This is the location for conversations that don't fall anywhere else on FlameFans. Whether its politics, culture, the latest techno stuff or just the best places to travel on the web ... this is your forum.

Moderators: jcmanson, Sly Fox, BuryYourDuke

#483667
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2 ... /26883351/
Christian schools will have no choice about gay marriage

A Supreme Court ruling could shatter religious school finances.

Justice Alito posed a predictable, but revealing question to Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, Jr., in the recent Supreme Court same-sex marriage oral argument: "In the Bob Jones case, the court held that a college was not entitled to tax exempt status if it opposed interracial marriage or interracial dating. So would the same apply to a university or a college if it opposed same-sex marriage?"

Verrilli replied that he would need to know more specifics, but allowed that "it's certainly going to be an issue. I don't deny that."

The solicitor general's answer should have been and probably was practiced. The question was unlikely to have surprised Verrilli, especially with the kind of preparation undertaken by the highest appellate lawyer for the United States in such high stakes situations. Such preparations would include multiple moot courts, simulated arguments with various lawyers playing the roles of each of the members of the Supreme Court trying to ask as many questions as possible.....

Alito's question was premised on the Bob Jones University case from 1983 in which the IRS revoked the school's tax exempt status because of its policies on interracial dating and marriage. BJU defended on the basis of the free exercise of religion. The Supreme Court rejected their defense holding that the government's goal of eradicating racial discrimination in marriage was more important than BJU's religious rights.

So, the follow-up question from Alito's question is obvious: If the court rules in favor of same sex marriage, how can religious colleges that refuse to acknowledge such unions avoid BJU's fate?
Not only religious schools, but I'm sure churches who oppose same sex marriages could face the same potential loss of tax exempt status.
#483698
Personally I think the Supreme Court is scared to even touch the same-sex issue. Of course I think states should decide that but with judicial activism run amuck these days, they may have no other choice.

But yes, I agree that it should be interesting to see.

It's funny to see though how Karl Rove added all these same-sex marriage bans in state constitutions during the Bush era, than as soon as the Democrats took control, judicial activism to strike those bans down.

Both were stupid in my opinion though.
#483705
SuperJon wrote:I'm not so sure churches should be tax exempt anyways. I haven't thought that issue all the way through, but it could be argued both ways.
Generally speaking, many churches in urban areas have, at least historically, provided services for the poor and homeless, thus reducing what "government has to do." There are some that don't do much of anything in regards to feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, etc...but I think a vast majority, on some level, do help reduce the burdens to local and state governments, and to a lesser extent, the federal government.
#483708
jbock13 wrote:Personally I think the Supreme Court is scared to even touch the same-sex issue. Of course I think states should decide that but with judicial activism run amuck these days, they may have no other choice.

But yes, I agree that it should be interesting to see.

It's funny to see though how Karl Rove added all these same-sex marriage bans in state constitutions during the Bush era, than as soon as the Democrats took control, judicial activism to strike those bans down.

Both were stupid in my opinion though.
The ironic thing is, one of the authors of VA's amendment (Steve Newman) admitted that, if it went up for a re-vote, the amendment would likely have not passed today. Yet the Republicans in the state capitol refused to allow a potential repeal to go up for a vote. So much for being the party of limited government.
#483710
alabama24 wrote:
SuperJon wrote:I'm not so sure churches should be tax exempt anyways. I haven't thought that issue all the way through, but it could be argued both ways.
What should be taxed?
Churches don't pay sales tax on anything they buy. So you have all these mega churches buying hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of tech gear with no tax on it.

The flip side is small inner city churches who do great work in their community but also don't pay sales tax. It allows them to do more.

Again, I don't have the entire thing thought out. There are just certain pieces that don't sit well with me.
#483713
TH Spangler wrote:If the folk pushing for this think it will hurt Christian organizations they had better think twice. Recent history proves financial support usually quadruples after such a move.
Yeah, just look at Memories Pizza...over $800,000 in a crowdfunding campaign. Honestly though, I'm not trying to hurt Christian organizations.
#483714
SuperJon wrote:
alabama24 wrote:
SuperJon wrote:I'm not so sure churches should be tax exempt anyways. I haven't thought that issue all the way through, but it could be argued both ways.
What should be taxed?
Churches don't pay sales tax on anything they buy. So you have all these mega churches buying hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of tech gear with no tax on it.

The flip side is small inner city churches who do great work in their community but also don't pay sales tax. It allows them to do more.

Again, I don't have the entire thing thought out. There are just certain pieces that don't sit well with me.
Yeah that is my thing. You have this huge churches that have monstrous budgets being treated the same way as the small church barely squeaking by. I also don't think there is a way to work it out without getting a lot of flack from the "religious right" which sadly is a population often catered to by politicians.
#483723
Bringing it back to the school aspect, Grand Canyon (LU's biggest competitor) tried to flip to non-profit status, although they recently failed. However when exploring that option, they noted that their annual tax bill is in the $100 million + range. Given that they're about 70% of LU's size (10k on, 70k off) I would imagine the impact on Liberty to be at least that much if not north of $150 million a year.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/bu ... /21942343/
#483725
http://blog.acton.org/archives/78302-wh ... ation.html
Chief Justice John Marshal wrote, in the Supreme Court ruling in McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), “That the power to tax involves the power to destroy; that the power to destroy may defeat and render useless the power to create . . . are propositions not to be denied.” Yet for the last 196 years, people have repeatedly tried to deny those propositions.

The latest example involves the Supreme Court’s pending ruling on the same-sex marriage issue will affect the non-profit status of religious institutions, such as colleges and universities. Many people seem to deny that taxing such institutions would have any nefarious effects, much less “destroy” them. Many other—more knowledgeable—understand the destructive implications for religious organizations and consider it a fringe benefit.
The argument we must make is rather simple. Take the Religion Clauses of the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” and then take this passage from McCullough v. Maryland: “All subjects over which the sovereign power of a State extends are objects of taxation, but those over which it does not extend are, upon the soundest principles, exempt from taxation. This proposition may almost be pronounced self-evident.”

That government may make no law establishing religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof is a clear statement that the power of government does not extend over the subject of religion. Therefore, religious institutions are exempt from taxation, not by tax code, but by self-evident, sound principles. That’s the simple summary. In the details, the argument gets more complicated. I will introduce a few of the major issues and provide a basic explainer about how we got here.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/05/07/rel ... n-battles/

It's incredibly short-sighted and ignorant of history to think that it would be good for churches and other religious institutions to be taxed.
#483727
rogers3 wrote:
ATrain wrote:It is interesting, for sure. However, there is no guarantee the court will rule in favor of marriage equality.
I'm out of touch on Liberty's rules, but outside of hiring, how restrictive are LU's rules?
I've been gone for about 6 years now. Jerry Junior stated to the N&A while I was there that the university doesn't prohibit homosexuals from attending, but does prohibit sex outside of marriage and that in VA, marriage was between a man and a woman (paraphrased, but the point was the university prohibits sexual immorality being practiced by anyone). Not sure if the Liberty Way has been updated or not since that time.
#483735
SuperJon wrote:I'm not so sure churches should be tax exempt anyways. I haven't thought that issue all the way through, but it could be argued both ways.

From what I understand, if churches lose this privilege, then it would likely mean less tithes and offerings as those who donate would no longer get a tax benefit. For instance, if a person is a 10% tither and makes $50k a year. Then the $5k they donate to the church would not be subject to federal income taxation. This would likely save them around $1k in their tax bill. It would be worse for those who leave a large chunk of their wealth to a church or Christian organization like Liberty. Large donors who drop several millions of dollars to Liberty, would likely have that sum heavily taxed by the government (many times at a 50%+ rate).

I'm not sure of all the "in's and outs" of it, but non-profit organizations that are deemed to show discrimination to employees who have same sex marriages, or have a rules prohibiting those individuals in any way, could be subject to losing this tax benefit. If that were to happen, it would be devastating to those churches and christian organizations throughout the world.
#483748
rhezick wrote:Bringing it back to the school aspect, Grand Canyon (LU's biggest competitor) tried to flip to non-profit status, although they recently failed. However when exploring that option, they noted that their annual tax bill is in the $100 million + range. Given that they're about 70% of LU's size (10k on, 70k off) I would imagine the impact on Liberty to be at least that much if not north of $150 million a year.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/bu ... /21942343/
Their total tax bill in 2013 was about $56 million. The CEO said it COULD grow to close to $100 million soon given the growth rates, but that would have to be coupled with a drawdown in spending or something that results in a higher operating margin.

Also, where did you see that they failed in their bid to switch? I hadn't heard that up to this point in time...
#483761
My dad did a study on the Bob Jones case when he was working for his doctorate at the University of Michigan back in the mid 80's. He said one of the biggest dangers is that not only can they lose the tax benefits for those who donate, but they could also lose the benefits of property tax. In other words, schools and churches that have their tax benefit status stripped, would likely have to pay property taxes. I don't know what the property taxes in Lynchburg/state of VA are, but I imagine the campus is worth in the $100's of millions of dollars. Even in the most conservative property tax areas, they would likely have a monthly property tax bill in the $100's of thousands each month.
#483769
ATrain wrote:
jbock13 wrote:Personally I think the Supreme Court is scared to even touch the same-sex issue. Of course I think states should decide that but with judicial activism run amuck these days, they may have no other choice.

But yes, I agree that it should be interesting to see.

It's funny to see though how Karl Rove added all these same-sex marriage bans in state constitutions during the Bush era, than as soon as the Democrats took control, judicial activism to strike those bans down.

Both were stupid in my opinion though.
The ironic thing is, one of the authors of VA's amendment (Steve Newman) admitted that, if it went up for a re-vote, the amendment would likely have not passed today. Yet the Republicans in the state capitol refused to allow a potential repeal to go up for a vote. So much for being the party of limited government.
I would actually agree with your statement.
#483778
ATrain wrote:Then agree with it jbock
Sorry, as a history major I should have known better than to express my opinion using passive voice. :oops:
#483788
Humble_Opinion wrote:
rhezick wrote:Bringing it back to the school aspect, Grand Canyon (LU's biggest competitor) tried to flip to non-profit status, although they recently failed. However when exploring that option, they noted that their annual tax bill is in the $100 million + range. Given that they're about 70% of LU's size (10k on, 70k off) I would imagine the impact on Liberty to be at least that much if not north of $150 million a year.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/bu ... /21942343/
Their total tax bill in 2013 was about $56 million. The CEO said it COULD grow to close to $100 million soon given the growth rates, but that would have to be coupled with a drawdown in spending or something that results in a higher operating margin.

Also, where did you see that they failed in their bid to switch? I hadn't heard that up to this point in time...
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/news ... ikely.html

Sorry, I was using that first article which was older, having read this newer one recently but couldn't remember where I found it. Okay, so not quite a failed attempt. Just a bleaker possibility, as the shareholders rejected the proposal which the link details and around 2016 looks like they'll reach that $100 million mark in taxes owed.
#506237
The guys on the CSN board found this update on GCU ...
Inside Higher Ed wrote:Stuck With Profit
Grand Canyon U's leaders criticize decision by its accreditor to block the company's attempt to go nonprofit, raising questions about the broad use of outsourcing in higher education.

March 7, 2016
By Paul Fain


Image

Going nonprofit may not be a realistic option for the shrinking number of publicly traded for-profit institutions, if the failed attempt by Grand Canyon University is any indication.

The Christian for-profit has been a rare bright spot amid the sector’s steep decline in recent years. But about 18 months ago the Phoenix-based company said it would seek to convert to nonprofit status.
Click Here for Full Story
Dondi Costin - LU President

Ive gone there a few times since moving to texas b[…]

There’s a cerebral side to the game, which M[…]

NCAA Realignment Megathread

Duke Gonzaga B12? https://larrybrownsports.com/co[…]

FlameFans Fantasy Baseball

We are on!!! Hope to see everyone tonight at 9:30[…]