[podcast src=”https://html5-player.libsyn.com/embed/episode/id/5853761/height/90/width/450/theme/custom/autonext/no/thumbnail/yes/autoplay/no/preload/no/no_addthis/no/direction/forward/render-playlist/no/custom-color/c30000/” height=”90″ width=”450″ placement=”top”]The federal district court for the Western District of Wisconsin recently held that the Tax Code’s housing allowance violates the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. The decision in Gaylor v. Mnuchin, (W.D. Wis., Oct. 6, 2017), deals with 26 U.S.C. § 107(2). It does not affect the exemption from taxed income based on the value of a church-owned home, traditionally referred to as a parsonage, which is found in 26 U.S.C. § 107(1). Josh explains how the housing-allowance exemption works, why the court concluded it is unconstitutional, and what ministers and religious organizations should look for as the case progresses.
FREE Webinar Nov. 2: Best Employee Practices for Houses of Worship
“FREE Webinar Nov. 2: Best Employee Practices for Houses of Worship” Register here for a free webinar sponsored by Church Executive and webinar featuring Frank Sommerville on November 2 at 11 a.m. E.D.T. The webinar will cover employee harassment, harassment policies, best hiring practices, terminating employees, and compliance with minimum wage and overtime rules.
1741 What to do with assets when a worshiping community closes
[podcast src=”https://html5-player.libsyn.com/embed/episode/id/5826736/height/90/width/450/theme/custom/autonext/no/thumbnail/yes/autoplay/no/preload/no/no_addthis/no/direction/forward/render-playlist/no/custom-color/c30000/” height=”90″ width=”450″ placement=”top”]If history is any indication, every worshiping community’s life ends sometime. If that happens under the U.S. Tax Code, there are limits on how assets must be distributed. Musical instruments, books, and furnishings can’t just be given to the donors who funded them. Fair prices must be received. And any assets left at the end of the legal entity’s existence must be transferred to another charitable entity, like another house of worship, a denominational entity, relief agencies, or social service providers.
“11 Ways Employees Commit Fraud: The most common types of fraud experienced by religious, charitable, and social service organizations”
“11 Ways Employees Commit Fraud: The most common types of fraud experienced by religious, charitable, and social service organizations” ChurchLaw&Tax has an infographic here.
“Claim of Fraudulent Luring Into Conversion To Christianity Dismissed on Ecclesiastical Abstention Grounds”
“Claim of Fraudulent Luring Into Conversion To Christianity Dismissed on Ecclesiastical Abstention Grounds” Religion Clause reports here on Rymer v. Lemaster, (M.D. Tenn., Oct. 4, 2017). The adopted magistrate judge’s recommendation is here.
“Court Says Tax Code’s Parsonage Allowance Is Unconstitutional”
“Court Says Tax Code’s Parsonage Allowance Is Unconstitutional” Religion Clause reports here on Gaylor v. Mnuchin, (W.D. Wis., Oct. 6, 2017). Freedom From Religion Foundation has a press release here. Here’s an excerpt from the court’s decision: Continue reading ““Court Says Tax Code’s Parsonage Allowance Is Unconstitutional””
“How to Recognize and Confront Fraud: Two telltale signs, and the best and worst ways to respond to suspected stealing.”
“How to Recognize and Confront Fraud: Two telltale signs, and the best and worst ways to respond to suspected stealing.” Bobby Ross Jr. has this interview with Nathan Salsbery on ManagingYourChurch.
Ga.: flipping the bird at a pastor during worship protected speech
Ga.: flipping the bird at a pastor during worship protected speech. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports on the Georgia Supreme Court’s decision overturning a man’s conviction for disorderly conduct here.
“Trump Administration Set to Roll Back Birth Control Mandate”
“Trump Administration Set to Roll Back Birth Control Mandate” Robert Pear of the New York Times has this report about coming exemptions to regulations under Affordable Care Act that require employers to provide coverage for contraceptives. The new exemptions allow employers or insurers that object to covering contraceptive based sincerely held religious beliefs or moral convictions. Houses of worship and similar religious employers were exempted under the Obama-era rules, but other religious organizations, including hospitals and schools, and entities that were not overtly religious but that were owned by individuals with religious objections to the coverage were required to provide the coverage. The 2014 Supreme Court decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby held that the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) required an exception for closely held, for-profit corporations controlled by owners who object to paying for contraceptives. In 2016 the Supreme Court considered a group of cases brought under RFRA by religious nonprofits, colleges, and schools that sought to expand the exemption as it applied to houses of worship to those groups. Zubik v. Burwell, 136 S. Ct. 1557 (2016). The Supreme Court did not decide the issue, instead remanding the case and encouraging the sides to explore alternative resolution. In May President Trump highlighted one of the groups in that consolidated case, the Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged, praising the nuns who run that organization for their challenge and promising these changes allowing their objections to be accommodated.
ECFA reports on the decision here.