I don't take issue with them having a large pile of money, or with what they do with it.
My problem is that they don't act in the public interest, which is what a non-profit is supposed to do.
The Red Cross pulls in about half what the Mormon church does, and while quite a bit gets eaten up by overhead costs, even more goes to providing medical aid and supplies to those in need -- regardless of color, creed, sexual orientation, or coffee preference.
The Red Cross doesn't lobby to deny basic human rights to 'undesirable' groups. They don't have investment holdings in insurance companies and real estate. The Red Cross isn't members-only, where you have to 'join the club' to receive aid.
The Red Cross helps anybody in need.
The Church (pick one) exists solely to further the interests of its members -- shareholders, if you will -- at the expense of other groups.
This is why I say The Church is a business, and as such should be taxed as one.
Of course not. 501(c)(3) accreditation is the standard in the USA for legal purposes. Wikipedia has a good writeup if you want to know more about how "nonprofit" is usually defined:
Just because a place is called a "nonprofit" doesn't mean that they have no money, no savings and no employees. It would be nearly impossible to run any kind of organization that way and would ridiculously handicap what they could accomplish. No money, savings, employees or profit is pretty much the recipe for a failed startup, after all. Anyhow, the IRS link explains exactly what is and is not allowed.
They also need to show that they are doing work which is a public benefit. For example, several free software projects are set up as a non-profit foundation, and they need to convince the IRS that they are a public good, vs. a company trying to shelter under the non-profit umbrella.
My problem is that they don't act in the public interest, which is what a non-profit is supposed to do.
The Red Cross pulls in about half what the Mormon church does, and while quite a bit gets eaten up by overhead costs, even more goes to providing medical aid and supplies to those in need -- regardless of color, creed, sexual orientation, or coffee preference.
The Red Cross doesn't lobby to deny basic human rights to 'undesirable' groups. They don't have investment holdings in insurance companies and real estate. The Red Cross isn't members-only, where you have to 'join the club' to receive aid.
The Red Cross helps anybody in need.
The Church (pick one) exists solely to further the interests of its members -- shareholders, if you will -- at the expense of other groups.
This is why I say The Church is a business, and as such should be taxed as one.