darkhall67 wrote on Nov 10
th, 2011 at 8:00pm:
longweekend58 wrote on Nov 10
th, 2011 at 7:21pm:
Uncle wrote on Nov 10
th, 2011 at 7:09pm:
longweekend58 wrote on Nov 10
th, 2011 at 6:58pm:
the usual suspects making the usual comments and only Verge seems to have any idea of what it is.
Not for Profits dont pay tax on their surplus (not profit). you dont like it? complain the the govt and watch a large number of community organisations collapse - mainly charities, welfare groups and community sporting groups etc.
most of the nonsense spread here is by people who know nothing about what goes on and even less about taxation law. if all these 'tax evasions' are going on - churches and miners for example - why do you think the ATO isnt taking action? just perhaps because... they ARENT evading tax?
Ah the little ray of sunshine blesses us with his presence!
http://www.filipinouk.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/repuke.gifThe issue, Einstein, is with the law. What is the law? The law is simply nothing more than a mere act of Parliament.
This is why "the people" are asking questions (Heaven forbid that the Great Unwashed should dare ask questions!) about the laws that allow such inequality.
Tool.
While it is clear that you hate the Church and that is your right, dont think for a moment that removing tax free status from non-profits is somehow going to enrich socieity by removing most charities and impeding the actions of those that remain.
This month my church did a community project for the Childhood Cancer Association. Cost: $350,000. what did you do?
and this wouldnt be possible if non-profits were taxed. Mind you, it wouldnt be needed because the CHildhood Cancer Association wouldnt exist either.
I would be ok with this if the pastor of said church didnt live a millionaires lifestyle (like hillsong).
Raising 350000 for cancer is great but if the pastor and church higherups make 1,350,000 then it's not such a great result.
Now I am one of those people with not much of a knowledge on australian tax laws but maybe someone could enlighten me.
If the tax free status of "religious" groups is abolished , but any charitable donations or outlays paid by a "religious " group is tax deductible (just like any member of society I think) would this prevent "religious" groups from doing good in society?
Or would it just prevent those unscrupulous and money hungry , millionaire lifestyle type "religious" groups from getting away with selfish profit making?
when you talk about millionarie religious people you are usually talking about probably 3 of them in total. Is it reasonable to condemn an entire group for the actions of one? If that were the case the ALP wopuld be deregistered on the basis opf some its members crimes.
and secondly, many of these 'millionaires' are so on the basis of their non-church speaking fees and book royalties. Or are we going to deny people that as well?
The tax free status of non-profits and churches has been rorted in the past that is true. But the problem with threads like this is it assumes that ALL churches rort - and they dont.
[highlight]Removing tax-free status of non-profits will only reduce their capacity to perform, doing more harm than good[/highlight].
If they could claim any charitable outlay as a deduction , how would that limit their performance?