
This is Joel Osteen. You helped pay for his house. (The Washington Post)
Matt Yglesias thinks we
ought to start taxing churches. “Whichever faith you think is the one
true faith, it’s undeniable that the majority of this church-spending is
going to support false doctrines,” he notes. Even if you did direct the
money toward the one true faith, it’d still be a bad idea, as
“Upgrading a church’s physical plant doesn’t enhance the soul-saving
capacity of its clergy.”
Regardless
of whether you buy Yglesias’s logic, this raises an interesting
question — exactly how much money are we talking about here? If, all of a
sudden, churches, synagogues, mosques and the like lost their tax
privileges, how much tax revenue would that generate?
Ryan
T. Cragun, a sociologist at the University of Tampa, and two of his
students, Stephanie Yeager and Desmond Vega, took it upon themselves to figure it out.
They’re not exactly disinterested parties; their research appeared in
Free Inquiry, a publication of the Council for Secular Humanism. But
Cragun is a serious sociologist of religion and the data seems to check
out. The full scale of subsidies religions get is pretty staggering:

Cragun
et al estimate the total subsidy at $71 billion. That’s almost
certainly a lowball, as they didn’t estimate the cost of a number of
subsidies, like local income and property tax exemptions, the sales tax
exemption, and — most importantly — the charitable deduction for
religious given. Their estimate that religious groups own $600 billion
in property is also probably low, since it leaves out property besides
actual churches, mosques, etc.
The charitable deduction for all groups cost about $39 billion this year, according to theCBO, and given that 32 percent of
those donations are to religious groups, getting rid of it just for
them would raise about $12.5 billion. Add that in and you get a
religious subsidy of about $83.5 billion.
Of
course, these subsidies do more than reduce revenue. Property tax
exemptions, in particular, distort real estate construction decisions
and allocate more land to religious entities than would otherwise be the
case, which drives up rents for everyone else (especially since
religious groups tend not to buy property in high-density,
skyscraper-style developments and instead get a whole lot of land for
themselves).
No comments:
Post a Comment