not community buildings of personal worship for local people any more, they’re multi-million dollar stadiums and TV shows in some cases.

If a church is being run like a community centre then it should have the same tax rules as actual community centres, and if it’s being run like a theatre, stadium, or TV network then it should be taxed as secular versions of those things are.

There may be some churches for which it is appropriate to not tax them (as they are genuinely performing charitable works) but I don’t think there’s anything special about a church in particular that entitles it to tax exemption by default.

"When people answer "yes", they're probably thinking of predatory televangelists and megachurches..." -me
"With the rise of Tevangelists [sic] then some churches are not community buildings of personal worship for local people any more, they’re multi-million dollar stadiums and TV shows in some cases." -daisy
🤦

@DaisyWelham It sounds like you're saying that most churches should not pay taxes, only the "Tevangelist" ones. You should probably vote NO on this poll!

@TiredCliche

It’s a legitimate point. The concept of a “church” is a broach-church term (pun intended), and tevangelist “churches” need to be treated very differently to small local churches which need to be treated very differently to massive cathedrals.

I don’t think all churches should be taxed or all churches should not be taxed so I haven’t voted on this poll. But “churches should be taxed to the same extent that they would be if they were not churches” feels closer to a “yes” than to a “no”.

@DaisyWelham “churches should be taxed to the same extent that they would be if they were not churches” would result in most churches not being taxed, so the outcome feels closer to a "no" than a "yes."
(Also, I've seen the finances of the massive cathedrals. Many of them are barely scraping by, the donations just cover the property tax.)

@TiredCliche

I think it boils down to different interpretations of the question, which is somewhat ambiguous.

I’d say “yes” to:

• Should some churches be taxed?

• Should all churches have to pay the same amount of tax as non-church organisations of the same type?

And “no” to:

• Should all churches be taxed?

Given none of these are an exact match for the wording in the question then we need to make inferences about what is meant. Absent any clarification from the asker, I feel like they meant something more like the first two questions than the last one.

@DaisyWelham @TiredCliche I think this question was not very well-posed. I already thought when I voted that a question like this needs to include a lot more nuance in the answer choices. It's hard to tell what people's opinions actually are when all you get is yes/no on a vague and broad question.

I don't think the question of, "Does Daisy Welham's position count as Yes or No," is that meaningful, since it's just a debate over how to interpret the ambiguous poll.

why are so many betting NO? Why should churches be exempt from taxes when everyone else is not?

@Seeker Nonprofits and charities are also exempt from corporate taxes, for the same reason as churches are. Church leaders are not exempt from income taxes.

Why not?

100% They should and its disgusting that they dont