Church tax for the USA now!

Having friends and relatives in Germany, I've heard a lot about "Kirchensteuer" or "church tax". This automatically takes about 10% (usually 8-9, but sometimes even 13% in some Scandinavian regions) from salaries and benefits. It would not include France, who came up with the Masonically inspired "separation of church and state finance" during the post-revolutionary "enlightenment".
Church tax can be paid to any any chosen established organization (rules vary, but Catholics and Lutherans generally apply). One usually inherits church tax, or gets it from childhood catechisms, but one can also withdraw from the church. This means that religious baptisms, weddings and burials are not for free, and one may even be denied a place at Christmas mass. Since Islam is included in EU countries' church tax, the channeling of funds via official means may also play a part in the war against terror.

What I find strange is that the US has a huge nominally Christian and fundamentalist population. Expecially the fundamentalist evangelicals argue against the separation of church and state, and villify the ACLU and others who agitate to keep religion private.
Why do they never argue for US church tax? I'm sure organizing donations that way will end the money-grabbing industry of the dodgy TV evangelists.
Strangely, the approximate 10% of Church tax mirrors the evangelical tithes. The origin of the practise is actually pagan.

In any case, Americans already seem to pay "moral" taxes via "sin tax" on tobacco and alcohol. So I argue that church tax for the accredited churches should be introduced, since this is far more reliable than handing cash to all kinds of self-proclaimed evangelists.

On EU Church Tax see for example: www.natcath.com...
en.wikipedia.org...

My conclusion so far: those who argue against separation of Church and State in the US are usually funding evangelical TV/media programming. They believe that the founding farthers (including several Masons, although that's never mentioned as the symbolism of "French" Masonry is flashed across the screen) didn't want the state to interfere in church affairs, but the church should form the basis of state affairs. I believe they never mentioned state-run (Old Testament styled) "church tax" because these programs are run by false prophets who have a vested interest in personal donations.




[edit on 9-2-2010 by halfoldman]

hmm....

Sure, I believe that the church of satan should enjoy taxpayer money.

many of the "non-denominational" churches down here in TX (read: mega-churches or what a friend calls DOT-COM churches) pretty much expect a 10% "donation" by their members.

And you wondered why they needed a 148000 sq ft building. HA!

reply to post by halfoldman


Sorry, but that would never fly in the US. We were built on the concept of freedom of religion, and why should I pay my hard-earned tax dollars into a church that I do not belong to, nor support? That may be all well and good in the UK and other countries, but many of us here in the good 'ole US of A would flatly refuse to pay a tax for something that we do not use. "Sin taxes" as you call them, are only collected if you actually purchase said products. If I do not go to Church, why should I have to pay a tax for it? Taxation without representation was the whole basis for the founding of this country. Respectfully, I think you should check some of your facts about the US tax system before making these types of claims and/or suggestions.




[edit on 10-2-2010 by truthseeker1984]

[edit on 10-2-2010 by truthseeker1984]

reply to post by SaturnFX

I never did become a card-carrying member of the Church of Satan, but from what I've read LaVey belived that religion should be heavily taxed, and therefore they demand to pay tax (even when they could qualify for tax-exempt status).

reply to post by SaturnFX

In much of Europe one can choose an accredited church to whom the monies should go.
So nobody will pay for the Church of Satan (theoretically, I doubt it even applied) unless you indicate that and it's applied and listed. Consider that Catholics and Protestants have been warring for centuries, and some Protestants would consider paying the Church of Satan as preferable to paying the Vatican (and vice versa).
On the other hand, why should the churches and their ministers just entertain people who choose not to pay for special occassions, when other members clearly do pay?

reply to post by truthseeker1984

It's automatically taxing people around 10% which gets paid to the church of your choice.
If your church is not available, or you are atheist or anti-church (whatever) you can drop out and stop paying. However, churches here are very traditionally passed down, so your kids may not be baptized or confirmed and if poor you'll get a state pauper's funeral.
This is why traditionally Europe has regional rules on "mixed" marriages ie. if the father and mother are from different Catholic/Protestant backgrounds different traditions may apply to the gender of the child and the faith it will be confirmed into.
The church tax significantly also includes the Jews and Muslims.

More worrying for me is that church tax was paid through-out the Nazi era.

reply to post by halfoldman


Well, I have decided not to recant my statement. What worries me is that this sort of taxation could get out of hand in the long run. Look at the USA: Income tax wasn't immediately part of our society, and in fact is (according to some studies of our Constitution) illegal. Of course, if you don't pay them, you go to jail. Kinda sucks.

I for one am very against organized religion (but respect those involved), and would like nothing more than to see the disintegration of organized religion. It would save a lot of people a lot of heartache, and possibly a lot of wars.

But back to the original statement.

A 10% tax is very hefty, and quite possibly very illegal if it were to be introduced into the US. The reasons Churches are still running over here is through donations, grants, and the like. I honestly like to see it as the old adage: "A fool and his money are soon parted." Shoot, if that weeds out some of the sheeple from having any sort of spending power, then let them to continue to make the fat cats at the top of the Evangelical Movement richer. Those people will eventually die, and the money will be spread out again. I don't believe that forcing citizens to pay a tax for something they don't use is the right thing to do at all, and I would be one to adamantly fight it. Just my opinion of course, and I hope this question of taxation sparks some thought-provoking debate.

[edit on 10-2-2010 by truthseeker1984]

reply to post by truthseeker1984

I agree with your points, but just to clarify again, you can cancel the tax and forgo church rituals.
At least it's organized and controlled that way. I have serious doubts about the the "trickle-down" effect of supporting evangelists. Families who gain assets and join the super-rich rarely re-distribute their loot, and it remains inter-generational. They also won't give to proven charities, since they present themselves as a charity.

reply to post by halfoldman


I understand the forgoing part, however, the same thing was supposed to be done to the Income Tax, and it has become a monster. I just don't like the notion of anyone having to pay a tax if they decide to go to Church. It just doesn't set quite right with me.

As far as the trickle-down effect, you're right, it doesn't work. It was called "Reaganomics" back in the 80's. I was trying to get at the point that eventually they will all be exposed as frauds and their empire will eventually crumble. Only wishful thinking on my part, however.

I'd rather burn down churches than have money taken from me by force to be given to churches.

I mean that quite literally, and I suspect that many others would do the same.

Churches are big business in America, and they really don't amount to much more than that, at least in my area. They don't do a lot for the people of our area, but they sure can raise 100,000 to send some dumb kids to some noname country to witness to people who probably don't care too much.

This would never fly in America, nor should it. Ever, in any form, and not before I became a serious criminal.

reply to post by truthseeker1984

The wierd thing is that most of my relatives there hardly go to church, but they still pay the tax - I suppose for tradition and special occasions' sake.
My grandfather is "ausgetreten", which means he apostated from the Catholic church, which means the church tax stopped. I suppose many people think - hey, pay now and save extra costs for a preacher at your funeral (or your child's baptism, confirmation, wedding).


[edit on 10-2-2010 by halfoldman]

reply to post by KrazyJethro

Interestingly in the heavier church-taxed Denmark churches were bombed and burnt relatively recently. It was later blamed on Black Metal music and alcohol, but I think there is a deeper resentment (and the region was one of the last to convert its pagans to Christianities, so it's not smoothly ingrained).

reply to post by halfoldman


See, I had no idea that this was an entirely cultural thing. I'm really glad that you shed some light on this whole matter. In the US, when someone dies, usually part of their Social Security, any retirement funds, and other assets are used in the cost of a funeral. If people want a traditional church funeral, they just pay for it. I have had to bury about 4 relatives in about the past 7 years, and I know that some churches will do the service for a "donation fee" and others will do it for free if your family member was part of that church. Most of the time, the funeral home director takes care of all of the paper work including autopsies if needed. You pay that person directly, and then you don't have to worry about who you have to pay out and when.

Question for you: Has there every been any sort of complaint from your countrymen about this particular tax, or is it just an expected thing? I know us Americans can get quite heated about extra fees and the like, and I'm curious to know if there are the same sorts of feelings across the pond, especially in this particular matter.

my kiddos teachers should get this type of treatment.... and, i dont mean the kind that teach myth.

reply to post by truthseeker1984

Well, I actually live in South Africa, and we have a similar policy to the US, and a huge assorment of local and global evangelists.
In Germany from the info I get, it's not such a big deal because you can withdraw from it. Socially for a lot of people that is a big deal.
I know with some groups like the Scientologists there have been problems and refusals to recognize them. So I suppose it might be a problem if your sect/church isn't recognized, but you can still give privately.

I'm also hoping somebody from Germany or Scandinavia could add some comments?

Originally posted by TXRabbit
many of the "non-denominational" churches down here in TX (read: mega-churches or what a friend calls DOT-COM churches) pretty much expect a 10% "donation" by their members.

And you wondered why they needed a 148000 sq ft building. HA!

And on top of it they pay no taxes on that income.

Starting a church has to be one of the better business ideas. Loyal customers and you only have to deliver promises, using ordinary used car salesman tactics, never anything tangible in the form of goods or services.

Originally posted by truthseeker1984
reply to post by halfoldman

 

A 10% tax is very hefty, and quite possibly very illegal if it were to be introduced into the US. The reasons Churches are still running over here is through donations, grants, and the like.

But such charitable donations are tax deductible in the US while they are not in Europe (with the exception of the UK, and, I believe, Ireland).

i agree whole heartedly the church should be taxed for having any resources in "america" if there is a separation of church and state there should be no refuge from the hardships the state goes through and vice verse.

reply to post by KrazyJethro


This is a really funny post,I enjoyed the chuckle I had reading it.
A lot of churches are money grabbing charletans,most are on TV!
You have to be careful where you get your doctrine from.A lot of
churches change doctrine and scripture to fit their personal beliefs.

My husband and I pay our tithes every week.We also support those
in the mission fields,spreading the gospel of Jesus to the lost.A tithe,
is 10% of our income, paid each week to our church.