Church tax for companies?
The German churches with their blown up social apparatus the Zaster goes out. On the other hand the state wants to do somewhat. The Jewish municipalities are already today supported by it.
(kreuz.net) in the SPD Bundestag faction there is plans to be to drive from corporations and GmbHs church tax. The reported yesterday the daily paper `Financial Times Deutschland'.Thus is to be supplied to the religious communities more funds.
The social-democratic tax expert Reinhard Schultz writes in a paper: „Something similar as the existing coupling at the wage and income tax could take place also a coupling to body-expensively. “
Finance companies pay body-expensively. Owner of person companies income tax and employee wage tax.
„We must place the church tax on a broader basis “, said tax expert Schultz `Financial Times Deutschland'.
Schultz wants to provide not only the churches improveal, but also for justice among the companies.
So the motor vehicle and textile supplier joy mountain are also over 33.000 coworkers an unincorporated firm, which pays church tax.
On the other hand car company DaimlerChrysler is a finance company, which does not pay a church tax.
However finance companies, which did not want to pay a church tax, can refuse themselves after the plans suggested by Schultz: „The public attention would be however safe of the company. “
The protestant and catholic church tax incomes sank noticeably in the last years.
2001 were arising still about 8.6 billion euro. 2005 was it 7.8 billion euros.
That was on the one hand because of the general decrease of the total tax revenues. On the other hand the church withdrawals become apparent.
The tax constitutes depending upon Federal state eight to nine per cent of the income tax debt.
By the 2008 planned reform of the taxation of enterprises could be still intensified the financial situation of the churches and synagogues:
If the option was granted to the unincorporated firms to change from the income tax to body expensive could the churches after internal computations of the Federal Government up to 20 per cent - 1.5 billion euro tax revenues escape.
For the churches that would be a hard impact. The incomes from the church tax constitute with them between 60 and 85 per cent of the respective household.
Tax expert Schultz - which is afraid protestant actual that the churches must close soon education and social mechanisms such as kindergartens and homes for the disabled, if their incomes continue to sink.
In addition bräuchten in the future more religious communities money. The Jewish municipalities are supported already today by the state.
All reader opinions indicate
6 of 45 reader opinions:
6 of 45 reader opinions:Wednesday, 28 June 2006 15:09
Jörg Guttenberger, Cologne: blueberry: Church tax
They mention the Vatikan again and again. After the church tax is fixed concordat-moderately, the Aushandlung of details is thing of the German Bischofskonferrenz. The Vatikan remains there outside forwards.
To the installation course of legal entities: I never demanded that, but specified only arguments, which speak for it. Thus I referred to the overall economic use of church and other private schools. In this connection I raised the question whether the church tax for legal entities is possibly more nedriger, than their portion of the total tax burden, if the churches give their to the public up serving social and scientific activities, i.e. the state take over these mechanisms, fully financiers must and for it tax increase necessarily.
The question not raised by me should be examined unabashedly on the basis of legal and economic criteria, how I expressed on in an answer iustitia.
As well known in the framework the federations concerned by legislative procedures are asked. Whether their expert knowledge is always sufficiently brücksichtigt, is however another question.
To the installation course of legal entities: I never demanded that, but specified only arguments, which speak for it. Thus I referred to the overall economic use of church and other private schools. In this connection I raised the question whether the church tax for legal entities is possibly more nedriger, than their portion of the total tax burden, if the churches give their to the public up serving social and scientific activities, i.e. the state take over these mechanisms, fully financiers must and for it tax increase necessarily.
The question not raised by me should be examined unabashedly on the basis of legal and economic criteria, how I expressed on in an answer iustitia.
As well known in the framework the federations concerned by legislative procedures are asked. Whether their expert knowledge is always sufficiently brücksichtigt, is however another question.
Tuesday, 27 June 2006 22:53
blueberry: @ Guttenberger
Only, when is more frequently happened: today or in the Middle Ages, when it still no so highly developed Rechtssytem gave, how today?
As previously mentioned it does not hang of it starting from whether the juridical system is highly developed or not, but only of it whether the Judikative the instruments of power possesses itself to intersperse or not. Frequently the hands were bound the princes for the emperor because had ever emazipiert themselves. From church side this emancipation was desired starting from a certain point with security.
Since the number of Christians - both protestant, and catholic - decreases strongly, the church tax could actually get the character of by the state driven club subscriptions. Only: is that desired?
Why not? I do not have anything against it if a catholic for its church a tax pay or if the protestant one does it. I am even catholic and pay thus taxes. If one wants to require however contributions of companies, then that is power politics. That does not have to do anything with financial need, finally gives it also in France or otherwise where a church. There it concerns traditional power politics like it in the Middle Ages was operated and like it (not only) to Germany substantial harmed. To it the Vatikan should say good-bye finally. The church is not a religious community, it should power politics drive and into the interests of states interfere, still to it if in it 70% is not at all catholic.
As previously mentioned it does not hang of it starting from whether the juridical system is highly developed or not, but only of it whether the Judikative the instruments of power possesses itself to intersperse or not. Frequently the hands were bound the princes for the emperor because had ever emazipiert themselves. From church side this emancipation was desired starting from a certain point with security.
Since the number of Christians - both protestant, and catholic - decreases strongly, the church tax could actually get the character of by the state driven club subscriptions. Only: is that desired?
Why not? I do not have anything against it if a catholic for its church a tax pay or if the protestant one does it. I am even catholic and pay thus taxes. If one wants to require however contributions of companies, then that is power politics. That does not have to do anything with financial need, finally gives it also in France or otherwise where a church. There it concerns traditional power politics like it in the Middle Ages was operated and like it (not only) to Germany substantial harmed. To it the Vatikan should say good-bye finally. The church is not a religious community, it should power politics drive and into the interests of states interfere, still to it if in it 70% is not at all catholic.
Tuesday, 27 June 2006 22:02
Jörg Guttenberger, Cologne: blueberry: Church tax
That today also right before power pinches, is correct naturally. Only, when is more frequently happened: today or in the Middle Ages, when it still no so highly developed Rechtssytem gave, how today?
I write not, as in the high Middle Ages, but only orient me at the legal situation and at economic criteria.
As well known only the Angehöigen of the respective church pays church tax. The Atheisten mentioned by Inen is not thus at all affected of it!
As already determined, the churches became so good after 1918, as finances from the entire people. Since the number of Christians - both protestant, and catholic - decreases strongly, the church tax could actually get the character of by the state driven club subscriptions. Only: is that desired? In vain expenditures for churches are not just as, as contributions to social and science-promoting mechanism coming in and/or body expensive deductible. I.e. nevertheless, the state saves so much money through the activity of these mechanisms that this promotion is worthwhile itself. With abolishment a drastic ESt and/or KSt increase would possibly come to church activity to us!
I write not, as in the high Middle Ages, but only orient me at the legal situation and at economic criteria.
As well known only the Angehöigen of the respective church pays church tax. The Atheisten mentioned by Inen is not thus at all affected of it!
As already determined, the churches became so good after 1918, as finances from the entire people. Since the number of Christians - both protestant, and catholic - decreases strongly, the church tax could actually get the character of by the state driven club subscriptions. Only: is that desired? In vain expenditures for churches are not just as, as contributions to social and science-promoting mechanism coming in and/or body expensive deductible. I.e. nevertheless, the state saves so much money through the activity of these mechanisms that this promotion is worthwhile itself. With abolishment a drastic ESt and/or KSt increase would possibly come to church activity to us!
Tuesday, 27 June 2006 21:35
blueberry: @ Guttenberger
Because penetration of right presupposed power at that time for penetration.
Is that today different? I would say that am today exactly the same.
Gesetzesbegründungn stand, as already said, not in the law, but on bringing in the bill are called and are in appropriate parliament minutes to be reread.
However you can go out with security with it that these reasons depending upon a party and motivation to look different. The church naturally let an interest in it appear as legitimate as possible their position and demand. Which expresses itself then evenly in the different views of the parliamentarians. The center had surely another view than the social-democracy.
They talk here as if we would be in the high Middle Ages and as if was the Pope on the height of its power. Three quarters of all Germans are not catholic. What will those probably say if you will arrive and to them to explain will want the small craftsman with enterprise that are protestant and the independent Mauerermeister in Saxonia that already any longer do not know like a church look are a special tax now to the Pope to pay!?
Those will say to them: „The Germans are sometimes stupid, but so stupidly also again, the Pope is not to look for each other another stupid one! “.
Is that today different? I would say that am today exactly the same.
Gesetzesbegründungn stand, as already said, not in the law, but on bringing in the bill are called and are in appropriate parliament minutes to be reread.
However you can go out with security with it that these reasons depending upon a party and motivation to look different. The church naturally let an interest in it appear as legitimate as possible their position and demand. Which expresses itself then evenly in the different views of the parliamentarians. The center had surely another view than the social-democracy.
They talk here as if we would be in the high Middle Ages and as if was the Pope on the height of its power. Three quarters of all Germans are not catholic. What will those probably say if you will arrive and to them to explain will want the small craftsman with enterprise that are protestant and the independent Mauerermeister in Saxonia that already any longer do not know like a church look are a special tax now to the Pope to pay!?
Those will say to them: „The Germans are sometimes stupid, but so stupidly also again, the Pope is not to look for each other another stupid one! “.
Tuesday, 27 June 2006 14:39
Jörg Guttenberger, Cologne: blueberry: Church tax
yes, see not arbitrary winter king in Böhmen, for serious reason, but. That were absolute exceptions with the rising power of the realm princes were in fact impossible a Entegungung. Because penetration of right presupposed power at that time for penetration.
With the Hitler concordat the church tax was however not introduced m.W again, because otherwise the question would result, about which the church lived before quite well. Gesetzesbegründungn stand, as already said, not in the law, but on bringing in the bill are called and are in appropriate parliament minutes to be reread.
It sit correctly that bishops and cathedral chapters are not financed from church tax means, but thus is not compensated nevertheless the entire 1803 expropriated fortune!
With the Hitler concordat the church tax was however not introduced m.W again, because otherwise the question would result, about which the church lived before quite well. Gesetzesbegründungn stand, as already said, not in the law, but on bringing in the bill are called and are in appropriate parliament minutes to be reread.
It sit correctly that bishops and cathedral chapters are not financed from church tax means, but thus is not compensated nevertheless the entire 1803 expropriated fortune!
Monday, 26 June 2006 23:10
blueberry: @ Guttenberger
Also otherwise the emperor could not expropriate awarded goods because of dwindling power simply.
Unfortunately! Princes of the realm could very probably be expropriated however. This happened several times.
They should differentiate only times between state achievements and church tax. During state achievements it acts around lease indemnifications out of national expropriations.
The church tax does not have to do thereby nothing at all. In the concordat between the third realm and the Vatikan no cause is mentioned, but only lapidary determined the Vatikan would have to raise the right taxes.
Unfortunately! Princes of the realm could very probably be expropriated however. This happened several times.
They should differentiate only times between state achievements and church tax. During state achievements it acts around lease indemnifications out of national expropriations.
The church tax does not have to do thereby nothing at all. In the concordat between the third realm and the Vatikan no cause is mentioned, but only lapidary determined the Vatikan would have to raise the right taxes.
All reader opinions indicate 39 further reader opinions
39 further reader opinionsThe editorship does not take responsibility for contents of the contributions. She reserves herself the right to delete contributions as well as to exclude readers from the debate.
Fladenbrot fair:
