James F. McDonough
Of Counsel
732-568-8360 jmcdonough@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Parsonage Allowance – Once Again It Is An Issue
Author: James F. McDonough
Date: May 13, 2014
Key Contacts
Back
In the 1990s, an Orange County California minister and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) battled over the amount of his parsonage or housing allowance. The IRS claimed that the allowance, which is tax-free to the minister, was overstated and that some portion of the allowance should have been reported as income. The case proceeded to court and was appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco. There, the Court appointed a law professor to write a brief on whether the parsonage allowance was constitutional. Congress took immediate action passing a law granting the exemption but limiting the parsonage allowance to the fair market value of the residence. This statute was a concession to clergy and IRS. The Court dismissed the case because there was no longer an issue to decide although the law professor believed the issue should be briefed, debated and ruled upon.
In 2013, this very same issue appeared in two cases. In Freedom From Religious Foundation v. Lew, a Federal District in Wisconsin held that the parsonage allowance was unconstitutional and that the allowance was an endorsement of religion. That case is on appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago and enforcement of the decision was stayed. The same issue was litigated in American Atheists v. Schulman, where a Federal District in Kentucky decision is pending. The Kentucky case would also be appealed to the Seventh Circuit.
The impact of a decision adverse to the parsonage allowance may not be limited to housing for ministers. One argument made by atheists is that because churches pay nothing, citizens pay more and that this is unfair. They claim governments could collect 71 billion in tax revenue if the allowance was halted. They also raise an argument that atheist organizations are unable to compete with churches because churches are not subject to the same qualification process. Finally, there is a challenge to the extension of favorable treatment to churches, clergy, religious organizations and non-church organizations that advance religion. They argue equal protection and the establishment clauses claiming that the favorable treatment is without secular purpose and rational explanation in law or fact.
Striking down the parsonage allowance would have a dramatic impact upon real estate property taxation. If other favorable treatment was revoked, the tax-exempt area and religious areas would be dramatically impacted. There has always been tension between church and state throughout history. Once again, it appears, albeit in a slightly different form.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Related Posts
See all
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Author: Jesse M. Dimitro
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
Author: Dan Brecher
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
Author: Ronald S. Bienstock
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
Author: Patrick T. Conlon
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Parsonage Allowance – Once Again It Is An Issue
Author: James F. McDonough
In the 1990s, an Orange County California minister and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) battled over the amount of his parsonage or housing allowance. The IRS claimed that the allowance, which is tax-free to the minister, was overstated and that some portion of the allowance should have been reported as income. The case proceeded to court and was appealed to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco. There, the Court appointed a law professor to write a brief on whether the parsonage allowance was constitutional. Congress took immediate action passing a law granting the exemption but limiting the parsonage allowance to the fair market value of the residence. This statute was a concession to clergy and IRS. The Court dismissed the case because there was no longer an issue to decide although the law professor believed the issue should be briefed, debated and ruled upon.
In 2013, this very same issue appeared in two cases. In Freedom From Religious Foundation v. Lew, a Federal District in Wisconsin held that the parsonage allowance was unconstitutional and that the allowance was an endorsement of religion. That case is on appeal to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago and enforcement of the decision was stayed. The same issue was litigated in American Atheists v. Schulman, where a Federal District in Kentucky decision is pending. The Kentucky case would also be appealed to the Seventh Circuit.
The impact of a decision adverse to the parsonage allowance may not be limited to housing for ministers. One argument made by atheists is that because churches pay nothing, citizens pay more and that this is unfair. They claim governments could collect 71 billion in tax revenue if the allowance was halted. They also raise an argument that atheist organizations are unable to compete with churches because churches are not subject to the same qualification process. Finally, there is a challenge to the extension of favorable treatment to churches, clergy, religious organizations and non-church organizations that advance religion. They argue equal protection and the establishment clauses claiming that the favorable treatment is without secular purpose and rational explanation in law or fact.
Striking down the parsonage allowance would have a dramatic impact upon real estate property taxation. If other favorable treatment was revoked, the tax-exempt area and religious areas would be dramatically impacted. There has always been tension between church and state throughout history. Once again, it appears, albeit in a slightly different form.