NY Religious Corporations Law

SAMUEL M. KRIEGER smkrieger at verizon.net
Thu Mar 12 08:45:00 PDT 2009


I recognize that by black letter  law, a church is exempt. However for a church  to secure an actual letter of recognition of exemption  from the IRS , I have always believed there was a requirement to submit a Certificate of Incorporation (and By Laws), Trust agreement , Constitution or similar document-

Additionally, the document must contain  certain required clause, - no private innurment, disposition of assets upon dissolution.

These documents are  not necessarily utilized by Unincorporated Associations .

In the absence of an IRS recognition letter, the burden in an audit is on the taxpayer to prove the entity is exempt 

See Generally IRS Publication 557. 


SAMUEL M. KRIEGER,ESQ.
Krieger & Prager LLP
39 Broadway, Suite 920
New York, NY 10006
----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Lawyer2974 
  To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics 
  Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 10:22 AM
  Subject: Re: NY Religious Corporations Law


  Why would being an unincorporated association have any effect on tax status of a church?



  In a message dated 03/11/09 15:55:44 Central Daylight Time, smkrieger at verizon.net writes:
    Marc and Marci - If  a congregation registers under the Not for Profit Corporation law , does that thereby allow ecclesiastical decisions to be subject to approval by lay governance or review by  the courts? Are we elevating form over substance?? 


    Can the lay board of directors  direct that the Rabbi of an Orthodox Jewish congregation allow a female cantor to officiate or that he  hold Sabbath sevices on Sunday ??   I would submit not -    Davis v Scher , 97 N.W.2d 137, 356 Mich. 291 (1959). What happens if on the other hand the Rabbi wamts to introduce these practices over board or membership opposition.? see,.   Katz v Singerman  241 La. 103, 127 So.2d 515. (1960).

    Two additional notes-
     1.Many of the cases in this area have courts straining to find a "property interest" and thereby granting jurisdiction to a secular court ... See PARK SLOPE JEWISH CENTER, ,v.CONGREGATION B'NAI JACOB, 90 NY2d 517, 686 N.E.2d 1330 (1997) . (fascinating procedural history) 

    2. Retaining unincorporated status  may result in making  the benefits of IRC Section 501 (c) (3) unavailable to the congregation. 


    SAMUEL M. KRIEGER,ESQ.
    Krieger & Prager LLP
    39 Broadway, Suite 920
    New York, NY 10006
    Tel: (212) 363-2900
    Fax: (212) 363-2999
    ----- Original Message ----- 
      From: Douglas Laycock 
      To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics 
      Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 3:19 PM
      Subject: NY Religious Corporations Law


      So that's the escape route.  Makes sense that there had to be one.

      Quoting Marc Stern <mstern at ajcongress.org>:

      > In New York, a religious institution is generally permitted to 
      > register under the secular not for profit corporation law.
      >
      > ________________________________
      >
      > From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu 
      > [mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Friedman, 
      > Howard M.
      > Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 2:54 PM
      > To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
      > Subject: RE: Connecticut bill
      >
      >
      >
      > To the extent that the entire NY Religious Corporations Law is 
      > mandatory, as opposed to merely default provisions that apply in the 
      > absence of contrary rules in the organization's charter or bylaws, I 
      > think there are serious constitutional issues with very many of the 
      > internal governance provisions.
      >
      >
      >
      > *************************************
      > Howard M. Friedman
      > Disting. Univ. Professor Emeritus
      > University of Toledo College of Law
      > Toledo, OH 43606-3390
      > Phone: (419) 530-2911, FAX (419) 530-4732
      > E-mail: howard.friedman at utoledo.edu
      > *************************************
      >
      > ________________________________
      >
      > From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu 
      > [mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of SAMUEL M. 
      > KRIEGER
      > Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 1:11 PM
      > To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
      > Subject: Re: Connecticut bill
      >
      >
      >
      > Just for the sake of perspective  on the proposed Connecticut 
      > legislation, I would welcome any comments on  Section 200   of   the 
      > New York Religious Corporations Law (codified in Article 10  
      > applicable to "Other Denominations" - including Jewish Congregations 
      > ) compared  to sub- sections (e) and (h) of the proposed Connecticut 
      > legislation.
      >
      >
      >
      > ------
      >
      >
      >
      > "§  200.  Control  of  trustees  by  corporate  meetings;  salaries  of
      >   ministers.
      >
      >
      >
      >   A  corporate  meeting  of  an  incorporated  church,  whose
      >   trustees  are  elective  as  such, may give directions, not inconsistent
      >   with law, as to the manner in which any of the temporal affairs  of  the
      >   church   shall  be  administered  by  the  trustees  thereof;  and  such
      >   directions shall be  followed  by  the  trustees.  The  trustees  of  an
      >   incorporated  church  to which this article is applicable, shall have no
      >   power to settle or remove or fix the salary of the minister, or  without
      >   the  consent  of  a  corporate  meeting,  to  incur debts beyond what is
      >   necessary for the care of the property of the corporation; or to fix  or
      >   charge the time, nature or order of the public or social worship of such
      >   church,  except  when  such  trustees are also the spiritual officers of
      >   such church."  (emphasis supplied)
      > --------------------
      >
      >
      >
      > The provison  has been  in   NY law in some form since 1813 and was  
      > last  amended in 1909 .
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > SAMUEL M. KRIEGER,ESQ.
      > Krieger & Prager LLP
      > 39 Broadway
      > New York, NY 10006
      >
      >




      Douglas Laycock
      Yale Kamisar Collegiate Professor of Law
      University of Michigan Law School
      625 S. State St.
      Ann Arbor, MI  48109-1215
        734-647-9713



--------------------------------------------------------------------------


      _______________________________________________
      To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
      To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

      Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
  To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

  Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20090312/922d5b83/attachment.htm 


More information about the Religionlaw mailing list