silverfox
29th May 2005, 10:06 AM
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,600137292,00.html
The church has spoken. The church knows they can influence politics in Utard. I am sure they pay out big bucks for LDS politicians when they are campaigning.
I am not sure how a flat tax would affect things. I haven't figured out the math. I donate to several charities just not the LDS church.
My complaint is that the church and politics mingle way too much in Utard. Interesting since Utard is now only about 50% Mormon.
I wonder what the church is so worried about? (enter sarcasm here) I mean, their wonderful faithful members, of course, would continue paying tithing because they do it because it's is God's commandment NOT because they get a tax break, right? Is the church admitting that maybe their faithful are NOT so faithful? Or maybe that asking 10% from financially struggling families is a little ridiculous ESPECIALLY if they can't deduct it? I remember years ago members could deduct expenses for missionaries. But if I remember correctly that was done away with. I wonder if the church found a way around that. Don't they open a banking account (I work with a bank and remember seeing missionary accounts....with the missionary and the church as cosigner on the account) and parents give money that they deposit into the account and the church forwards it on to the missionary? I have no idea how it works so I am just curious.
Excerpt:
"I think we'll still discuss a (true) flat-rate tax" as tax reform moves forward, said Curtis. But more than 80 percent of legislators are members of the LDS Church and the church rarely losses a political battle when it takes a public stand.
The church "hasn't lost one in recent history," noted Curtis. Although he did recall that church leaders opposed the repeal of Prohibition in the 1930s, yet the Utah Legislature voted to repeal the U.S. constitutional amendment banning liquor. (Utah's vote, in fact, was the critical 36th one that achieved the three-fourths majority necessary to make the repeal effective.)
A modified flat-rate tax could still include some aspects that Curtis and other legislators like. "You'll remember that the Jones/Mascaro bill" — named after sponsoring Reps. Pat Jones, D-Cottonwood Heights, and Steve Mascaro, R-West Jordan — "goes after large families (with a number of dependent children deductions) who pay little toward their children's education, and a flat-rate tax can get at that (issue), too," Curtis said."
The church has spoken. The church knows they can influence politics in Utard. I am sure they pay out big bucks for LDS politicians when they are campaigning.
I am not sure how a flat tax would affect things. I haven't figured out the math. I donate to several charities just not the LDS church.
My complaint is that the church and politics mingle way too much in Utard. Interesting since Utard is now only about 50% Mormon.
I wonder what the church is so worried about? (enter sarcasm here) I mean, their wonderful faithful members, of course, would continue paying tithing because they do it because it's is God's commandment NOT because they get a tax break, right? Is the church admitting that maybe their faithful are NOT so faithful? Or maybe that asking 10% from financially struggling families is a little ridiculous ESPECIALLY if they can't deduct it? I remember years ago members could deduct expenses for missionaries. But if I remember correctly that was done away with. I wonder if the church found a way around that. Don't they open a banking account (I work with a bank and remember seeing missionary accounts....with the missionary and the church as cosigner on the account) and parents give money that they deposit into the account and the church forwards it on to the missionary? I have no idea how it works so I am just curious.
Excerpt:
"I think we'll still discuss a (true) flat-rate tax" as tax reform moves forward, said Curtis. But more than 80 percent of legislators are members of the LDS Church and the church rarely losses a political battle when it takes a public stand.
The church "hasn't lost one in recent history," noted Curtis. Although he did recall that church leaders opposed the repeal of Prohibition in the 1930s, yet the Utah Legislature voted to repeal the U.S. constitutional amendment banning liquor. (Utah's vote, in fact, was the critical 36th one that achieved the three-fourths majority necessary to make the repeal effective.)
A modified flat-rate tax could still include some aspects that Curtis and other legislators like. "You'll remember that the Jones/Mascaro bill" — named after sponsoring Reps. Pat Jones, D-Cottonwood Heights, and Steve Mascaro, R-West Jordan — "goes after large families (with a number of dependent children deductions) who pay little toward their children's education, and a flat-rate tax can get at that (issue), too," Curtis said."