Should Megachurches Be Taxed?
By Four Walls
@FourWalls (68084)
United States
October 17, 2015 12:19pm CST
I noticed that televangelists are making tens, if not hundreds of millions of dollars every year. I also noted that they aren't exactly clothing the naked, feeding the hungry, and sheltering the homeless as the Scriptures command them to do. In an article I wrote about this on Persona Paper, I pointed out that Joel Osteen's megachurch, Lakewood Church in Houston, has 22,000 members...and their "good" is having a sign-up sheet so members can volunteer once a month at a homeless shelter that is actually owned and operated by the 3,000-member Christ Church Episcopal Cathedral. 
For less than a tenth of Osteen worth (he's worth $40 million or so) that church could build quality apartments for homeless people (where the homeless could have work [such as happens at a homeless shelter here -- homeless residents do many jobs at the facility, such as cooking, maintenance, and housecleaning] as well as a place to live). Instead, the homeless continue to live on the streets of Houston and Osteen lives in a $10 million palace.
Back in the old days, churches took care of the poor through orphanages, homes, shelters, and hospitals. Now that the government does all that for us, shouldn't these megachurches with preachers asking their congregations to give $60 million for a plane (hello, Creflo Dollar, I'm talking about you) pay the government, given how they conveniently have sat back and allowed the government to do the work while they, the churches, become Ft. Knox-style "storehouses" making preachers rich?
For less than a tenth of Osteen worth (he's worth $40 million or so) that church could build quality apartments for homeless people (where the homeless could have work [such as happens at a homeless shelter here -- homeless residents do many jobs at the facility, such as cooking, maintenance, and housecleaning] as well as a place to live). Instead, the homeless continue to live on the streets of Houston and Osteen lives in a $10 million palace.
Back in the old days, churches took care of the poor through orphanages, homes, shelters, and hospitals. Now that the government does all that for us, shouldn't these megachurches with preachers asking their congregations to give $60 million for a plane (hello, Creflo Dollar, I'm talking about you) pay the government, given how they conveniently have sat back and allowed the government to do the work while they, the churches, become Ft. Knox-style "storehouses" making preachers rich?2 people like this
4 responses
@FourWalls (68084)
• United States
17 Oct 15
That's precisely why I mentioned the megachurches. Most congregations are small (200 or fewer members), and -- in the U.S. (and probably elsewhere) -- getting smaller.
1 person likes this
@xFiacre (13035)
• Ireland
17 Oct 15
@FourWalls I have major problems with megachurches and not just with the money angle! My own has 20 members and that's enough.
3 people like this
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
18 Oct 15
I don't really know what Joel Osteen does with the money, but I do know that in addition to government oversight - they still have to file financials - there is also an organization that audits churches. I don't think you can tax just mega churches simply because they are such. The problem being that if you tax one church, it makes it discriminatory not to tax another. Tax everyone or no one. I don't see that the government has the right to tax churches that are too popular while giving a break to churches that can't attract a large membership. Actually, I think that if you start taxing large churches that rake in millions, like Osteen, you enable them to actually spend more money on material things. It would mean there would be less incentive for them to use the money in only charitable ways, it's been taxed and so there is less oversight. And it's taxed twice then. Once when you give it, once when they get it. It's not the best solution. The best solution would be for people to stop supporting organizations that aren't spiritually profitable. But I am not sure you can penalize them for being popular. And churches do still take care of the poor in many ways. My teenaged son spent his Saturday working at the church's food bank today and he spends many of his Saturdays that way.
2 people like this
@FourWalls (68084)
• United States
18 Oct 15
It's not taxed twice, because donations to churches, as charitable organizations, are tax deductible (meaning the people giving the money take it off their income tax).
You're right, however, there's no way to "fairly" do it. The church down the street from me, which has a more packed parking lot on Tuesday night when kids are using their gym for basketball than they do for Sunday morning services, shouldn't have to pay the same amount of money that a megachurch does, and (to me, anyway) part of the First Amendment is religious neutrality. If the IRS starts saying this denomination has to pay and that denomination doesn't, that's tantamount to an endorsement of religion.
I think the true point of this rant was more to wake the megachurches up to stop acting like social clubs and start doing the work that God called churches to do. And I honestly believe that too many of the megachurches act like social clubs and not servants of God, to the point where the only thing that will get their attention is to threaten their lofty wallet. It's troubling to me that a 3,000-member church owns and operates the homeless shelter in Houston, while the nation's largest church (which is also in Houston) can do nothing more than send them volunteers one Saturday a month.
1 person likes this
@LeaPea2417 (37355)
• Toccoa, Georgia
17 Oct 15
I do think the mega churches should be taxed.
1 person likes this
@FourWalls (68084)
• United States
19 Oct 15
That's a good idea. As I said in another reply, there's a tiny church near me that has maybe a dozen cars in its parking lot on Sunday morning, so any income they get is minimal. They shouldn't be punished because these other places are seeing how much land they can buy without having to pay a penny tax on it..and all they do with the land is make themselves comfortable instead of the people the Bible commands them to care for.
1 person likes this
