Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS

It’s Complicated

Questions on procedure, rationale of tax-exempt conflict

January 17, 2013

The decisions to change some entities’ tax-exempt status were not made in a day....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Jan-18-13 10:35 AM

"Just pay their fair share like everyone else does"

Not everyone pays taxes.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-17-13 2:07 PM

Just pay their fair share like everyone else does,whoops forgot they're not like everyone else, they're better, just ask them they will be the first to tell you.

5 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-17-13 12:20 PM

"Bias" may be more apt than "complicated"--considering the Board Chairman also moonlights at the Chairman of the Warren County Democratic Party. That's like having a fox watching the hen house. We should focus on fixing problems and accountability for bad decisions rather than taxing nonprofits that provide vital community services.

0 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-17-13 9:55 AM

OK, why try to "win" here? It seems that the assessment board made a reasonable set of decisions -- but might not have done it the right way. why not have Warren County have the guts to request the hearings, as Bevevino says is the proper procedure, and do it again? It'll delay the tax revenue by a year, but it'll save the court costs associated with an appeal. The results will be the same because the hospital is no more a pure charity than is United Refining. Look at the salaries of its leaders. That's a for-profit structure. You want a charity, look at the salaries of the good and noble Salvation Army. The Y and the hospital remind me of the tobacco companies, claiming and claiming "no link" between tobacco and cancer, when it became self-evident. Ditto here: They should pay the taxes, because they use the governmental services.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-17-13 9:09 AM

Its not like they are closing these good organizations down! The board is only saying these organizations who charge for their services share in the cost of services they recieve from the government.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-17-13 1:45 AM

129 Pa****mw. 69 (1989). really? "Pa Common wealth 69" = Pa****mw69

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Jan-17-13 1:41 AM

"The YMCA of the USA will fight," Turner said. "If the corporate office... loses one of these, that's gigantic. We'll fight this to the Supreme Court." Really Thad? you may want to review a case known as "Pittsburgh v.YMCA" and "Erie Co. v. YMCA" before you go all the way to the Supreme Court which will most likely deny hearing your case."The common pleas court held that the facility did not function as a "purely public charity" and thus did not qualify to any extent for tax-exempt status". (129 Pa****mw. 69 (1989)564 A.2d 1026) Google it, it's not hard to do.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 7 of 7 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web