Seminarian’s Religious Freedom Was Not Violated

A federal appeals court ruled that a Mennonite seminarian's constitutional right to religious freedom was

A federal appeals court ruled that a Mennonite seminarian's constitutional right to religious freedom was not violated by a federal prosecution for his failure to register with the Selective Service System.

The court observed that any burden on religious freedom was minimal since the religious objections could be raised after registration but before induction. United States v. Schmucker, 815 F.2d 413 (6th Cir. 1987).

Ministers Who Revoke Their Exemption from Social Security Taxes

Ministers considering the revocation of their exemption from Social Security taxes should not delay in

Ministers considering the revocation of their exemption from Social Security taxes should not delay in making a decision.

While the deadline for filing the application to revoke one's exemption from Social Security coverage (Form 2031) may be filed as late as April 15, 1988, a minister who waives his exemption must begin paying Social Security taxes no later than January 1, 1987. The longer a minister delays in making a decision on this important question, the less likely it will be that he or she will have the financial resources to pay the accumulated tax liability.

Source: March-April 1987 issue of Church Law & Tax Report

Self-proclaimed Minister Denied Exemption from Social Security Taxes

The Tax Court denied a self-employed cabinet maker's application for exemption from social security taxes

The Tax Court denied a self-employed cabinet maker's application for exemption from social security taxes on the ground that he was not an ordained, commissioned, or licensed minister of the gospel, despite his claim that he was a self-proclaimed minister. Loiler v. Commissioner.___ T.C .___ (1987).

State May Not compel Adult to Submit to Medical Treatment Which Would Violate Religious Beliefs

Can a civil court compel a terminally-ill adult to receive potentially life-saving medical treatment despite

Can a civil court compel a terminally-ill adult to receive potentially life-saving medical treatment despite her rejection of such treatment in favor of faith healing?

No, said the Ohio Supreme Court in an important ruling. Noting that faith healing is a form of religious belief, the court concluded that "the state may not compel a legally competent adult to submit to medical treatment which would violate that individual's religious beliefs even though the treatment is arguably life-extending." This is so no matter how "unwise, foolish, or ridiculous" those beliefs may seem to others. In re Milton, 505 N.E.2d 255 (Ohio 1987).

Court Rejects Church Schools’ challenge to Iowa’s Compulsory Education Law

A federal appeals court rejected a challenge by two fundamentalist church schools to the constitutionality

A federal appeals court rejected a challenge by two fundamentalist church schools to the constitutionality of Iowa's compulsory education law.

The state law required that church-related schools file annual reports with the local public school district listing pupils' names, ages and attendance record, texts used, and teachers employed. In addition, the law required that church schools provide "equivalent instruction" using state-certified teachers. The court concluded that the "burden on [parents'] religious beliefs—if one exists at all—is very minimal and is clearly outweighed by the state's interest in receiving reliable information about where children are being educated and by whom."

In rejecting the claim that standardized testing be used to evaluate the quality of education at the schools instead of requiring certified teachers, the court observed that "certification is the best means available today to satisfy [the state's] interest in the education of its children." The court also ordered that the state's attorneys' fees be paid since the lawsuit was "vexatious and unreasonable," and was based on arguments that had been rejected in the past by numerous courts. Fellowship Baptist Church v. Benton, 815 F.2d 485 (8th Cir. 1987).

Check the Date on Your Checks

The Tax court disallowed a charitable contribution deduction in 1981 for two checks dated in

The Tax court disallowed a charitable contribution deduction in 1981 for two checks dated in 1980 but allegedly delivered to the charity in early 1981, because the taxpayer could not prove that the checks were in fact delivered in 1981. The Court relied on the well-established rule that checks constitute a charitable contribution only upon delivery (or mailing) to the charity. Marshall v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1986-582.

Couple Denied a Deduction for Noncash Property

A couple was denied a deduction for noncash property given to the Salvation Army because

A couple was denied a deduction for noncash property given to the Salvation Army because they failed to substantiate the market value of the donated property. The only evidence offered to substantiate the contribution was a receipt from the Salvation Army that did not describe the property or state its value, and that cautioned that the Salvation Army was not an appraiser and accordingly could not be expected to fix a value for donated property.

The Tax Court concluded that such evidence was not adequate to support the deduction. It should be noted that the Salvation Army acted properly in refusing to value the donated property. Churches are not appraisers. When receipting a donor who contributes non- cash property, churches should only identify the donated property, the donor, and the date of contribution. Churches should also advise donors of the special substantiation rules that now apply to contributions of non- cash property valued by the donor at $500 or more. Goldstein v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1987-47.

Source: Church Law & Tax Report March/April 1987.

Disallowed a Charitable Contribution

The Tax Court disallowed a charitable contribution deduction by a taxpayer who failed to establish

The Tax Court disallowed a charitable contribution deduction by a taxpayer who failed to establish the amounts or recipients of his alleged contributions. The taxpayer argued unsuccessfully that disclosing such information would violate his religious freedom. Bruno v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1986-571.

ajax-loader-largecaret-downcloseHamburger Menuicon_amazonApple PodcastsBio Iconicon_cards_grid_caretChild Abuse Reporting Laws by State IconChurchSalary Iconicon_facebookGoogle Podcastsicon_instagramLegal Library IconLegal Library Iconicon_linkedinLock IconMegaphone IconOnline Learning IconPodcast IconRecent Legal Developments IconRecommended Reading IconRSS IconSubmiticon_select-arrowSpotify IconAlaska State MapAlabama State MapArkansas State MapArizona State MapCalifornia State MapColorado State MapConnecticut State MapWashington DC State MapDelaware State MapFederal MapFlorida State MapGeorgia State MapHawaii State MapIowa State MapIdaho State MapIllinois State MapIndiana State MapKansas State MapKentucky State MapLouisiana State MapMassachusetts State MapMaryland State MapMaine State MapMichigan State MapMinnesota State MapMissouri State MapMississippi State MapMontana State MapMulti State MapNorth Carolina State MapNorth Dakota State MapNebraska State MapNew Hampshire State MapNew Jersey State MapNew Mexico IconNevada State MapNew York State MapOhio State MapOklahoma State MapOregon State MapPennsylvania State MapRhode Island State MapSouth Carolina State MapSouth Dakota State MapTennessee State MapTexas State MapUtah State MapVirginia State MapVermont State MapWashington State MapWisconsin State MapWest Virginia State MapWyoming State IconShopping Cart IconTax Calendar Iconicon_twitteryoutubepauseplay
caret-downclosefacebook-squarehamburgerinstagram-squarelinkedin-squarepauseplaytwitter-square