Jump to content

Property tax-free, clergy homes

Nice Guy Eddie

By Nice Guy Eddie
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Popular Post
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13391

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

Chronicle has had a good series this week about how Texas gives churches a tax break on homes for their clergy. No difficult for us to see how this could be abused. https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/investigations/unfair-burden/article/parsonages-religion-texas-tax-free-clergy-homes-16678079.php

Even when the property violates the requirement to be under 1 acre, many jurisdictions look the other way saying the state law is too vague to enforce.

I think we can accept a scenario where a church is giving their 20k salaried pastor a home, perhaps not charging property tax is acceptable. But Kenneth Copeland has a 18,000 sq ft home valued at $7m and the local county gets squat in property tax.

Quote

“You may think that house is too big,” Copeland told the believers’ convention. “You may think it's too grand. I don't care what you think. I heard from heaven. Glory to God, hallelujah!”

And we all realize why this is a problem. If Copeland doesn't pay his $150K annual tax (or whatever) on his estate, the money has to be made up from the rest of county residents. The law should be changed to only allow one or two exemptions per church and the exempted amount shouldn't surpass the median residential improvement value for that county. 

  • Hook 'Em 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13391

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, Harrison Bergeron said:

Agreed. Just enforce the existing laws or clarify the regulations and have appraisal districts enforce them.

IMO the law should be adjusted to not just restrict >1 acre properties but properties appraised above a certain value. While I'm disgusted how some "pastors" fleece their congregation, I can accept people are giving away money of their own free will. But the average citizen shouldn't be punished when a church buys their pastor a multi-millionaire dollar home. And we know in some instances, it's the pastor making the decision to buy that house with church funds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
hookemATL

hookemATL 11593

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted

You complaining about how big their houses are?  Think of all the room they need for activities:

- room to count pilfered tithings 

- room for diddling youths

- room for pilfered antiquities 

- breakfast nook

- blood of Christ wine cellar

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DalTxHornFan

DalTxHornFan 3083

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Chronicle has had a good series this week about how Texas gives churches a tax break on homes for their clergy. No difficult for us to see how this could be abused. https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/investigations/unfair-burden/article/parsonages-religion-texas-tax-free-clergy-homes-16678079.php

Even when the property violates the requirement to be under 1 acre, many jurisdictions look the other way saying the state law is too vague to enforce.

I think we can accept a scenario where a church is giving their 20k salaried pastor a home, perhaps not charging property tax is acceptable. But Kenneth Copeland has a 18,000 sq ft home valued at $7m and the local county gets squat in property tax.

And we all realize why this is a problem. If Copeland doesn't pay his $150K annual tax (or whatever) on his estate, the money has to be made up from the rest of county residents. The law should be changed to only allow one or two exemptions per church and the exempted amount shouldn't surpass the median residential improvement value for that county. 

Cool.  Now do the University of Texas Chancellor's tax free residence.

Bauer house front entrance

https://www.utsystem.edu/offices/events

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

There is an insane amount of educational and fundraising programming events that go on at Bauer House.  The Denius pavilion out back puts on educational content for students/grad students almost weekly.  It's no different than the UT System building downtown being exempted from property taxes.  Where absolutely zero educational content takes place.  At least Bauer House engages with students. 

I do see the Pastor homestead being an extension of the church, so I have no issue with a modest home receiving a tax break if it's within reason.  But as sited above, it can get abused faster than a rosy-cheeked Irish boy at first communion.  My wife's Catholic Church, there is a new rectory home for one priest and one visiting clergy.  The house is about 3-4k square feet, sits on a few acres, and given the part of town---would easily be worth a $3mm in the open market.  But it's on church property and was built with private funds.  If it was unattached, I think it would get a lot more criticism for its size and tax exemption. 

The missed out property values of priestly homes is like #137 on my list of issues with organized religion and the Catholic Church/Baptist Churches of Texas.  

IF we wanna get serious about missed-out revenue in Austin, we can start with the insane amount of land dedicated in Central Austin to State of Texas buildings.  And then Camp Mabry.  Oh yeah, I forget...citizens need to be near all those "services" between 11th & 18th street.  Meanwhile, that's the only place you can park in Central Austin because nobody goes to those fucking buildings except the people who work in them.  THey could just as easily go to work past 130, or NE Austin, or anywhere else cheaper.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DalTxHornFan

DalTxHornFan 3083

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Lobo said:

IF we wanna get serious about missed-out revenue in Austin, we can start with the insane amount of land dedicated in Central Austin to State of Texas buildings.  And then Camp Mabry.  Oh yeah, I forget...citizens need to be near all those "services" between 11th & 18th street.  Meanwhile, that's the only place you can park in Central Austin because nobody goes to those fucking buildings except the people who work in them.  THey could just as easily go to work past 130, or NE Austin, or anywhere else cheaper.  

That was kinda my point.  We do a lot of dumb stuff with property tax exemptions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

Yeah, seems like we should either limit what can be built in certain property-tax generating areas (don't put state buildings on prime lakefront property/hilltops) -OR- don't exempt anything remotely associated with a public/religious entity (assistant to the associate deacon's primary residence) or giant downtown skyscraper filled with UTIMCO analysts.  But doing both seems to be fucking us over in many cities. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31178

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Chronicle has had a good series this week about how Texas gives churches a tax break on homes for their clergy. No difficult for us to see how this could be abused. https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/investigations/unfair-burden/article/parsonages-religion-texas-tax-free-clergy-homes-16678079.php

Even when the property violates the requirement to be under 1 acre, many jurisdictions look the other way saying the state law is too vague to enforce.

I think we can accept a scenario where a church is giving their 20k salaried pastor a home, perhaps not charging property tax is acceptable. But Kenneth Copeland has a 18,000 sq ft home valued at $7m and the local county gets squat in property tax.

And we all realize why this is a problem. If Copeland doesn't pay his $150K annual tax (or whatever) on his estate, the money has to be made up from the rest of county residents. The law should be changed to only allow one or two exemptions per church and the exempted amount shouldn't surpass the median residential improvement value for that county. 

One of the "features" of that article was HIghland Park Presbyterian Church.  It is relatively famous for owning a number of parsonages around the Park Cities, one of which I grew up next door to.

They've owned those properties for 50-75+ years, long before the property values in the Park Cities are what they are today.  The assistant pastor that lived next door to us actually bought his home from the Church.  Some of the still-current ones are not in the greatest condition.  While they are now super-valuable, it's not some "ultra luxe" live-like-pimps deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

One real good way to stir up some political shit this holiday season?

Tax exemptions for homes of families of fallen troops?  "Okay" say Texans.

Tax exemptions for homes of families of fallen first responders/police?  "Okay" say Texans.

Tax exemptions for homes of pastors/priests/ministers/rabbis?  "Okay" say Texans.

Tax exemptions for homes of mullahs/imams?  "GODDAMMIT, NO!" say Texans.  

Happy Festivus! 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Deej

Deej 76476

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, Lobo said:

There is an insane amount of educational and fundraising programming events that go on at Bauer House.  The Denius pavilion out back puts on educational content for students/grad students almost weekly.  It's no different than the UT System building downtown being exempted from property taxes.  Where absolutely zero educational content takes place.  At least Bauer House engages with students. 

I do see the Pastor homestead being an extension of the church, so I have no issue with a modest home receiving a tax break if it's within reason.  But as sited above, it can get abused faster than a rosy-cheeked Irish boy at first communion.  My wife's Catholic Church, there is a new rectory home for one priest and one visiting clergy.  The house is about 3-4k square feet, sits on a few acres, and given the part of town---would easily be worth a $3mm in the open market.  But it's on church property and was built with private funds.  If it was unattached, I think it would get a lot more criticism for its size and tax exemption. 

The missed out property values of priestly homes is like #137 on my list of issues with organized religion and the Catholic Church/Baptist Churches of Texas.  

IF we wanna get serious about missed-out revenue in Austin, we can start with the insane amount of land dedicated in Central Austin to State of Texas buildings.  And then Camp Mabry.  Oh yeah, I forget...citizens need to be near all those "services" between 11th & 18th street.  Meanwhile, that's the only place you can park in Central Austin because nobody goes to those fucking buildings except the people who work in them.  THey could just as easily go to work past 130, or NE Austin, or anywhere else cheaper.  

At least city hall and the library aren't sitting on valuable property.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

I don't mind the Seat of Government being visible/available to the people, as is the case with both the Capitol and City Hall.  But there are so many other fucking government buildings that just do not need to be in the fucking urban core or on fucking lakeside bluffs.  It's madness.  I get some were built there 100 years ago, but when it comes for a re-up CapEx...move them the fuck out to the sticks were they and their fucking employees belong.  Guess why government employees can't afford the cost of living in much of Austin?  'Cause their fucking bosses keep building their new offices in places that don't collect property tax revenue...so it gets passed along to renters/homeowners who can no longer afford to live near where they work?  It's been 20 fucking years since City of Austin left that Barton Plaza at South First Street?  Did they turn it over to private industry to collect more in taxes?  Nope.  It's now the world's most expensive surface parking lot for Austin Public Works pickup trucks.  And several floors of CoA offices THAT ARE CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC.   Real great use of prime real estate dipshits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
royiv

royiv 9126

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, CleverNickname said:

The state will sell Hobby building soon. So sometimes it happens.  Though it hasn't happened yet.

It blows my mind that they haven't sold it yet. I hear it's a maintenance nightmare and crumbling in places. It's also sitting on an extremely valuable full city block. Sell it, build the replacement outside of downtown and put the excess cash to work.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NeverMarryAStripper

NeverMarryAStripper 21780

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, royiv said:

It blows my mind that they haven't sold it yet. I hear it's a maintenance nightmare and crumbling in places. It's also sitting on an extremely valuable full city block. Sell it, build the replacement outside of downtown and put the excess cash to work buying overpriced real estate from relatives of city council members to turn into homeless shelters.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CleverNickname

CleverNickname 1291

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, royiv said:

It blows my mind that they haven't sold it yet. I hear it's a maintenance nightmare and crumbling in places. It's also sitting on an extremely valuable full city block. Sell it, build the replacement outside of downtown and put the excess cash to work.

We move out next year, May-June time frame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Jerry Callo said:

Churches should pay taxes on all of the property they own.

If you do that, has to apply to all nonprofits.  You cannot discriminate against a nonprofit because they are religious based.

So goodbye to pretty much all museums, symphonies, animal shelters, nonprofit hospitals, battered women's shelters, privately owned zoos/parks (there are a whole lot open to public), private universities, private schools, etc.  Oh, and all those planned parenthood buildings -- adios.  All that public good is gone but yeah we get more concrete, strip malls, and high rises.

You want to really complain about property taxes -- private clubs.  I am a member of one that sits on some nice real estate.  They pay 1/50th of what fair market value is. I actually think there is benefit to the public from golf courses.  Having some green space in cities is good, even if private.  Trees that aren't chopped down.  Habitat for animals.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
royiv

royiv 9126

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted
4 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

You want to really complain about property taxes -- private clubs.  I am a member of one that sits on some nice real estate.  They pay 1/50th of what fair market value is. I actually think there is benefit to the public from golf courses.  Having some green space in cities is good, even if private.  Trees that aren't chopped down.  Habitat for animals.

Golf courses are terrible for the environment. They require lots of water and fertilizer. Not to mention the changes in runoff and storm water retention caused by their construction. Restore those courses to their natural habitat and then we can talk.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

Sack has a good point though about all the other non-profits that would have to be rolled into such a taxation platform.  An asshole with a really good point always sees another asshole with a really good point from afar ;) 

But yeah-golf courses are just a net drag on so much of society.  Just absolute fucking, unneeded garbage.  But we can't get rid of them because dudes in Tahoes get their feelings hurt.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, Foosters said:

LOL at Sack giving a shit about the environment

I love the outdoors. I spend more time out in the brush or on the open seas than 99 percent of the world.

I care about the environment quite a bit.  Climate change isn't something that scares me.  Largely because if we had any sense we'd realize we hold the keys to the jail cell -- build nuke plants or micro nuke plants instead of ugly ass windmills that can't produce power on demand or other green new deal grift.  Also I believe before it gets too bad there will likely be tech that can mitigate it.  I am far more worried about polluting our oceans and the asian countries overfishing than I am about any other environmental issue.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Johnny Sack

Johnny Sack 8397

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, royiv said:

Golf courses are terrible for the environment. They require lots of water and fertilizer. Not to mention the changes in runoff and storm water retention caused by their construction. Restore those courses to their natural habitat and then we can talk.

Most golf courses recycle their water.  And there is no restoring it to natural habitat.  It would be divided into new home lots and concrete streets.  Which would be far worse for the environment than a golf course.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DaysOff

DaysOff 7819

Posted
Posted
Sack has a good point though about all the other non-profits that would have to be rolled into such a taxation platform.  An asshole with a really good point always sees another asshole with a really good point from afar  
But yeah-golf courses are just a net drag on so much of society.  Just absolute fucking, unneeded garbage.  But we can't get rid of them because dudes in Tahoes get their feelings hurt.  

Watching amateur white people play golf is like watching white people drunk dance at weddings. It's so awful, and they suck so bad I have to be embarrassed for them because they lack the self awareness to realize it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Incredulity

Incredulity 11529

Posted
Posted
6 minutes ago, DaysOff said:


Watching amateur white people play golf is like watching white people drunk dance at weddings. It's so awful, and they suck so bad I have to be embarrassed for them because they lack the self awareness to realize it.

IMPO, amateur golf struggle is about a color blind as it gets.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted (edited)
39 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I love the outdoors. I spend more time out in the brush or on the open seas than 99 percent of the world.

Dude, c'mon.  You spend more time in the open brush or open seas than 99% of the world?  I mean, yeah---you sound like you much more outdoorsy than the average American by a mile.  but 99% of the global population?  You do realize how much of the world lives near untarnished nature and/or open seas?  I'll give you "more than 95% of America" and 75% of the global population, but c'mon man.  Let's be somewhat honest here.  I'm a sportsmen in the sense of fishing and backpacking but in 80% of the planet, I'm an annoying tourist with some REI gear and a decent penchant for the elements and freshwater angling. I've no doubt you're a responsible sportsman with preservation in your spirit.

Your heart's in the right place but "more connected to the Earth than 99 percent of the world"...we are not.  

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Judge Roybeanbag

Judge Roybeanbag 11793

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I very clearly said if you want to bitch about property tax breaks, look at private clubs.  That should be the outrage.

Yes, you did, now start with your private club(s). But that doesn’t excuse abuse by religious entities, ag properties or anyone else.  It’s all subject to scrutiny.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Lobo

Guest Lobo

Posted
Posted

Actually no, the County collects the taxes.  But then turns over a huge fucking chunk to the State (mainly in the form of recapture).  Also divides out some/sum to EMS/Fire, community colleges, health districts, et. al.  Counties don't really pay property taxes to local governments so much as counties do after the date rape ids over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DalTxHornFan

DalTxHornFan 3083

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

And then redistributed by the state, which is kinda funny.  

The point that I and Lobo have been making is that that there is a lot of pretty damn valuable property not on the tax rolls, whether due to governmental or non-profit (including religious) statuses.  Some of which, like the clerks working in the valuable UTIMCO building downtown, or the Kenneth Copeland manse, make no sense from a financial and economic standpoint.

Sack makes a good point that you can't single out religious non-profits.  (Although there are some really bad examples of abuse there, for example, Kenneth Copeland.)  If the law about 1 acre is too vague for county tax assessors to enforce, it sounds like something the legislature needs to address.

There used to be the thought that the City of Austin made out OK by having confiscatory utility rates on the tax-exempt state buildings, but I think that concept is no longer true.

Highest and best use of property is rarely governmental or non-profit.  Exhibits A and B are Austin City Hall and the new Austin Library.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Judge Roybeanbag

Judge Roybeanbag 11793

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, DalTxHornFan said:

The point that I and Lobo have been making is that that there is a lot of pretty damn valuable property not on the tax rolls, whether due to governmental or non-profit (including religious) statuses.  Some of which, like the clerks working in the valuable UTIMCO building downtown, or the Kenneth Copeland manse, make no sense from a financial and economic standpoint.

Sack makes a good point that you can't single out religious non-profits.  (Although there are some really bad examples of abuse there, for example, Kenneth Copeland.)  If the law about 1 acre is too vague for county tax assessors to enforce, it sounds like something the legislature needs to address.

There used to be the thought that the City of Austin made out OK by having confiscatory utility rates on the tax-exempt state buildings, but I think that concept is no longer true.

Highest and best use of property is rarely governmental or non-profit.  Exhibits A and B are Austin City Hall and the new Austin Library.

Sure, I was mainly ribbing sack because he’s an elite.  Sort of.  Yes the city is a prime example of worst use of property.  The fact is, our archaic property tax system sucks, our knee jerk reaction to any changes in our tax system sucks, and nobody in power cares to change anything.  No one of us posting here can do much about it either, given our archaic two party primary system, where the biggest loser wins.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...