An American court ruled this week that an Orthodox Jewish couple could not use tax deductions that Scientologists can use (deductions they obtained by way of a secret 1993 agreement with the Internal Revenue Service). In the case Sklar v. Commissioner of the IRS, Michael and Marla Sklar tried to claim their childrens’ tuition for their Jewish day school as a tax deduction but their argument was rejected by the US Ninth Circuit Court because it violates the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which states in the first sentence that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”.
The Sklars’ main argument was that section 170(f)(8) and 6115 of the IRS code authorized deductions for donations made to religious institutions if they provided “intangible religious benefits”. Scientologists can claim deductions for “religious” services provided by the “Church”, and the Sklars argued that they too should be allowed to utilize this benefit. If the “Church” of Scientology is allowed to violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, then they should be able to do the same thing in the name of consistency. The Ninth Circuit Court rejected this argument because “[t]o conclude otherwise would be tantamount to rewriting the Tax Code, disregarding Supreme Court precedent, only to reach a conclusion directly at odds with the Establishment Clause — all in the name of the Establishment Clause.”.
The court ruled wisely in favor of not violating the First Amendment, which unequivocally states that no religion should have an advantage over the other. But what to say about the “Church” of Scientology’s special privilege, which they allegedly obtained by shady means. Three years after the “Church” was established by L. Ron Hubbard in 1953, the IRS gave it tax-exempt status. However, in 1967, their tax-exempt status was stripped away because it was determined that the activities of the “Church” were commercial, and several US courts agreed. This meant war between the IRS and the “Church”, which continued for 25 years.
In 1973, L. Ron Hubbard initiated Operation Snow White against the governments of several countries, including the United States. The main target of “Project Hunter”, the American branch of Snow White was the IRS. Operation Snow White called for the infiltration of the IRS and other US government agencies in order to steal documents related to L. Ron Hubbard and the “Church” of Scientology. Eventually, several Scientologists, including L. Ron Hubbard’s wife Mary Sue, were caught, and the FBI invaded Scientology offices in Los Angeles and Washington DC. In 1979, eleven Scientologists, including Mary Sue Hubbard, were sentenced to five years in prison. That did not stop the war against the IRS. Private investigators were hired by the cult to dig up dirt on various IRS officials, and in many cases, they found enough damning evidence to blackmail these officials.
Finally, in 1993, then IRS Comissioner Fred Goldberg met with current “Church” leader David Miscavige and reached an agreement that would end all lawsuits against the IRS by the “Church” of Scientology: the war was finally over. Attempts by various IRS watchdogs to get the IRS to disclose this agreement were unsuccessful, even though by law the IRS has to release it.
The question to ask is: why is a pseudo-religion started by a charlatan solely to make money allowed these special privileges, while legitimate religions are not? This IRS agreement violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment by making it a de facto “established” religion. It was wise on the part of the Ninth Circuit Court to reject Michael and Marla Sklar’s argument, but the “Church” of Scientology must be called out for this circumvention of the US Constitution.
Let me leave you with a quote from L. Ron Hubbard:
If you enjoyed this post, why not subscribe to our RSS feed or follow us on Twitter? You might also consider making a donation to the Counterknowledge.com fighting fund.“Somebody some day will say ‘this is illegal’. By then be sure the orgs say what is legal or not.”
Click here to sign up for free RSS updates.
Download the free 
Join 
10 responses
You should mention that the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Hernandez v. Commissioner, 490 U.S. 680 (1989) that payment for services in Scientology (so-called fixed donations) were not found deductible. So it seems the agreement is in violation of a supreme court decision.
Thank you for that. The problem with that argument is old Supreme Court rulings can be struck down by a newer Supreme Court ruling. For example, Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education. Now that the IRS has given the Scientologists unconstititutional tax deductions, a new Supreme Court ruling must invalidate it.
But who has the stamina to sue the “Church” of Scientology and the IRS all the way to the Supreme Court? Especially with the “Church”’s ‘Fair Game Doctrine’?
There hasn’t been a supreme court ruling on this matter since the Hernandez v. Commissioner, right? If the IRS changed their policy tomorrow to conform with the law, and the CoS took them to court for it, the IRS could still rely on Hernandez v. Commissioner, and the CoS would have to try to get Hernandez v. Commissioner overturned, right?
The problem of course would be if the agreement was terminated in a lawful manner, and what happens to the lawsuits and the potential blackmail which the agreement put an end to.
If the IRS won’t enforce Hernandez v. Commissioner, then maybe someone other who have standing should sue? But who wants to sue to remove another group’s tax break rather than sue to get the tax break for themselves? Maybe if the Sklars join other parents in a similar situation?
I suppose the legal batter then would be over standing. Since it’s a tax issue rather than an issue of discretionary spending, I think they may have standing as tax payers according.
The quickest approach might be if Congress or the President forces the IRS to comply.
I’m just picturing what the well-organized, funded, and very well educated Orthodox Jewish world would do to Scientology if that so-called church ever tried that Fair Game nonsense with them.
See the 9/11 picture in the post below for a visual representation of what would happen to Scientology.
Easy there Moses. The job of preaching to people what the “legitimate” religions are has already been filled by plenty of crazies crazier than scientologists.
How can I take the writer of this article seriously when he exhibits an obvious bias against scientologists? “pseudo-religion”? Really? Are their claims really more absurd then Moses getting the 10 commandements from a burning bush, or an “immaculate” conception? What about parting the red sea, or the rising of Jebus?
A cult, is what members of a bigger cult, call a smaller cult competing for the same donation dollars. People really need to look in the backyard of their own bullcrap religions, and see them for what they are. Tools for pacifying and herding the masses of idiots who refuse to think for themselves. Has anyone tried to compare the actions of those real/true/authentic (man that is just funny) religions and their followers versus scientologists? Who are the bigger fanatics?
Scientologists are fools, but so is everyone bowing down to any other bed-time story passed on by savages who killed with abandon, and slept with their own brothers and sisters. The fact that people willingly belong to an identifiable group, and chose to believe in the same thing, makes it just as valid a religion as any. To single them, or anyone else, out for ridicule because in your opinion it’s not “real” is intellectually dishonest, and inherently uncivilized. But I guess on the internet, that’s not that big a concern.
Max, your are either a clam or deliberately ignorant of the reality of the true danger Scientology poses to the public at large. I’m willing to go with either.
Your argument about other religions doing things as bad as, if not worse than Scientology is not only an old argument, but a lazy one. So other people have done terrible things in the past in the name of their religion. What’s your point? Keep in mind the vast difference in the social and political structure from one thousand years ago and compare it to today. The church was considered the ultimate authority in all things divine and anyone who questioned them was condemned. Over time, people recognized that the people who lead the church were human, too. They made mistakes and didn’t always act in the best interest of their congregants and the general public.
In what way does that diminish the impact of the atrocities committed by the COS today and how can you even begin to compare other religions PAST crimes to the COS’s present and CONTINUING CRIMES when you obviously have shown that you haven’t read up ANYTHING on the COS?
The Sklar case concerns a deduction of the religious portion of tuition paid to a religious school, which Sklar claims as the equivalent of a donation for Scientology training at a Scientology church.
Sklar states that the “IRS’ position that religious education (other than for members of the Church of Scientology) is not an “intangible religious benefit”, and that no portion of any religious school tuition (outside the Church of Scientology) is deductible, is very well known among religious schools.”
Payments for Scientology training (whether paid for an adult or child) are deductible when paid to a Scientology Church. Only those courses listed the Scientology “Bridge to Total Freedom”‘ qualify for a charitable donation. The same training, delivered by an individual practitioner of Scientology (or at a school), would not qualify as a charitable contribution.
In the Sklar case, the tuition was paid to a religious school providing religious instruction as well secular education. Sklar failed to establish the total amount paid for his children’s education exceeded the value of the secular portion of that education. If Sklar donated to his synagogue specifically to support religious education in which his children participated, it would in all likelihood be just as deductible as a donation for Scientology training. If Sklar were a Methodist whose children attended Sunday School, his donations to the church to support their educational activities would also be deductible.
Your claim of special privileges afforded to Scientology and not other legitimate religions is unsupportable as a blanket assertion. For all legitimate (and some less than legitimate) religions, donations to their respective house of worship (such as churches or synagogues, but not religious schools) for services which confer an intangible religious benefit are deductible.
Max –
It may be your favorite topic of conversation, how religions should not be allowed to exist and how they’re all “bullcrap” and how anything which supports any religion is automatically bad.
In that case, you might want to find one of the many, many places on the net where this is the topic of conversation. However, here we are discussing a quite different topic, which is how ONE “religion” is being given preferential treatment over any others. This happens to be a violation of the US Constitution.
Why are you trying to drag the conversation off its topic and onto another topic?
If you can’t understand why Scientology would be more deserving of the title ‘pseudo-religion’ than any other, it’s not a sign of wisdom on your part, but of ignorance of Scientology. You may choose to jeer at and look down upon those who founded Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Shinto, etc. and that is your choice. But when we look at the founders of those religions, we do not find direct evidence of the founders asserting that their belief system is NOT a religion just a few years before changing their minds and declaring it is a religion after all. We do not find the founders writing that the choice to seek the status of a religion is a matter purely for accountants and solicitors. If we did, then those religions would be subject to the same derision as Scientology.
Goto Change.gov and vote in Obama’s citizen Briefing Book to Revoke the Tax Exempt Status of the Church of Scientology
http://citizensbriefingbook.change.gov/ideas/viewIdea.apexp?id=087800000004rbZ
Incoming links from other sites