Skip to main content

Clergy Housing Allowance Survives Attack (For Now)

The relentless efforts of a Wisconsin family to pass judgment on the clergy housing allowance were again stalled by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago in a decision announced Friday, March 15, 2019. The Court reversed the decision of a lower court in Gaylor et al v. U.S. Treasury which ruled that the clergy housing allowance was unconstitutional.

Had the original decision stood, ministers in the states of Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin would have lost the exemption from income taxation for church compensation designated to provide for clergy housing costs. As has been the case since the early days of social security, a clergy housing allowance remains subject to the 15.3 percent self-employment tax. We believe that the loss of the exemption to ministers within the 7th circuit would have quickly spread to all U.S. clergy.

As advisors to many ministers, MinistryCPA expressed concern not only with the financial and public policy attacks against religious ministries, but with the financial consequences to the families serving in them. Gleaned from materials we presented in two conferences held in the Midwest in 2018, the following financial challenges were averted by the 7th Circuit decision:
  • Increase in ministers’ federal, state and local income taxes.
  • Disappearance of low-income ministers’ federal earned income credits (and state piggyback credits).
  • Significant reduction in premium tax credits on HealthCare.gov for health coverage on the exchange.
  • Termination of many ministry families’ health care eligibility for state programs.
In 2013, Mrs. Anne Gaylor of the Madison, Wisconsin-based Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) and her daughter and son-in-law, Annie Gaylor and Dan Barker, successfully convinced Judge Barbara Crabb of the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin that the clergy housing allowance was unconstitutional. The 7th U.S. Circuit reversed that decision in 2014. Before Anne’s death in June 2015, she and her daughter and son-in-law again convinced Judge Crabb that their judgments were just. Her son, Ian, continued the fight on behalf of her estate.

In its news release on the day of the appellate court decision, the FFRF gave no indication whether the Gaylor family would attempt to take its fight beyond the 7th Circuit.

We are thankful for the result of the appellate decision and what it represents as a defense of religious ministries.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Housing Allowance and Form 1099-MISC Reporting

Question:

A church provides its minister a housing allowance, but for other purposes it believes that it must report the full amount of compensation (including the non-taxable housing allowance portion) on Form 1099-MISC (in order to demonstrate the full earnings of the minister). If the church reports his compensation,including the housing allowance, on Form 1099-MISC as taxable income, will he be able to deduct his housing expenses somewhere else on the Form 1040?

Answer:

This questions brings up a couple of issues. First, most ministers are properly classified as employees who receive Form W-2, not as independent contractors who receive Form 1099-MISC. On Form W-2, Box 1 for taxable compensation is reduced reflecting the church's designation of a portion of his pay as non-taxable. Then in Box 14, it typically reports as a memorandum item his additional non-taxable, housing allowance compensation. In the situation addressed in the question, this Form W-2 reporting may or may not a…

Heath Care Sharing Ministries and the SE Insurance Deduction

Question:

Can payments made to a health care sharing ministry (e.g., Samaritan Ministries, Christian Healthcare Ministries) which are exempt from the Affordable Care Act be deducted from income as a self-employed (SE) insurance deduction?

Answer:

First, to be technical, "health care sharing ministries" (IRS exemption D) provide participants an exception from Shared Responsibility Payments (ACA penalties), but don't connote other tax benefits.

Second, a health care share ministry does not qualify as health insurance. One does not pay what the IRS considers to be premiums, but instead shares the health expenses of others. And according to IRS Pub 535, in order for self-employed individuals to qualify for a SE insurance deductions they must be to pay premiums for qualifying health insurance. 


Threat to Tax-Exempt Status? Using Facilities for Profit

Question:

Can a church member conduct piano lessons in her church's auditorium without threatening the loss of the congregation's tax-exempt status?

Answer:

Our answer comes from Matthew Davis, J.D., former attorney with the nationally recognized Christian Law Association, who currently practices law in Wisconsin, Illinois, and Florida.

"As a tax-exempt entity, churches must be careful not only in what activities they engage in directly, but also in how they allow the facilities to be used.

"The primary way in which this can come up relates to the requirement for tax-exempt status that the ministry's activities must relate to its exempt purpose. Assuming the church's exempt purposes are 'religious, charitable, and educational,' (three of the purposes specifically mentioned in the Internal Revenue Code 501(c)(3)), piano lessons would certainly fit within that expectation as 'educational' and therefore not be a problem on the tax-exempt purpose i…