I don’t see why I should pay for it. Why don’t they fund their own bloody repairs? 👿

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18108389

It’s not like they’re short of a few quid!

So who do I call to ask for my VAT exemption?

I don’t see why I should pay for it.

Unfamiliar with the concept of tax, are you?

They are in disrepair because they do not generate sufficient income, ergo costs exceed revenue. Simple case of economics IMHO, liquidate some assets to fund the repairs, perhaps the religious version of a Rights Issue amongst the faithful could raise funds. Repurpose some of the unused assets, diversify, prove the existance of God and they’ll be packed and will generate unlimited funds. Do anything but don’t give them my money either. 😀

So who do I call to ask for my VAT exemption?

Are you renovating a church ?

Whilst it is not a lot of money, this is heading in entirely the wrong direction. There should be a punitive tax on all religious buildings.

The sooner our cathedrals, mosques and temples are turned into Wetherspoons the better.

Around 15 per cent (over £160 million) comes from the Church Commissioners who manage assets of £4.4 billion (at the end of 2008) on behalf of the Church:

From here

I’d rather see that cash go elsewhere TBH. Does seem a bit of an oddity TBH

Woody, why would that cash go elsewhere ?

As I understand it, it’s the money raised from investments on the churches assets.

Where else do you think it should go ?

Why don’t they fund their own bloody repairs?

Your link claims that for any future repairs and alterations the C of E carries out, the government will demand payment of 20% of the cost. The grant they are offering is “designed to offset” that. It doesn’t claim that the C of E won’t be funding their own bloody repairs.

Personally I don’t have a problem with that, nor do I think it’s a “total disgrace”. What I think is possibly a disgrace is that the government now presumably wants to charge churches, mosques, synagogues, and temples, for repairs they carry out, just to raise revenue for their spending.

Typical Tories – they want to tax everyone more. Except themselves of course.

Typical Tories – they want to tax everyone more. Except themselves of course.

This is the disgrace here.

I call troll on your original post.

Not trolling, just expressing my opinion. Which of course you are free to disagree with.

On a less frivolous note – the article seems to suggest that work undertaken as part of renovations will now be eligible for VAT as it is with other construction work.

Ok I’m curious Ernie, why should any religious building be exempt from paying VAT, what makes them any different from buildings used by other groups? I would prefer to see VAT exemption on other public works – hospitals, schools etc where the benefit is available to a wider body of people than just to those who follow the faith that owns the building and their governing body. Religion is, after all, mostly a personal choice. Whereas being ill is, in general, not.

Also, how far do you extend that list of faith and exemption – do you include Scientology? Where do you draw the line? It is genuine question, I am curious how far you believe this should apply.

I don’t consider religions to be businesses so I don’t feel that an added value tax is appropriate. Those who attend churches, mosques, synagogues, and temples, already pay their taxes on both their income and purchases. I don’t “draw the line” on any religion – everyone is free to believe whatever they want to believe imo as long as they don’t engage in criminal activity.

Ok, 1 answer one neat sidestep.

Point 1 – I think I may disagree based upon the way they utilise funds and assets to generate income, some of the more demanding religions operate something of a tax take of their own from parishioners and they do trade – ie buy and sell which I believe makes them too close to a business to ignore – I think we will have to differ on that one as it’s not our call to make, but interesting nonetheless.

Point 2 – I was not asking about where the line should be drawn re their religion and people’s freedom to follow it, perhaps my question was not clear. I asked at what point in the spectrum of faiths and religions from CofE and the RC Church at the larger and more recognised end of the scale right through to a man who believes his cat is the second coming, does the VAT amnesty end or it is wholly inclusive, where do you believe that the VAT exemption should stop. Not sure I can be any clearer with my question.

Church buildings are national assets in my book, not just religious ones. I’m not religious, but I’ve marvelled at their splendour many times and also enjoyed their quiet spaces. I would be very sad to see them collapse through lack of funding.

The same goes for plenty of secular things too. Public art, other historical buildings, gardens etc etc.

I think that many people share this viewpoint. Therefore public support is appropriate, in my opinion, for all the things mentioned above.

I don’t consider religionsfootball to be businesses so I don’t feel that an added value tax is appropriate. Those who attend matches already pay their taxes on both their income and purchases. I don’t “draw the line” on any religionfootball team – everyone is free to believesupport whomever they want to believe imo as long as they don’t engage in criminal activity.

Church buildings are national assets in my book, not just religious ones.

I agree but they were dead against my party idea for their building and said something about it being a holy place and only for religious activities of the religion they belonged to 😯

If they were actually poor and struggling there may be some call for protecting some religious national treasures. its just old churches rotting because no one goes there anymore and falling in to disrepair. I like to call this progress but it may just be change

Point 2 – I was not asking about where the line should be drawn re their religion and people’s freedom to follow it, perhaps my question was not clear. I asked at what point in the spectrum of faiths and religions from CofE and the RC Church at the larger and more recognised end of the scale right through to a man who believes his cat is the second coming, does the VAT amnesty end or it is wholly inclusive, where do you believe that the VAT exemption should stop. Not sure I can be any clearer with my question.

We don’t need to worry about that, They already have it sorted

rogerthecat – Member

Ok, 1 answer one neat sidestep.

You appear to be under the impression that I have an obligation to justify my opinions to you – I don’t.
I’m not accountable to you.

FYI I have no problem with someone “who believes his cat is the second coming”. And if they want to start a religion based on that belief then that’s their business, not mine.

Most churches are just plain ugly, some cathedrals display fantastic craftsmanship, of course they were built that way to display the power and wealth of the church. Now they have become irrelevant to society, let the buildings crumble as a sign of their decay.

We don’t need to worry about that, They already have it sorted

Cool. Bit thin on detail – eg what do they consider to be a religion – does Jedi really count? And I can’t find a list of the ones that are recognised by COR UK, perhaps they have yet to find one.

Assuming there is a list, is this the one they use to decide which ones pay VAT?

Now they have become irrelevant to society, let the buildings crumble as a sign of their decay.

But that’s not what this issue is about. The issue is whether it is right to tax churches for carrying out repairs to their crumbling buildings.

For what I can see those who believe that it is appear to be motivated for purely vindictive reasons, and nothing else. Personally I think it is shameful if the government now feels that it needs to slap a charge on any repairs carried out by churches, mosques, synagogues, and temples, to finance their spending programmes.

ernie_lynch – Member
You appear to be under the impression that I have an obligation to justify my opinions to you – I don’t.
I’m not accountable to you.

An extremely valid point there Ernie, which makes your earlier post today even more puzzling…

ernie_lynch – Member
The other part of the problem I suspect is simply the reluctance to firmly nail your colours to the mast because doing so leaves you open to critical attack…….how much better to leave people guessing what you actually believe in – at least they won’t be able to effectively attack you.

At least we are in agreement on the subject matter (again) 😉

You do get some funny things on STW!!! 😉

let the buildings crumble as a sign of their decay.

There are quite a few priests who would agree with you, the up keep of medieval & other old buildings being the thorn in the side to many who just want to get on with the business of god & not waste time on numerous fundraisers & committees involved in buildings upkeep.

You appear to be under the impression that I have an obligation to justify my opinions to you – I don’t.
I’m not accountable to you.

No, you are not, no more than others who post opinions on here are under the same obligation to you. Perhaps you should apply that rule when you dogmatically pursue a point in other threads. 😀

Personally I think it is shameful

I don’t think it is. I think they are part of society, they should pay their share like everyone else. When you start letting some people not pay something that others have to, it can lead to resentment.

BUT, these are almost public buildings so it’s right that they should get some help.

Tricky really. Glad I don’t have to make those decisions

anyone else who should be exempt? The poor , the infirm, or just the wealthy religious establishment?

I am glad you dont have to explain/justify your opinions but you feel perfectly comfortable negatively explaining our motives.

I think the church should be treated like every other organisation regarding its tax bill I dont see it as special. I would ask you why you think it is but of course you dont need to explain your views whilst calling us Purely vindictive.

Even by your standards this is woefully low 🙄

teamhurtmore – Since when have I left people guessing what I believe ? 😀

Expressing my views and opinions clearly isn’t the same as having an obligation to justify them.

Generally I don’t give a toss whether other people agree with me or not….why should I ?

Isn’t it that they have removed an exemption rather than “slapped a charge” on repairs. Which seems fair and equal.

The Treasury said it needed to take steps to correct “significant anomalies” in the VAT system.

So the money given is a straight donation to the CofE straight from taxpayers coffers.

You have just repeated your view shall i repeat mine?

Church buildings are national assets in my book, not just religious ones. I’m not religious, but I’ve marvelled at their splendour many times and also enjoyed their quiet spaces. I would be very sad to see them collapse through lack of funding

Even as a dogmatic atheist, I agree with molgrips’ comments. Churches are part of our architectural and historical heritage and we should take care of them. Of course, if the C of E is minted, then they should reimburse the public purse by whatever valid form of taxation.

Even by your standards this is woefully low 🙄

I’ll try to up my standards just for you babes.

I guess it comes down to beliefs in the concept of listed buildings. They are listed as part of our heritage. Is that a worthy cause or not? The Church owns nearly half of the listed buildings in the UK. Many are magnificent buildings that are worth helping to maintain IMO.

church of england needs to have a serious think about it’s music policy IMO..

Ernie appears to be adopting the Croydon variation of the Edinburgh Defence…

If they are public buildings, and we are providing tax relief to assist in the upkeep for their architectural heritage, then perhaps they should be open to the public on a more regular basis and provide some additional public function over and above religious services. (I appreciate that there are some that already fulfill this public duty and I applaud them for doing so.)

So what’s the Croydon variation of the Edinburgh Defence crikey ?

The one where someone asks you to clarify your opinion, you do, they tell you that they aren’t satisfied with your answer, you realise that they won’t be satisfied with any answer until you agree with them, you think to yourself “I can’t be arsed to argue yet again with someone over religion”, you inform that you have no obligation to justify your opinion to them personally ?

Is it that one ?

Not trolling, just expressing my opinion. Which of course you are free to disagree with.

Sorry, direct at Woppit, not you!

Ernie, you appear to be under the impression that I have an obligation to justify my opinions to you – I don’t.
I’m not accountable to you.

I’m asking not you to justify your opinions crikey – just trying to figure out your point. Which I suspect you don’t really know yourself. Ah well never mind eh ?

And you are absolutely right btw – you’re not accountable to me.

I’ll try to up my standards just for you babes.

Bless you
EDIT: 😳
I spoke too soon …ever the optimist me