We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133
Details
Submitted by[?]: Social Dynamist Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: August 2135
Description[?]:
| This bill would remove the special rules for religious organisations which exempt them from normal duties. Any profit made by religions will be subject to normal rules for business, so as to reflect the full costs of operating. Religious organisations will have the option to have any end of year profits automatically distributed in charitable donations before assessment. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change
Taxation of religious institutions.
Old value:: No religions are taxed.
Current: Recognized religions are not taxed.
Proposed: Religions are treated as companies, and all profit is taxed, however, charitable donations are not taxed.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:13:48, October 31, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | This bill will deal with those religious and pseudo-religious groups, that take advantage of followers to extract money from followers. Many of you will have heard of the venerable Timotheus, whose vast fortune as head of his movement presented a dubious moral standard. Religions already operating on conscientious grounds will therefore not be affected. |
| Date | 18:29:23, October 31, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | We shall oppose this bill. |
| Date | 08:17:43, November 01, 2005 CET | From | United Farmers of Tukarali | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | We shall also oppose. It sets a bad precident to legislate in terms of religions making a "profit". It may make sense, however, to set guidelines for what kind of activities are banned to religions if they wish to maintain a tax-free status. This would weed out the pseudo-religious groups you are worried about. |
| Date | 10:20:57, November 01, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | The bad precedent is already set by those religions that do make a profit. Like it or not, we have to deal with it somehow. |
| Date | 14:46:57, November 01, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | Taxing religion will set people into an uproar SDP. Did you ever stop to contemplate that? |
| Date | 16:13:13, November 01, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | We are not taxing religion. We are taxing relgious organisations that seek to make a profit. Religions that work as non-profit organisations and religions that direct proceeds to charity will not be subject to this tax. All this bill does is close a loophole. And since when has the RiP stopped to consider the uproar that inevitably follows moves to oppress ordinary working Tukaralians? Opponents of this motion should present a clear case for the exemption of religious organisations. |
| Date | 17:14:33, November 01, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | You are, in essence, taxing religion. That is how it will be perceived. As for you swipe at me, we always consider it before making our bills, however we also look at the possible damages of not doing it as well. WE at least look at the whole picture, unlike you. |
| Date | 19:13:36, November 01, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | We're quite happy to include a national radio/TV proposal to ensure that the proposal will not be twisted, if you want. We do think the articles should be debated on actual effects rather than perceptions and prejudices, and we consider the people of Tukarali on the whole to be intelligent enough to notice that this is not a tax on religion, this is the closing of an abuse in the name of religion, especially given the fact that we are simultaneously proposing a bill to end the ban on the promotion of religion. |
| Date | 21:51:42, November 01, 2005 CET | From | Rightist Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | Banning promotion of religion will not sit well with the people of this country. Incase you haven't noticed, we do live in a religious nation. This bill and your banning promotion of religion will wind up having you tossed out of power. |
| Date | 22:02:31, November 01, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | In case you have not noticed, we are permitting religions to promote themselves. If the SDP suffers, so be it. That is not a reason to oppose this bill. |
| Date | 00:37:26, November 02, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | We'll oppose this bill since many religions do alot for communities. We will not have them suffer because the SDP hates religion. |
| Date | 01:22:16, November 02, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | We request firstly and foremostly that the PP rescind their accusation of intolerance against the SDP. Secondly, we request that the PP read the details - this bill will not affect such activities, and may even promote them. Only religions that actually make a profit can be taxed. |
| Date | 21:27:06, November 02, 2005 CET | From | Freedom Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | The point of the bill is that if the religions make money through less-than-admirable means they should be taxed for that specific portion of income. Any money that is made in a charitable manner and is used in a charitable manner is exempt. The only money taxed is the money that is not donations and is merely business. And the bill mentioned is to STOP banning religions promotion. As in, the religions would be allowed to promote themselves. |
| Date | 00:11:26, November 03, 2005 CET | From | Inactive | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | OPPOSE! |
| Date | 05:20:20, November 03, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | The Tribal Council has rejected this Bill. |
| Date | 05:21:07, November 03, 2005 CET | From | Patriot Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | SDP, we will not rescind our accusations of intolerence. |
| Date | 07:00:09, November 03, 2005 CET | From | Social Dynamist Party | To | Debating the Charitable Status (Religious Organisations) Bill, 2133 |
| Message | The PP has made a serious accusation: that Tukarali's oldest party is institutionally bigoted. We must therefore request they give evidence. For our part, we will concede that our frontbench do not discuss their own private religious beliefs as brazenly as those of other parties, but the PP must surely be aware that a good number of the Councillors sitting here today on the SDP benches are quite devoted followers of the Prophet Tukral, let alone the members of the other faiths represented in these tribes. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | ||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 103 | ||||
| no |
Total Seats: 150 | ||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 46 |
| Random fact: Real-life organisations should not be referenced in Particracy, unless they are simple and generic (eg. "National Organisation for Women" is allowed). |
| Random quote: "Soldiers are not the enemies of the movement. They're potential allies. They're more than that. Soldiers are the only people in America who are paying a stiff price for this war. Everybody else profits. Soldiers are the ones losing their lives, losing friends, having their lives disrupted. The real victims of American imperialism are its soldiers." - Fred Gardner |