WASHINGTON (AP) — The IRS has made a surprising decision that allows pastors to endorse political candidates from the pulpit without risking their organization’s tax-exempt status. This move has received positive feedback from conservatives and some progressive religious groups, but has raised concerns among other faith leaders, as well as tax and legal experts.
The Johnson Amendment, a provision in the tax code dating back to 1954, states that churches and other nonprofits could lose their tax-exempt status if they participate in political campaigns for or against any candidate for public office. While this rule was rarely enforced, the IRS recently stated in court documents that communicating in good faith with a church congregation about matters of faith does not constitute intervention in a political campaign.
Although the IRS did not call for the repeal of the Johnson Amendment, its new interpretation has come after years of debate and legal challenges from various religious organizations. President Donald Trump praised the IRS’ decision, emphasizing his support for churches endorsing political candidates.
While some see this as a newfound freedom for churches to openly discuss preferred candidates, others are concerned about potential issues such as campaign finance corruption and the entanglement of church and state. Despite differing opinions, the new IRS interpretation has been welcomed by many religious leaders and congregations across the country.
“It is permissible for pastors to express political opinions on their personal social media accounts, but not within the sanctuary or from the pulpit,” he explained. “Church politicking concerns have been raised by tax and constitutional law experts who are cautious about potential entanglements resulting from the IRS’ new stance. Philip Hackney, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law specializing in the relationship between churches and tax authorities, expressed concerns that this could lead to churches blurring the lines between politics and their core beliefs, potentially shifting their mission focus. There is a sense of skepticism among various religious groups, especially within faith communities of color, regarding the implications of this decision. The Rev. Mark Whitlock from Reid Temple African Methodist Episcopal Church expressed caution, apprehension, and skepticism, particularly questioning the timing of the decision.
Moving forward, there is a concern that the repeal of the Johnson Amendment could align some congregations with specific political parties or candidates, potentially overshadowing their commitment to the Gospel. The issue of political endorsements by houses of worship during elections remains a divisive topic, with a majority of U.S. adults believing that churches should refrain from favoring one candidate over another. Some see the IRS statement as a means to dispel unfounded criticisms against the agency, while others urge caution in interpreting it to avoid turning religion into a partisan tool. Not all pastors may choose to engage in political discourse, as they may prefer to focus on ministering to a congregation that may have differing political views or feel uncomfortable mixing politics with religion.”
“Noguchi stated that these policies would promote the greater good. The Catholic Church remains steadfast in its position of neither supporting nor opposing political candidates.”___This report was contributed by Bharath from Los Angeles.___Funding for AP’s religion coverage is made possible through collaboration with The Conversation US, supported by Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely accountable for the content of this report.
