That this National Executive Council reiterate its support for the "Give and Take" tax proposals developed by the National Voluntary Organizations, and that the Minister of Finance of the Government of Canada be asked to implement the tax credit portion of the proposal, in addition to the removal of the $100 standard deduction already implemented. CARRIED
That the following recommendations of the Administration and Finance Committee be received and approved:
(a) That National Executive Council issue a statement that, while it recognizes that the government has a right and obligation to enforce the terms of the Income Tax Act and other statutes, it protests the increasing involvement of the government in the legitimate activities of Canadian charities, and points out that the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada has made a practice of publishing its annual statistics and financial statements.
(b) That National Executive Council request the Canadian Council of Churches to initiate discussions with the Government of Canada leading to amendments to the sections of the Income Tax Act which place unreasonable restrictions on the expenditure of the funds of registered charities for charitable purposes outside Canada.
(c) That National Executive Council affirm the statement sent by the General Secretary of General Synod to the Prime Minister and Leaders of the Opposition Parties in response to the Revenue Canada Information Circular 78-3, Registered Charities: Political Objects and Activities.
(d) That National Executive Council request that Information Circular 78-3 of the Department of National Revenue, now withdrawn, be not replaced by a Circular which has a similar effect;
but that, if it is the avowed intent of the Department to issue a revised Information Circular 78-3, the Minister of National Revenue be asked to ensure that consultation takes place between representatives of his Department and of the national Churches, as well as of other major charitable organizations before such revision is completed.
(e) That National Executive Council request the Canadian Council of Churches to consult with other religious bodies to raise the issue of religious bodies being described in the Income Tax Act as "charitable organizations." CARRIED
Mississauga -- The House of Bishops of the Anglican Church of Canada makes the following statement concerning the Goods and Services Tax (GST) based on the scriptural principle: "Much is required from the person to whom much is given; much more is required from the person to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:48)
The bishops reaffirm their statement of October 1989 on taxation policy:
That this House of Bishops, out of concern for the more vulnerable members of society, affirm the principle of progressive taxation, whereby those with greater wealth pay a higher proportionate amount of taxes than those with lesser means, and oppose the principle of regressive taxation, whereby those of lesser means are required to pay the same percentage tax as the wealthiest income earners...
Consequently the bishops oppose the proposed GST legislation because we believe the poor will pay a disproportionately large amount of their income; and the reverse will be true for affluent people.
We ask the Government of Canada to consider alternatives that, in our view, are more just, such as:
1. making personal income tax more progressive;
2. instituting a corporate income tax based on ability to pay;
3. considering an annual tax on net wealth such as is used in most European countries;
4. reconsidering its position on inheritance tax.
Notes
For further information, contact: Doug Tindal, Director of Communications, (416) 924-9192 (bus.), (416) 335-8349 (res.)
Chair of the Panel on Accountability and Governance in the Voluntary Sector: Ed Broadbent.
Contents divided into divided into two main parts: Part I: Looking to the Sector -- Part II: Looking to Governments.
Contents: Message from the Chair / Ed Broadbent -- Executive Summary and Principal Recommendations -- Acknowledgements -- Introduction -- The First Step Toward Better Accountability: Building Capacity -- Organizational Governance and Stewardship -- Program Outcomes -- Fundraising -- Access to the Federal Tax System -- A New Voluntary Sector Commission -- Regulation of Financial Management -- The Legal Framework -- Conclusion: Building on Strength -- Summary of Proposals: Addressing Different Audiences -- Notes -- Appendix I : The Consultation Process -- Appendix II : Tools for Better Governance and Accountability -- Appendix III : Biographical Notes on the Panel Members -- Glossary.
The Anglican Church of Canada i.e. General Synod, the Anglican Diocese of Toronto and the Anglican Diocese of Ontario all submitted briefs to the Panel.
"Faith communities should feel confident about their dollars-and-cents contributions to society in the face of a growing movement to eliminate their tax-free status, attendees at a Toronto interfaith forum heard March 11 [2017]" (p. 1). Mike Wood Daly, research lead at the Halo Canada Project, spoke "at Exploring Sacred Space: Regenerating Places of Faith, the annual forum of Faith and the Common Good, a national interfaith organization. Since 2015, the Halo Canada Project, funded by a range of faith-based organizations, including the Anglican diocese of Toronto, has been attempting to gauge the measurable impact faith communities can bring in the form of everything from community garden plots to counselling services. An initial pilot study looked at 10 Toronto congregations -- 8 Protestant and two Muslim; since then, the study has been widened to cover 25 congregations of various faith traditions. The pilot study found a total 'halo effect' of $45 million per year for the 10 congregations -- a considerable sum, Wood Daly said, given these 10 make up only a small fraction of Toronto's faith communities" (p. 1, 13). "Halo then looked at how governments would benefit if faith communities were taxed, and found that this amounted to only a fraction of the financial benefit they bring" (p. 13).
That action be taken on the correspondence as follows:
Text
That the Secretary of the House of Bishops should send a letter of thanks to the Diocese of Rupert's Land with the assurance that the Canadian tax system would be an on-going concern of this House. CARRIED
"'To tax and to please, no more than to love and be wise, is not given to men'. Edmund Burke's insight would not have been lost on Alexander MacDonald, the eighth (1909-1923) Roman Catholic Bishop of Victoria, who fought and won an historic tax battle against the City of Victoria. Yet while the tax exemption victory benefited all the churches in British Columbia, only the Catholic church contributed financially to the costly legal battle, which, when coupled with MacDonald's financial incompetence, reduced the Diocese to near bankruptcy and led to his own removal. The affair also demonstrated that public opinion in Victoria was largely indifferent and sometimes hostile towards organized religion which most citizens believed had no right to tax exemptions" (p. [149]). "Was Alexander MacDonald a victor,a victim, or a fool ? Certainly he was the key participant in the tax battle that provided site exemptions to the churches of British Columbia. He demonstrated that city hall need not always have the last word. On the other hand, he seriously lacked administrative skills and was unwilling to seek out and, when he did, to listen to the guidance of those who might have helped him to make sounder decisions regarding Diocesan finances. Rome's handling of his case definitely seemed highhanded. The distant Vatican had long ignored the problem and when they did decide to deal with it, they used spurious charges rather than those that would at least have been just: namely, that Bishop MacDonald was an incompetent administrator. The incident did show that most of the major churches in Victoria could cooperate, however grudgingly, at least when their wallets were at issue. Although their support would probably have been far greater if MacDonald had been more the persecuted Bishop and less the incompetent land speculator" (p. 165).
The Rev. Michael Rolph introduced Mr. Ian Morrison, Chairman of the NVO - National Voluntary Organizations. The NVO coalition consists of approximately 130 groups.
Mr. Morrison explained the Give and Take concept of taxation. The Income Tax Act, at present, is giving no incentive to give to charities, fewer people are giving more.
The Give and Take concept proposed that in lieu of $100 allowed automatically, that receipts to charities be saved and 50% of the total amount could be deducted from the amount of Income Tax a person would have to pay.
Graphs were shown to demonstrate the levels of income/person/giving ratio.
Text
That the National Executive Council endorse the "Give and Take" proposal of the National Voluntary Organizations and that such endorsement be reported to the National Voluntary Organizations' Committee, to the Church, and to the Minister of Finance. CARRIED
That this House of Bishops, out of concern for the more vulnerable members of society, affirm the principle of progressive taxation, whereby those with greater wealth pay a higher proportionate amount of taxes than those with lesser means, and oppose the principle of regressive taxation, whereby those of lesser means are required to pay the same percentage tax as the wealthiest income earners, and that the Economic Justice staff of the Public Social Responsibility Unit be asked to prepare a position paper for this House of Bishops on the Goods and Services Tax for consideration at its next meeting. CARRIED
The Primate reminded the House of the motion passed at the October, 1989 meeting of the House in which it was requested that the Economic Justice staff of the Public Social Responsibility Unit be asked to prepare a position paper for this House on the Goods and Services Tax for consideration at this meeting.
Mr. David Pollock, Economic Justice Consultant, and Mr. John Dillon of GATT-FLY said that they have analyzed the Goods and Services Tax and found it to be a regressive tax.
The Public Social Responsibility Unit met in January, 1990 and passed a resolution condemning the GST. The Anglican Church has joined with other organizations to mount a publicity campaign to reject it. A further resolution has been forwarded to the Program Committee for its October, 1990 meeting, for an educational session on tax policy in general, with a view to investigating the feasibility of establishing a `wealth tax' in Canada.
Mr. Dillon described four types of taxes in the light of the above resolution: Income tax; Wealth tax; Sales tax; Corporate tax.
He distributed information regarding progressive and regressive taxes, and responded to questions.
Text
That this House accept the statement entitled "Bishops Oppose Goods and Services Tax", and
That this statement be released to the press. CARRIED
Notes
APPENDIX D
BISHOPS OPPOSE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX AND CALL FOR PROGRESSIVE TAX POLICY
MISSISSAUGA, February 9, 1990 -- The House of Bishops of the Anglican Church of Canada makes the following statement concerning the Goods and Services Tax (GST) based on the scriptural principle: "Much is required from the person to whom much is given; much more is required from the person to whom much more is given." (Luke 12:48)
The bishops reaffirm their statement of October 1989 on taxation policy:
"That this House of Bishops, out of concern for the more vulnerable members of society, affirm the principle of progressive taxation, whereby those with greater wealth pay a higher proportionate amount of taxes than those with lesser means, and oppose the principle of regressive taxation, whereby those of lesser means are required to pay the same percentage tax as the wealthiest income earners..."
Consequently, the bishops oppose the proposed GST legislation because they believe the poor will pay a disproportionately large amount of their income; and the reverse will be true for affluent people.
We ask the Government of Canada to consider alternatives that, in our view, are more just, such as:
1. making personal income tax more progressive;
2. instituting a corporate income tax based on ability to pay;
3. considering an annual tax on net wealth, such as is used in most European countries; and