I don’t know why you would think tha assessment has any credibility. You aren’t going to know what they have and frankly that isn’t relevant to taxation as we don’t tax wealth.
Why? We don’t assess anyone’s wealth because that’s insanely hard to do and is why every wealth tax that gets adopted eventually gets dropped.
What right do we have to know what a foreign nation, which the Vatican is, has?
Why would you want government workers to decide what is and is not acceptable for a Church? This is literally why the Congregationalists moved to Plymouth.
My point is that, in the US, other organizations that accept charity have to produce documentation detailing their spending. Religious organizations should be held to the same standard.
Because those things are related. If you don’t spend all your revenue, you end up accumulating wealth - that’s profit. Which is directly in contradiction of being a nonprofit entity.
This is literally why the Congregationalists moved to Plymouth.
A bit disingenuous. They also didn’t want to be persecuted while having batshit insane ideas and did horrible persecution, even unto death and torture of others, unless I’m misremembering. Churches should not be allowed to persecute nor encourage persecution of others. It would be nice if they actually taught the whole Bible in a sane and honest way and let God do the judging.
The Vatican isn’t a mega church. Almost no one in Roman Catholicism is using a private jet.
Fine, here then: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wealthiest_religious_organizations
I don’t know why you would think tha assessment has any credibility. You aren’t going to know what they have and frankly that isn’t relevant to taxation as we don’t tax wealth.
Would be nice if we had some kind of visibility into that, huh?
Why? We don’t assess anyone’s wealth because that’s insanely hard to do and is why every wealth tax that gets adopted eventually gets dropped.
What right do we have to know what a foreign nation, which the Vatican is, has?
Why would you want government workers to decide what is and is not acceptable for a Church? This is literally why the Congregationalists moved to Plymouth.
My point is that, in the US, other organizations that accept charity have to produce documentation detailing their spending. Religious organizations should be held to the same standard.
Their spending not their wealth yet you brought up wealth not spending.
Because those things are related. If you don’t spend all your revenue, you end up accumulating wealth - that’s profit. Which is directly in contradiction of being a nonprofit entity.
Profit is the revenue you have left after your expenses. Profits can become wealth but wealth is not profits.
If you can’t understand the above you should be asking questions more than making definitive statements.
deleted by creator
A bit disingenuous. They also didn’t want to be persecuted while having batshit insane ideas and did horrible persecution, even unto death and torture of others, unless I’m misremembering. Churches should not be allowed to persecute nor encourage persecution of others. It would be nice if they actually taught the whole Bible in a sane and honest way and let God do the judging.
We don’t, but civilized countries do.