[Vision2020] IBTA Decisions

Sun Jun 4 18:13:41 PDT 2006

Wayne,

  I am afraid I am going to have to agree with the other posters on this  topic. In addition to fuchsia not being my color : ) I think the thinking you are using is sort of twisted and backwards, contrary to logic.

  I don't pay any money or taxes to support Christ Church. So it is not  taking my tax dollars any more than they are taking mine to support my  church. Your solution simply takes money out of the hands of volunteers  doing work with non-profits and putting it in the hands of the  government instead. I disagree with that.

 I think it would be  a disastrous policy to try and donate $10 to the Catholic Relief Fund  and have $3-$5 of that money be taxed and given to the government to be  spent on mobile homes that sink in the Arkansas mud instead of getting  to the people that need them like what happened with the victims of  Katrina. Most reputable charity organizations; Red Cross, UNICEF,  Catholic Relief Fund etc, get about 90% of the money to the cause, in  addition to providing volunteer labor. The government is not that  efficient. I don't know how many times the government's incompetence to  manage taxpayer dollars has been demonstrated to us in just the last  six years alone. 

 I would agree that maybe perhaps we can  revisit the rules and regulations regarding what constitutes a  non-profit organization. However, I think that you will find it  impossible to find an definition that will be to the liking of everyone  and not violate the constitutional religious rights and freedoms of  anyone.

  Regards,

  _DJA

Art Deco <deco at moscow.com> wrote:          Donovan,

  My  universe of discourse was limited to non-governmental, non-profit  organizations.  I have bolded these words below and in the  original post below in fuchsia so that you can see that.  I am   sorry if I was not clear about this in the original post.

  My point is this:  

  Instead of forcing each taxpayer to financially   support non-governmental,  now tax exempt organizations (non-profits) whose  goals/activities they do not wish to support and thus  enable,  I am proposing to revoke the tax exempt status of  these non-governmental   organizations.  Then each of us will be able to choose to give   money to the organizations that we   choose to support, money now being taken involuntarily through   taxation from us and applied where we do not   wish it to be.

  Suppose  that $10 of my tax money now goes to the Anti-Rhododendron League who  activities I abhor, but am forced to enable and to support by my forced  tax contribution.  If the tax-free status of the  Anti-Rhododendron League were revoked, I would save $10 in taxes  which I then could choose to contribute to the Friends of the Sewer  Lagoon or any other organization which I as an individual   choose to support.

  The cost to me in both cases is the same.  The difference   is that in the second case, I   exercised the freedom to   choose where my   money went and what non-governmental activities I   chose to support.  The principle being advocated is   that citizens should not be forced to finance non-governmental organizations whose   goals/philosophies/activities they wish not to support or enable.    

  In the case of the war in Iraq, the  war on drugs, or any other governmental activity each adult  citizen has at least a little say about whether or how money is spent  on these activities through the ballot box and by communicating our  opinions to our elected representatives, etc.  In the case of  the Wilson & Family's Cult & Cash Machine, I have no   influence what-so-ever on how the money forcibly   taken from me and given to them is spent,  even though I do not support, in fact strenuously oppose, most  of the goals/philosophies/activities of that organization.  

  I  am reasonably sure you can think of an organization about which you  feel the same way, unless you are one who does not care to  exercise personal choice/freedom over the disbursement/expenditure  of the money they earn to non-governmental organizations and do   not believe others should have that freedom either.

  The  above is a simple, straight-forward, particular application  of part of the libertarian, self-determination point of view which  appears to be an underlying element of our the  U.S. Constitution.  I would expect that persons from almost  the entire gamut of political outlooks could support the principle  invovled and the ensuing legislation once the facts and impacts are  known.

  If  the above is still not clear, and you have carefully read the above and  the now bolded original post, please seriously indicate what is not  clear, and I will attempt to clarify it.

Wayne A. Fox
1009 Karen Lane
PO Box 9421
Moscow, ID    83843

  (208) 882-7975
waf at moscow.com

  ----- Original Message -----   From: Donovan Arnold 
  To: Art   Deco ; Vision 2020 
  Cc: Tom Trail ; Shirley   Ringo ; Gary   Schroeder 
  Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2006 10:54 AM
  Subject: Re: [Vision2020] IBTA Decisions

Wayne,

So  what is your point? That we not have any non-profit organizations? That  we get to pick and choose what we want to pay taxes for on an  individual bases?

I think the war in Iraq and the war on   drugs are bigger wastes of money than anything locally, and certainly more   costly. 

_DJA

Art Deco <deco at moscow.com> wrote:                Rose, Saundra, et al,

    The problems of unfair/unbalanced taxation that     you have exposed are but a tip of the iceberg.

    Here is the problem of granting tax-exemptions     (income, property, sales, etc) to so-called non-profit     organizations:

    Whenever  one person, a group of persons, or an organization is given  preferential tax treatment, the rest of us must make up the difference  with our tax payments.  Those non-profits specially favored with  no taxes use that money that they do not pay (and the rest of make  up for by paying) to further the goals of their organization.  In  other words, those of us taxed are involuntarily  paying for the pursuance of any non-profit's goals.  Further,  those of forced to contribute to these organizations have no way to  influence the way such contributions are used.

    None of us probably favor the goals of all     organizations granted this special     treatment.  

    For  example, I resent having to pay for the Hertiage  Foundation pursuance of their goals and I am sure that there are  members of the Heritage Foundation that resent being forced  to pay for the activities of the Brookings Institute.  [Use your  imagination to think of all the non-governmental, non-profit organizations     whose activities you  are being forced to subsidize and whose activities conflict with your  ethical/political/social outlook and whom you would not choose to  support had you the personal freedom/discretion not to, for example.]

    This  is a clear violation of personal freedom to choose what  ideals/activities to support with our own money.  It is  also inconsistent with free-enterprise philosophy which directs that  any non-governmental organization depend on their success     in the marketplace to finance their own activities.

    It  would be foolish to expect any of our legislators to support the  abolishment of preferential tax treatment of non-profits at this  juncture.  This is partially because we as citizens and they as  legislators are basically ignorant of the cost to each taxpayer of  these gifts and the financial and ethical impact on those not so gifted.

    A  start to curing this ignorance and a start towards better tax laws with  respect to non-profits would be to pass a set of laws mandating that  the various taxing entities be required to determine and to publish the  amount of taxes lost under the various preferences granted to each  non-profit and the general categories of nonprofits as defined by  the tax law.  As part of these reports, the financial impacts  on classes of individuals should also be calculated so that  we can understand the financial impact on ourselves as individual  taxpayers.  

    If,  for example, knowing the amount it cost for each individual to  grant tax free status to religious organizations (especially those  whose teachings are in opposition to our own personal beliefs) may  influence the public's and eventually the legislators' willingness to  continue these free rides to non-governmental organizations and to continue violating our personal freedom which     such forced subsidies totally     abrogate.

    Abolishing  tax-free rides for nonprofits would not necessarily diminish the total  amount of money collected now by these organizations.  But by  making contributions/support/etc voluntary and dependent upon the  ideals and activities of each organization, there would probably be  some shift driven by the marketplace and considerations of general  worth in the distribution of that money.  Monies which individuals  are not being forced to fork over could be re-directed to the non-governmental organizations of the individual's own choice.

    In  the long run, abolishing tax-free status would not only restore  personal freedom of what to do with the discretionary funds we choose  to disburse, but will force those organizations we are now being forced  to support (without our having any way to influence their  activities) to operate much more openly, intelligently, legally,  and effectively.

Wayne A. Fox
1009 Karen Lane
PO Box     9421
Moscow, ID  83843

    (208) 882-7975
waf at moscow.com

    -----     Original Message -----     From:     DonaldH675 at aol.com 
    To: vision2020 at moscow.com 
    Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 6:11 PM
    Subject: [Vision2020] IBTA Decisions

    The  IBTA has announced their decisions on property tax issues related to  Logos School, New St. Andrews, and the Nuart Theatre aka Community  Christian Ministries.  The decisions will be posted (it  is hoped) within the next week (and I urge those interested to  take the time to review them) at: http://www2.state.id.us/bta/Appeal%20Lists/appealslist2005.htm.

    The  IBTA ruled in favor of all three entities.  I am disappointed in  their findings but I am appreciative of the opportunity to express  our concerns and make our arguments in a public  venue.   I believe that the IBTA "Conclusions of Law"  (on the Logos and NSA issues) opens the door to innumerable claims  from home-schooling families and other alleged educational  institutions for tax exemption on their homes or other  properties.  I need hardly remind you who will shoulder the tax  burden for that.

    It is  significant that Logos School, NSA, and CCM have     never  provided independently audited financial records to the Latah County  Board of Equalization or to the Idaho Board of Tax Appeals - nor have  those bodies asked for or required such documentation.  In the  case of NSA no financial documents have ever been provided - and they  fervently protest (successfully) any suggestion that they do so.   Logos School offered a two year old self-prepared Tax Form 990.   Mr. Jim Wilson (director of CCM) provided a self-reported  "budget."  (The financial documentation Mr. Wilson offered  included the generalized heading "Donations." Although the Nuart housed  Atlas School - a Christian, for-profit boys school, Mr. Wilson  testified that he had never charged rent for that use - thus dodging  any need for prorated the taxes on the property.  We  subsequently learned that instead of rent, Atlas School  administrators provided a monthly "donation" which of course was not 
 identified in the lump sum accounting provided by Mr. Wilson)

    I  urge readers of V2020 who are receiving their property tax bills this  week to contact the Latah County Commissioners and ask them  to require that all entities who receive property tax exemption in  this county provide, for the public record, a complete financial  disclosure which is prepared and submitted by an independent,  external, public accounting firm.  It is unconscionable to me  that the privilege of tax exemption is extended on the basis of  self-assertion of non-profit status.  And, if your property tax  seems a little higher, don't forget to thank the members and associates  of Wilson, Inc.

    Rose Huskey

    Rose     Huskey

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight     you, then you win." Mahatma Gandhi

---------------------------------

_____________________________________________________
 List     services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the     communities of the Palouse since 1994.       
                http://www.fsr.net                        
              mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
_____________________________________________________
List     services made available by First Step Internet, 
serving the communities of     the Palouse since 1994. 
http://www.fsr.net     
mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

---------------------------------
  Ring'em or ping'em. Make PC-to-phone   calls as low as 1¢/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice._____________________________________________________
 List services made available by First Step Internet, 
 serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low  PC-to-Phone call rates.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20060604/fade6358/attachment-0001.htm