Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It was sarcasm based on most churches (that I've attended) preaching that salvation is based on your works and deeds rather than grace and faith. People who don't tithe AND give offerings are often called "God robbers".
You know, I think it's a mistake to accuse people who believe we have a responsibility to keep God's commandments as believing that we are saved by our works. Now... back to the topic of the OP.
revrandy understanding of the Canadian tax code in this regard is not correct.
It is not my understanding, it is the understanding of the lawyers at the United Church of Canada. In fact a couple of our churches have been audited by CRA and action has been taken against them.
Perhaps you should instruct our lawyers on how they wrong and please notify the CRA as well.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,950,860 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by revrandy
It is not my understanding, it is the understanding of the lawyers at the United Church of Canada. In fact a couple of our churches have been audited by CRA and action has been taken against them.
Perhaps you should instruct our lawyers on how they wrong and please notify the CRA as well.
I wonder what the details of those are - I've been involved in a couple of CRA audits as a senior board member of two charities.
Are you suggesting by renting out the building for a use, that jeopardizes the charitable status? I just can't see that, because we are in a situation identical to that, and in no way was that an issue. What was an issue was the amount of GST claimed back, but that got sorted.
CRA seemed more concerned about political activities, both as as a percentage of funds expended, AND, the amount of time put in by volunteers/staff versus other stated goals. Once we could prove the political activities were based on the goals of the organization, that issue got resolved also.
It has to be more than just renting the building. What was the exact ruling and do you know what IT Bulletin was being used to justify it?
You know, I think it's a mistake to accuse people who believe we have a responsibility to keep God's commandments as believing that we are saved by our works. Now... back to the topic of the OP.
You weren't in those churches and I don't really care what you think.
I wonder what the details of those are - I've been involved in a couple of CRA audits as a senior board member of two charities.
Are you suggesting by renting out the building for a use, that jeopardizes the charitable status? I just can't see that, because we are in a situation identical to that, and in no way was that an issue. What was an issue was the amount of GST claimed back, but that got sorted.
CRA seemed more concerned about political activities, both as as a percentage of funds expended, AND, the amount of time put in by volunteers/staff versus other stated goals. Once we could prove the political activities were based on the goals of the organization, that issue got resolved also.
It has to be more than just renting the building. What was the exact ruling and do you know what IT Bulletin was being used to justify it?
Legal has indicated that when we hold a funeral, wedding etc. we are required to charge the exact same amount for members, adherents as well as people who have no connection to the church. It is based on the notion that as a charitable organisation we are required to provide service to everyone equally. Having two different fee schedules is not treating everyone equally.
I also know the Presbyterian Church has changed their fee structure as well. A local minister brought up the topic at our ministerial meeting and showed us the letter they received from their legal department telling explaining the same thing.
It is my understanding this is the result of some changes in 2012 or so. If I can find the bulletin when I get into the church, I will post it for you.
Out of the things listed, my church only charges for weddings for non-parishoners. We have a small, historical church, and we've had drive-bys come in who want to use the church for their wedding. The charge is in the hundreds, not the thousands, and depends upon whether or not they also need the parish hall, the organist, or our priest. It's fair to do so--it costs money to keep up the building as well as the lights/HVAC for the wedding, and we already operate on a deficit.
If you are a registered member of the church, no. But if you are just out looking for a pretty church to get married in, yes. Not sure what the rate is but I do know it exists and I have no problem with that. And, we reserve the right to refuse a service to anyone if their beliefs/practices conflict with our core beliefs.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,950,860 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by revrandy
Legal has indicated that when we hold a funeral, wedding etc. we are required to charge the exact same amount for members, adherents as well as people who have no connection to the church. It is based on the notion that as a charitable organisation we are required to provide service to everyone equally. Having two different fee schedules is not treating everyone equally.
I also know the Presbyterian Church has changed their fee structure as well. A local minister brought up the topic at our ministerial meeting and showed us the letter they received from their legal department telling explaining the same thing.
It is my understanding this is the result of some changes in 2012 or so. If I can find the bulletin when I get into the church, I will post it for you.
Ah, so it appears to be recent.
My apologies, it appears I am the one who does not understand the charitable situation with the CRA. I would be interested in the bulletin you may find.
If a member has been faithful on giving, and even pays tithes, that member should not have to pay for weddings and stuff.
What's next, pay for baptisms too? I think the Catholics do that. That is sick.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
