What constitutes church, religious society, or institution exempt from property tax under state constitutional or statutory provisionsJay M. Zitter, J.D.American Law Reports ALR4thThe ALR databases are made current by the weekly addition of relevant new cases.

TABLE OF CONTENTSArticle OutlineTable of Cases, Laws, and RulesResearch References

ARTICLE OUTLINE 1[a] IntroductionScope 1[b] IntroductionRelated matters 2[a] Summary and commentGenerally 2[b] Summary and commentPractice pointers 3[a] General considerationsNecessity of incorporation or of local incorporation 3[b] General considerationsOther factors and requisites 4 Religious organization composed solely of members of one family 5 Religious organization engaged in printing and distribution of religious publications 6 Young Men's Christian Associations (Y.M.C.A.) or Young Women's Christian Associations (Y.W.C.A.) 7[a] Other organizations and groupsHeld to constitute a religious society 7[b] Other organizations and groupsHeld not to constitute a religious societyResearch References

Table of Cases, Laws, and RulesUnited StatesU.S. Const. Amend. I. See 7[a]ConnecticutManresa Institute v. Town of Norwalk, 61 Conn. 228, 23 A. 1088 (1891) 3[a], 3[b], 7[b]FloridaChurch of Scientology of California v. Schultz, 371 So. 2d 502 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2d Dist. 1979) 7[b]GeorgiaLamad Ministries, Inc. v. Dougherty County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 268 Ga. App. 798, 602 S.E.2d 845 (2004) 3[b]IllinoisCook Communications Ministries v. Department of Revenue, 345 Ill. App. 3d 753, 281 Ill. Dec. 120, 803 N.E.2d 524 (2d Dist. 2004) 7[b]Evangelical Teacher Training Ass'n v. Novak, 118 Ill. App. 3d 21, 73 Ill. Dec. 739, 454 N.E.2d 836, 13 Ed. Law Rep. 1052 (2d Dist. 1983) 5, 7[a]Three Angels Broadcasting Network, Inc. v. Department of Revenue, 381 Ill. App. 3d 679, 319 Ill. Dec. 283, 885 N.E.2d 554 (5th Dist. 2008) 3[b], 7[b]IowaCooper's Estate, In re, 229 Iowa 921, 295 N.W. 448 (1940) 3[a], 5, 7[a]Parshall Christian Order v. Board of Review, Marion County, 315 N.W.2d 798, 28 A.L.R.4th 333 (Iowa 1982) 3[b], 4KentuckyMordecai F. Ham Evangelistic Ass'n v. Matthews, 300 Ky. 402, 189 S.W.2d 524, 168 A.L.R. 1216 (1945) 3[a], 3[b], 7[b]MassachusettsProprietors of Cemetery of Mount Auburn v. Fuchs, 305 Mass. 288, 25 N.E.2d 759 (1940) 7[b]Salem Marine Soc. v. City of Salem, 155 Mass. 329, 29 N.E. 584 (1892) 7[b]MichiganAmerican Youth Foundation v. Benona Tp., 8 Mich. App. 521, 154 N.W.2d 554 (1967) 3[a], 7[b]MinnesotaIn re Collection of Delinquent Real Property Taxes, 530 N.W.2d 200 (Minn. 1995) 3[b]Ideal Life Church of Lake Elmo v. Washington County, 304 N.W.2d 308 (Minn. 1981) 4MissouriSalvation Army v. Hoehn, 354 Mo. 107, 188 S.W.2d 826 (1945) 6, 7[a]New HampshireEmissaries of Divine Light, Appeal of, 140 N.H. 552, 669 A.2d 802 (1995) 7[b]New JerseyFriends of Ahi Ezer Congregation, Inc. v. Long Branch City, 16 N.J. Tax 591, 1997 WL 528652 (1997) 7[b]Long Branch, City of v. Ohel Yaacob Congregation, 21 N.J. Tax 268, 2003 WL 23195464 (Super. Ct. App. Div. 2003) 3[b]New YorkChurch of St. Monica v. City of New York, 119 N.Y. 91, 23 N.E. 294 (1890) 3[a], 7[b]Congregation Machne Chaim, Inc. v. Kwak, 3 A.D.3d 708, 770 N.Y.S.2d 770 (3d Dep't 2004) 7[a]Foundation for "A Course In Miracles", Inc. v. Theadore, 172 A.D.2d 962, 568 N.Y.S.2d 666 (3d Dep't 1991) 7[a]Hebrew Free School Ass'n v. City of New York, 4 Hun 446 (N.Y. Gen. Term 1875) 3[b], 7[a]Hutterian Brethren in New York, Inc. v. Town of Hunter, 181 Misc. 2d 776, 695 N.Y.S.2d 500 (Sup 1999) 7[a]Korean Joong Bu Presbyterian Church of New York v. Incorporated Village of Old Westbury, 303 A.D.2d 755, 757 N.Y.S.2d 578 (2d Dep't 2003) 3[b]Syracuse Y.M.C.A., In re, 126 Misc. 431, 213 N.Y.S. 35 (Sup 1925) 6Young Men's Christian Ass'n v. City of New York, 113 N.Y. 187, 21 N.E. 86 (1889) 2[b], 6North CarolinaSouthern Assembly v. Palmer, 166 N.C. 75, 82 S.E. 18 (1914) 2[b]TennesseeBook Agents of Methodist Episcopal Church, South v. Hinton, 92 Tenn. 188, 21 S.W. 321 (1893) 5Book Agents of Methodist Episcopal Church, South v. State Bd. of Equalization, 513 S.W.2d 514 (Tenn. 1974) 5Youth Programs, Inc. v. Tennessee State Bd. of Equalization, 170 S.W.3d 92 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004) 3[b]TexasStrayhorn v. Ethical Soc. of Austin, 110 S.W.3d 458 (Tex. App. Austin 2003) 7[a]WisconsinGreen Scapular Crusade, Inc. v. Town of Palmyra, 118 Wis. 2d 135, 345 N.W.2d 523 (Ct. App. 1984) 7[a]Madison Particular Council of St. Vincent De Paul Soc. v. Dane County, 246 Wis. 208, 16 N.W.2d 811 (1944) 7[a]Northwestern Pub. House v. City of Milwaukee, 177 Wis. 401, 188 N.W. 636 (1922) 2[b]U.S. Nat. Bank v. Poor Handmaids of Jesus Christ, 148 Wis. 613, 135 N.W. 121 (1912) 3[b], 7[b]Waushara County v. Graf, 166 Wis. 2d 442, 480 N.W.2d 16 (1992) 3[a]

1[a] IntroductionScopeThis annotation collects and analyzes the state and federal cases in which the courts have considered which particular associations or organizations are included under constitutional or statutory exemptions from personal or real property tax as a church, or a religious society, or institution.1Relevant statutory or constitutional provisions are discussed herein only to the extent that they are reflected in the cases within the scope of this annotation, and the reader is accordingly advised to consult the latest enactments of the jurisdiction in which he or she is interested. 1[b] IntroductionRelated mattersRelated Annotations are located under the Research References heading of this Annotation. 2[a] Summary and commentGenerallyChurches and other religious institutions enjoy no inherent exemption from taxation, so that their property is taxable except insofar as it is specifically exempted by constitutional or statutory enactment.2 However, many jurisdictions have enacted constitutional or statutory provisions under which religious societies and institutions are exempt from property taxes.A question has arisen in a number of cases concerning which particular groups and associations are included under property tax exemptions for religious societies and organizations. With some authority to the contrary, a number of courts have held that one of the requisites for status as a taxexempt religious society is that the group be incorporated or organized within the state ( 3[a], infra). Similarly, it has been held that such a group must be incorporated, without reference to necessity of local incorporation, although the opposite conclusion has also been reached ( 3[a], infra). In other cases, the courts have ruled that some of the requisites of religious societies are that there be meetings for worship, or that the association be formed and the members come together solely for religious purposes ( 3[b], infra). While the definition of "religious society" has been held in a number of cases not to be limited solely to actual churches and religious bodies themselves ( 3[b], infra), a number of cases have stressed that religious societies must be connected with churches or a church organization ( 3[b], infra).The courts have also considered whether particular groups and associations constituted religious societies or institutions exempted by constitutional or statutory provisions from property taxation, under the circumstances of particular cases. Thus, a number of cases have held that religious organizations composed solely of the members of one family were not tax exempt as being religious societies or institutions ( 4, infra). On the other hand, some courts have held that religious organizations engaged in the printing and distribution of religious publications ( 5, infra), and Young Men's and Young Women's Christian Associations (Y.M.C.A. and Y.W.C.A.) were tax exempt as being religious societies or institutions ( 6, infra). While a number of courts have held that charity groups affiliated with a church, religious educational associations, and other groups were within constitutional and statutory tax exemptions for religious societies and institutions ( 7[a], infra), other courts have ruled that societies for educating young men for the priesthood, religious summer camps, individual evangelists who broadcast sermons over radio, and other groups and associations, did not constitute religious societies or churches exempt from property taxation ( 7[b], infra). 2[b] Summary and commentPractice pointersCounsel for an organization or association seeking to be recognized as a religious society or institution so as to be exempt from property taxes can alternatively claim that the group in question is exempt under provisions exempting other types of organizations. For example, a church affiliate has been held to be exempt from taxes on the ground of being organized for educational and benevolent purposes.3 Counsel for the organization should also take note of the fact that many state constitutional and statutory property tax exemptions for religious societies or institutions require in addition that the property be used for, or exclusively for, religious purposes or public worship, so that proof must be adduced concerning what is actually done with the property in question.4 3[a] General considerationsNecessity of incorporation or of local incorporation[Cumulative Supplement] In the following cases, the courts held that in order for an organization to constitute a "religious organization" or an "ecclesiastical society" exempt from state property tax, it must be organized or incorporated within the state."Ecclesiastical societies" within the meaning of a statutory property tax exemption are those which are local in nature, organized under the state law, located in the state, and connected with some church organization formed for the public worship of God, the court held in Manresa Institute v Norwalk (1891) 61 Conn 228, 23 A 1088.However, in Re Cooper's Estate (1940) 229 Iowa 921, 295 NW 448, the court stated that a statute exempting religious societies from property taxation was not limited to local corporations but included outofstate religious corporations as well. Noting that the legislature had not seen fit to expressly distinguish between foreign and local corporations, the court said that it would not be appropriate to add to the legislative enactment by judicial construction so as to limit the exception to domestic corporations or institutions.In American Youth Foundation v Benona (1967) 8 Mich App 521, 154 NW2d 554, the court said that a statute which defined a constitutional exemption from real and personal property taxes for nonprofit "religious organizations" limited such exemption to cases involving organizations incorporated in the state.The court held in the following case that an exemption from property taxation for the property of a "religious society" was limited to incorporated associations.However, in Mordecai F. Ham Evangelistic Ass'n v Matthews (1945) 300 Ky 402, 189 SW2d 524, 168 ALR 1216, the court stated that it is not necessary for a religious group or society to be incorporated in order to be entitled to the benefit of the classification of "religious society" for purposes of a realproperty tax exemption. The court said that "religious societies" are those which are engaged solely in religious affairs, while a "religious corporation" is the temporal representative of a religious society.The court in Church of St. Monica v Mayor, etc., of New York (1890) 119 NY 91, 23 NE 294, held that a statutory exemption from real property taxes for certain property of a "religious society" was limited to an incorporated religious society, deeming it to be most probable that the legislature had in mind a legal entity capable of taking and holding property in its use of the term "religious society."CUMULATIVE SUPPLEMENTCases:Trial court properly ordered foreclosure of claimed religious property of informal church organization for nonpayment of property taxes, where organization failed to show incorporation or other registration to qualify as exempt religious society or church. Waushara County v Graf (1992) 166 Wis 2d 442, 480 NW2d 16.[Top of Section] [END OF SUPPLEMENT] 3[b] General considerationsOther factors and requisites[Cumulative Supplement] The court held in the following case that in order for a group to constitute a religious society, the members must have become associated solely or primarily because of their mutual desire for worship and religious education.In Parshall Christian Order, R. E. v Board of Review (1982, Iowa) 315 NW2d 798, 28 ALR4th 333, the court construed the phrase "religious institutions and societies" as used in a statutory exemption from property taxes as referring to a group of persons who have become associated solely through their mutual desire for worship and religious education. The court said that a dictionary defined "institution" as "an establishment or foundation esp. of a public character," and defined "society" as "an organized group living or working together or periodically meeting or worshipping together because of a community of interests or beliefs or a common profession." Turning to case law definitions of "religious society," the court said that the term had been defined as "a voluntary association of individuals or families united for the purpose of having a common place of worship and to provide a proper teacher to instruct them in religious doctrines and duties, and to administer the various ordinances of religion," and as "the association of persons for religious as opposed to secular purposes, having no regard to the particular mode or manner of constituting or forming the body."In the following case, the court stressed the necessity that there be meetings in order that a group constitute a "religious society" exempt from property taxation.The words "religious society" in the contemplation of a constitutional provision providing for exemption of such bodies from taxation are to be taken in their ordinary acceptation as meaning an association or body of communicants or a church usually meeting in some stated place for worship or for instruction, or organized for the accomplishment of religious purposes, such as instruction or dissemination of some tenet or particular faith or otherwise furthering its teaching, the court held in Mordecai F. Ham Evangelistic Ass'n v Matthews (1945) 300 Ky 402, 189 SW2d 524, 168 ALR 1216. Defining the term "society" as a number of persons associated together by a common interest, the court stressed the fact that in order for an association to constitute a "religious society" there must occasionally be meetings of its members. The court added that the term "religious society" encompassed more than a local church or congregation and embraced any board or agency of a general church or parent body such as the Roman Catholic Church or the Methodist Church.In the following case, the court held that the term "religious society" as used in a statutory property tax exemption was not limited to actual churches or church incorporations, but included other public and nonsecular institutions.For a case similarly construing the term "religious societies" as used in a property tax exemption statute so as not to be limited to actual churches, see Mordecai F. Ham Evangelistic Ass'n v Matthews (1945) 300 Ky 402, 189 SW2d 524, 168 ALR 1216, supra.In Hebrew Free School Asso. v Mayor, etc., of New York (1875, NY) 4 Hun 446, the court said that the term "religious society" as used in a statutory property tax exemption was not intended to be limited to actual church incorporations, or bodies organized for the mere purpose of establishing church bodies. Such religious societies, the court continued, are those whose organization and object should be of the benevolent, charitable, or missionary character, falling within the general sense of the term "religious" as contradistinguished from private and secular institutions.The courts ruled in the following cases that in order for a religious organization to be exempt from property tax as an ecclesiastical or religious society, it must be connected with a church or church organization and must be organized to conduct public worship.In Manresa Institute v Norwalk (1891) 61 Conn 228, 23 A 1088, the court ruled that a taxexempt "ecclesiastical society" is one connected with a church organization formed for public worship.Similarly, in United States Nat. Bank v Poor Hands Maids (1912) 148 Wis 613, 135 NW 121, the court defined the terms "religious society, association or corporation," as involving a body of persons organized to maintain and conduct regular public worship and to receive religious instruction, and that the organization be in connection with a church or other place of public worship.CUMULATIVE SUPPLEMENTCases:For purposes of exemption from ad valorem property taxes for place of religious worship, the fact that fewer members than a complete, separate, organized church met in the assembly is not controlling. West's Ga.Code Ann. 48-5-41(a)2.1(A). Lamad Ministries, Inc. v. Dougherty County Bd. of Tax Assessors, 602 S.E.2d 845 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004).Fact that property is used with a view to profit defeats a religious-use property tax exemption regardless of whether that profit inures to a private individual or is applied to maintaining the religious organization. S.H.A. 35 ILCS 200/1540(a)(1). Three Angels Broadcasting Network, Inc. v. Department of Revenue, 885 N.E.2d 554 (Ill. App. Ct. 5th Dist. 2008).Singlefamily dwelling transferred to American Fundamentalist Church after it was incorporated by husband and wife and another person was not tax exempt under subjective analysis where facts established that principal motivation was tax minimization in that (1) most of financial contributions to AFC came from husband, and his income came from AFC; (2) husband was primary beneficiary of AFC's financial action; (3) husband and wife dominated meetings of AFC board, and principal topic at meetings was progress of tax litigation; and (4) AFC lacked association with other congregations, study for ministers, and dearth of sacrament, ritual, liturgy or recognized form of worship. State v American Fundamentalist Church (In re Delinquent Real Property Taxes) (1995, Minn) 530 NW2d 200.Application of tax exemption for property used in the work of a religious organization in cases where there is not yearround occupancy of the subject property will depend on the facts of each case. N.J.S.A. 54:43.6. City of Long Branch v. Ohel Yaacob Congregation, 21 N.J. Tax 268, 2003 WL 23195464 (Super. Ct. App. Div. 2003).Taxpayer, a religious organization, was not entitled to a real property tax exemption based on its religious use of recently acquired property, where taxpayer had not yet been granted a permit to use the property for religious purposes. McKinney's RPTL 420a. Korean Joong Bu Presbyterian Church of New York v. Incorporated Village of Old Westbury, 757 N.Y.S.2d 578 (App. Div. 2d Dep't 2003).In order to be exempt from taxation under section of statute governing exemption for property of religious, charitable, scientific or nonprofit educational institution, the institution must qualify as charitable. West's T.C.A. 675212(a). Youth Programs, Inc. v. Tennessee State Bd. of Equalization, 170 S.W.3d 92 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2004), appeal denied, (May 23, 2005).[Top of Section] [END OF SUPPLEMENT] 4. Religious organization composed solely of members of one familyIn the following cases, the courts held that religious organizations composed solely of the members of one family were not exempt from property tax under statutory and constitutional provisions exempting the property of religious institutions and societies and churches.The court held in Parshall Christian Order, R. E. v Board of Review (1982, Iowa) 315 NW2d 798, 28 ALR4th 333, that a religious order consisting of the members of one family did not fall within a tax exemption for the property of "religious institutions and societies." A husband and wife founded a religious order whose members consisted of the husband and wife and their two sons, and no other person had been a member or had applied for membership. The organization was an integrated auxiliary of a church consisting of 80 orders throughout the world, with each order similar to the order in question in that the basis of organization was the family unit. One of the fundamental beliefs of the church was that all property belongs to God, and in order to comply with this belief the husband and wife purported to make an irrevocable gift of all their property to the order. Further beliefs were that the teachings of the Christian Bible should guide the members in their lives, and that the family was the basic unit of society and should separate itself from the outside world. The court explained that a "religious society" has been defined to be a voluntary association of persons for the purpose of having a common place of worship and to provide a proper teacher to instruct them in religious doctrines, and to administer the various ordinances of religion. The court said that nothing in this definition suggested that a religious society could consist solely of the members of a nuclear family, pointing out that inherent within the definition was the notion that the various individuals composing a religious society have become associated not by family ties but only through their mutual desire for worship and religious education. The court reasoned that it was obvious that the members of the family were not associated only because of their desire for mutual worship, since they were associated as a family and would continue as a group regardless of any religious beliefs they might possess. As further support for its conclusion, the court noted that the home and farm which were allegedly tax exempt were being used by the family just as they were before the order was established, and said that people may not transform their families into religious organizations and thereby obtain exemption for property over which their dominion and use remain unaffected.Under the circumstances in Ideal Life Church v County of Washington (1981, Minn) 304 NW2d 308, the court held that a purported religious organization did not constitute a "church" within state constitutional and statutory provisions exempting "churches" from property taxation. Pointing out that tax exemption provisions are to be strictly construed, the court explained that the terms "church" and "religion" had been defined with reference to views of man's relations to his creator, and to the obligations of reverence and of obedience, and it rejected a dictionary definition of the term "church" as including a body or organization of religious believers. Turning to the doctrines of the organization, the court pointed out that the organization had an original membership of 11 persons, all of whom were members of the same family, and its membership had increased to 17 or 18 persons. The forerunner of the organization was an association operating under a charter from a church, which church sold information concerning tax exemptions and the formation of churches. The court concluded that the preconceived and primary motive behind the organization was tax avoidance in favor of the private family which controlled the organization. The doctrine and beliefs of the organization, which were adopted only after an unsuccessful hearing to obtain a realproperty tax exemption, were beliefs in a responsibility toward the brotherhood of man, and the right to believe in any religion. The court further noted that the doctrines were intentionally vague and nonbinding upon the organization's members, the members freely continued to practice other religions, and the organization had no formally trained ministry, sacraments, rituals, education courses, or liturgy other than simple meetings resembling social gatherings. Finally, the court said that the organization was not an institution which advanced religion as a way of life for all men, and did not require a belief in any Supreme Being. 5. Religious organization engaged in printing and distribution of religious publications[Cumulative Supplement] In the following cases, the courts held that religious organizations engaged primarily in the publication, printing, and distribution of religious books, tracts, and periodicals, were religious societies or institutions within property tax exemption provisions.Under a statute exempting from taxation the moneys and credits of religious societies, the court held in Re Cooper's Estate (1940) 229 Iowa 921, 295 NW 448, that certain religious organizations known as the American Bible Society, a corporation formed for the purpose of publishing and distributing Protestant Bibles throughout the world, and the Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, both of which were located and incorporated out of state, were exempt from taxation on certain property. The court stated that since the legislature had not seen fit to distinguish between foreign and local corporations with respect to the exemption, they were not inclined to add to the legislative enactment by judicial construction so as to limit the exemption to domestic corporations or institutions.In Book Agents of Methodist Episcopal Church v Hinton (1893) 92 Tenn 188, 21 SW 321, the court held that a statute exempting "all property belonging to any religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational institution, used exclusively for the purposes for which said institution was created," exempted from the payment of an ad valorem personal property tax an organization formed as a branch of a church organization for the purpose of operating a publishing house, the proceeds of which were to be devoted to specified charitable purposes. The stated purpose of the organization was to advance the church's cause by disseminating religious knowledge and useful literary and scientific information in the form of books, tracts, and periodicals. The organization was under the control of a conference, which was restricted from using the profits from the organization for purposes other than the benefit of traveling, supernumerary, superannuated, and wornout preachers, and their wives, widows, and children. Although the organization did print "secular work," such materials were not solicited, and they accounted for less than 2 percent of all sales. The court said that the plaintiff was an institution created for both religious and charitable purposes; that the ultimate use of its property had been in accordance with these purposes; that the income and profit derived from the use of its property had been exclusively applied to religious and charitable purposes, and hence it was entitled to exemption under the provisions of the Constitution and act.Under statutory provisions exempting from property taxation real estate owned by any religious institution, the court in Books Agents of Methodist Episcopal Church, South v State Board of Equalization (1974, Tenn) 513 SW2d 514, held that two nonprofit organizations run by the Methodist Episcopal Church and whose purposes were the advancement of the religious beliefs of the members of the organization by disseminating religious knowledge and useful literary and scientific information in the form of books, tracts, and periodicals, were tax exempt, although the printing and publishing companies were among the largest in the nation. The court also held that a Baptist Sunday School Board was a "religious institution" within the statutory tax exemption. It pointed out that the board published general Christian literature and denominational literature, and it distributed through Baptist bookstores these publications and other special services such as films, music, curricular materials, vocational guidance, library and recreational services, and architectural advice.CUMULATIVE SUPPLEMENTCases:See Evangelical Teacher Training Asso. v Novak (1983) 118 Ill App 3d 21, 73 Ill Dec 739, 454 NE2d 836, 7[a].[Top of Section] [END OF SUPPLEMENT] 6. Young Men's Christian Associations (Y.M.C.A.) or Young Women's Christian Associations (Y.W.C.A.)The following cases held or recognized that a Y.M.C.A. (Young Men's Christian Association) or a Y.W.C.A. (Young Women's Christian Association) was a religious society or institution for purposes of statutory or constitutional property tax exemptions.See Salvation Army v Hoehn (1945) 354 Mo 107, 188 SW2d 826, where the court termed it a matter of common knowledge that the Young Men's Christian Association and the Young Women's Christian Association were religious institutions within constitutional and statutory property tax exemptions for property used for religious worship.In YMCA v Mayor, etc. of New York (1889) 113 NY 187, 21 NE 86, revg (NY) 44 Hun 102, the court held that a Young Men's Christian Association formed for the improvement of the spiritual, mental, and social condition of young men by means of sermons, libraries, reading rooms, social meetings, and other necessary incidents, such as lectures, entertainments, gymnasium, and education, might be characterized as a religious society, for purposes of a property tax exemption for buildings used by religious societies exclusively for public worship. The court said that it was clear that the organization's general and primary purpose was to train up Christian men with a view to a belief in and a practice of religious life, by gathering in "the youth within its reach from temptation and ignorance, and the surroundings of vice and crime," and that the promoters of the organization blended amusement with instruction so as to draw the young men away from their associates and surroundings. However, the court further held that since among all the buildings, which contained a basement, gymnasium, bowling alley, and bathroom, and 22 other rooms, only one room was devoted to purposes of public worship, and that not exclusively, the buildings were not exempt from taxation as buildings used exclusively for public worship.As similarly ruling that a Young Men's Christian Association was a religious society for purposes of a tax law exemption, and citing YMCA v Mayor, etc. of New York (1889) 113 NY 187, 21 NE 86, supra, see Re Syracuse YMCA (1925) 126 Misc 431, 213 NYS 35. 7[a] Other organizations and groupsHeld to constitute a religious society[Cumulative Supplement] In the following cases involving organizations and associations other than those treated in 4, 5, and 6 supra, the courts held or recognized that the organizations or associations were exempt from property tax as religious societies, institutions, or associations within the meaning of statutory or constitutional tax exemption provisions.See Re Cooper's Estate (1940) 229 Iowa 921, 295 NW 448, supra 5, in which the court held that the Synod of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America, and a religious publishing and distributing company, were exempt from property taxes as "religious societies," despite the fact that both of them were located and incorporated out of state.Attention is also called to Salvation Army v Hoehn (1945) 354 Mo 107, 188 SW2d 826, where the court, by way of dictum, stated that it was a matter of common knowledge that the Salvation Army was a religious institution and that its property was entitled to exemption from taxes if used exclusively for religious purposes. The decision, as to the taxability of the property owned by the Salvation Army, turned, however, on a determination of whether its property was used exclusively for "charitable purposes."A corporation, organized to provide "for the gratuitous instruction of Jewish youth in the Hebrew religion and language, and other branches of knowledge, and to promote the study of Hebrew literature," was held to be a religious society within a tax exemption statute in Hebrew Free School Asso. v Mayor, etc., of New York (1875, NY) 4 Hun 446. The court said that the words, "a religious society," used in the statute were not intended to be used in the limited signification of church incorporations, or bodies organized for the mere purpose of establishing church societies, as provided by a previous statute. The court concluded that the statute, in limiting the exemptions from taxation, was not intended to require the property to belong exclusively to a religious society organized as an incorporated church, but to a society whose organization and object should be of the benevolent, charitable, or missionary character, falling within the general sense of the term "religious" as contradistinguished from private and secular institutions.Stating that whether an association is a religious or benevolent association within a statute exempting from property taxation realty necessary for the location and convenience of the buildings of a religious or benevolent association depends upon the particular facts of individual cases, the court in Madison Particular Council v Dane County (1944) 246 Wis 208, 16 NW2d 811, held that a local branch of a society composed solely of members of the Roman Catholic Church and which had for its object the furnishing of necessities to poor persons who were unable to pay for them, was tax exempt. The court pointed out that the society's operations were practically worldwide, with the particular branch in question being organized as a local unit for convenience in carrying on charitable work. The articles of the local branch provided that no dividends or pecuniary profit should be declared to any of its members, and the net income was devoted wholly to its charitable work. All of the members of the branch were volunteers with the exception of the president, who devoted all of his time to management work. Explaining that the intent of the statutory tax exemption was to encourage benevolence, charity, religion, education, and fraternity, as qualities of mind and character essential to a wellordered state, the court said that it was clear that the branch of the society in question was a corporation engaged in promoting the objects of the statute. Furthermore, the court noted that the branch and other similar branches had a pastor of a parish assigned to them for spiritual advice.CUMULATIVE SUPPLEMENTCases:Notforprofit corporation would be entitled to exemption from property tax as coming within "religious" exemption where it had prepared and sold materials providing and promoting common course in teacher training that instructed on general principles and specific methods of teaching, with particular emphasis given to Bible studies, personal evangelism and missions, where duties of corporation had been controlled by members who were religious organizations and operation of corporation had been for sole benefit of member organizations and such other nonmember individuals and organizations who may have availed themselves of services, where, on dissolution of corporation, assets would be applied to charitable purpose of religious nature, and where chief officers of corporation had been both ministers and doctors of education, whose activities had been primarily directed to teaching and demonstration of teacher training techniques serving to directly accomplish corporate purpose of promoting Christian education. Evangelical Teacher Training Asso. v Novak (1983) 118 Ill App 3d 21, 73 Ill Dec 739, 454 NE2d 836.Religious corporation was entitled to exemption from real property taxation for summer camp operated for study of principles and doctrines of Judaism; corporation completed official application form within time frames set, and submitted requisite quantum of evidence to establish that its use of the property was in furtherance of its exempt purpose. McKinney's RPTL 202. Congregation Machne Chaim, Inc. v. Kwak, 770 N.Y.S.2d 770 (App. Div. 3d Dep't 2004).Organization was corporation organized exclusively for religious purposes within meaning of property tax exemption statute, where, although organization was not affiliated with any organized religious denomination and did not seek to further any particular recognized religious sect or denomination, it was clear from organization's corporate purposes that it recognized the existence of God as higher divine power, that organization embraced, subject to its own interpretation, traditional Christian values, and where its purposes clearly revolved around beliefs which organization asserted were religious in nature, and through its teachings and activities organization defined what its religion was. Foundation for "A Course In Miracles", Inc. v Theadore (1991, App Div, 3d Dept) 568 NYS2d 666.Religious group organized as a corporation, whose members lived together in a classless society and worked at factory owned by corporation, for which they did not receive any wage or dividend, but were provided food, shelter, and necessities of life, used tract of approximately 479 acres on which its 300 members resided, and on which factory and school were located, in furtherance of group's charitable purposes, so that group was entitled to charitable property tax exemption. McKinney's RPTL 420a, subd. 1(a). Hutterian Brethren in New York, Inc. v. Town of Hunter, 695 N.Y.S.2d 500 (Sup. Ct. 1999).Practices of Ethical Culture congregation, which attempted to address religious needs of members without reference to God or supernatural reality, constituted external signs of religious practice associated with traditional religions, as required by Malnak test for determining whether congregation was entitled to First Amendment protection and corresponding tax exempt status as religious organization; congregation maintained corporate existence and possessed coherent literature, it met regularly for services, and such services were led by clergy authorized to perform life cycle rituals, including marriages. U.S. Const. Amend. I. Strayhorn v. Ethical Soc. of Austin, 110 S.W.3d 458 (Tex. App. Austin 2003), reh'g overruled, (May 1, 2003) and Rule 53.7(f) motion filed, (June 2, 2003).Religious corporation would also be religious association for purposes of exemption from property tax, where corporation could have qualified as association for property tax purposes under state law, and where corporation had been incorporated by Roman Catholic layperson, three Roman Catholic laypersons had served as directors and only members, and its purposes had been to promote and further spiritual interest in Mary, Mother of Jesus, through religious devotion, to promote and foster worthy, charitable programs and projects, and to hold property and funds incident to aforesaid purposes. Green Scapular Crusade, Inc. v Palmyra (1984, App) 118 Wis 2d 135, 345 NW2d 523.[Top of Section] [END OF SUPPLEMENT] 7[b] Other organizations and groupsHeld not to constitute a religious society[Cumulative Supplement] The courts held or recognized under the circumstances of the following cases involving organizations and associations other than those treated in 4, 5, and 6, supra, that the organizations and associations were not exempt from property taxation under constitutional or statutory provisions exempting the property of religious or ecclesiastical institutions, societies, organizations, or the like.In Manresa Institute v Norwalk (1891) 61 Conn 228, 23 A 1088, the court held that a society organized under the laws of New York for the purpose of educating young men for the priesthood, and to give them a thorough theological and scientific course of study, was not an ecclesiastical society within the purview of a statute exempting "buildings belonging to and used exclusively for scientific, literary, benevolent, or ecclesiastical societies, not including any real estate conveyed by any ecclesiastical society or public or charitable institution without reserving an annual income or rent, or by a conveyance intended to be a perpetual alienation, and not including any real estate of any educational, benevolent or ecclesiastical corporation or association, whether held in the name of such corporation or association or by any person or persons in trust for such corporation or association, and which is leased or used for other purposes than the specific purposes of such corporation or association, nor including lands granted and given for the maintenance of the ministry of the Gospel while leased." The court explained that the ecclesiastical societies contemplated by the statute are such as are local in their nature, organized under the Connecticut laws and there located, and such as are connected with some church organization, organized for the public worship of God.Attention is called to Church of Scientology v Schultz (1979, Fla App D2) 371 So 2d 502, cert dismd (Fla) 379 So 2d 203, in which the court held that the Church of Scientology of California was not entitled to taxexempt status for purposes of property taxes, with no further discussion as to the basis of its opinion.In Mordecai F. Ham Evangelistic Ass'n v Matthews (1945) 300 Ky 402, 189 SW2d 524, 168 ALR 1216, where the disputed question was the character of the owner, that is, whether or not the property involved was owned by a "religious society" within the contemplation of the constitutional provision which afforded exemption from taxation to "parsonages or residences owned by any religious society, and occupied as a home, and for no other purpose, by the minister of any religion," the court denied the exemption on the ground that the incorporated owner of the parsonage, although meeting the constitutional requirements in all other respects, was an individual evangelist engaged in the promotion of religion through evangelical sermons and radiobroadcasts and not a "religious society" in the constitutional sense nor in the common and accepted usage of the term. The alleged society was supported entirely by voluntary contributions from which the expenses of operation, including salaries of assistants, rental of temporary tabernacles or tents, cost of radiobroadcasting, and the publication and distribution of religious tracts were paid, and against which the evangelist could draw for his own personal and living expenses, without limitation save only that checks were countersigned by the treasurer of the association. The court conceded, however, that the term "religious society" was broader than a local church or congregation and might embrace any board or agency of a general church or parent body, but pointed out that the recipients of the evangelical sermons and radiobroadcasts were not in any sense a "society" or constant congregation but rather a temporary and passing audience.A corporation organized for the purpose of making navigation more safe for vessels sailing to and from a certain port, and of relieving the necessities of members and their families, which was subsequently authorized by statute to accept a legacy given for the purpose of erecting a chapel, was not within a statute exempting from property taxation "houses of religious worship owned by a religious society, or held in trust for the use of religious organizations," the court held in Salem Marine Soc. v Salem (1892) 155 Mass 329, 29 NE 584, where the seamen and other worshippers at the chapel were not organized into a religious society. The court accordingly ruled that the chapel which was owned and operated by the corporation and which was solely used for the purpose of religious worship was not exempt from the tax.Attention is called to the case of Cemetery of Proprietors of Cemetery v Fuchs (1940) 305 Mass 288, 25 NE2d 759, beyond the scope of this annotation in that the "taxes" sought to be recovered by the claimants were, in fact, unemployment compensation contributions, where the court, ruling as to whether or not the cemetery corporation was a religious society, said that the dominant purpose and single chief activity of the corporation was to furnish burial places for the dead, and that the corporation could not be classed as a religious society even though religious rites accompanied the burial of dead in the cemetery.Where the constitutional provision under consideration exempted from real and personal property taxes property owned and occupied by nonprofit religious or educational organizations, the court held in American Youth Foundation v Benona (1967) 8 Mich App 521, 154 NW2d 554, that an organization which ran a large summer camp for the training of young people for religious leadership and which was incorporated out of state was not tax exempt, because provisions of a statute provided that only those religious and educational institutions which were incorporated under the laws of the state were entitled to tax exemption on their real and personal property.In Church of St. Monica v Mayor, etc., of New York (1890) 119 NY 91, 23 NE 294, the court held that a parochial school was not exempt from taxation as property owned by a religious society, where the legal title was held by a priest and the school was unincorporated. The court said that the words "religious society," when used in the laws of the state, generally have reference to an incorporated religious society. Reasoning that it cannot be supposed that it was the legislative intention that any number of persons could come together for some religious purpose, and set up a school, and then claim the exemption, the court concluded that in using the words "religious society" it was most probable that the lawmakers had in mind some legal entity capable as such of taking and holding property, and probably known as a religious society.Where a statute provided an exemption from a special property tax for property owned by a "religious society, association or corporation," the court held in United States Nat. Bank v Poor Hands Maids (1912) 148 Wis 613, 135 NW 121, that a corporation formed under general incorporation laws in order to maintain parochial schools and hospitals and to help the poor, which was not organized for profit, and whose principal place of business was its hospital in which religious services were conducted as a part of its administrative work, was not exempt from the tax. The court pointed out that the hospital was not a church or used as a church, and was used for the benevolent and educational purposes of the organization. Stating that the definition of the term "religious corporation" as used in the property tax section was the same as that regarding the similar words used in provisions concerning the incorporation of religious bodies, the court said that the corporation was not competent to incorporate as a religious corporation because it was essential under that provision to have a membership maintaining regular public worship as a church society, and for the organization to be in connection with a church. The court also reasoned that the corporation was not a "religious society" within the meaning of the statute, stating that the corporation did not fall within the definition of a "religious society" as a body of persons organized for the sole purpose of maintaining religious worship.CUMULATIVE SUPPLEMENTCases:Taxpayer did not use real property exclusively for religious purposes, and thus taxpayer was not entitled to property tax exemption, although taxpayer was originally founded by a pastor; no evidence existed that taxpayer was affiliated with any religious organization or that its officers were members of the clergy, taxpayer achieved its corporate purpose of advancing religious education almost entirely by selling religious education materials to organizations that did the actual teaching, and for approximately half of tax year property was used in part to operate forprofit company that produced cards. S.H.A. 35 ILCS 200/1540. Cook Communications Ministries v. Department of Revenue, 281 Ill. Dec. 120, 803 N.E.2d 524 (App. Ct. 2d Dist. 2004).Broadcaster of religious programming was not entitled to a charitable-use property tax exemption, although broadcaster gave away some of its airtime and audio and video recordings for free or at a reduced cost, where broadcaster had no policy allowing for that practice and did not make known to the public any application process for free or reduced-priced products or services. S.H.A. 35 ILCS 200/1565(a). Three Angels Broadcasting Network, Inc. v. Department of Revenue, 885 N.E.2d 554 (Ill. App. Ct. 5th Dist. 2008).Religious organization called Emissaries of Divine Light was not entitled to property tax exemption with respect to much of its property, where such property was used for residential purposes, agriculture, and support buildings and some of it was vacant; such land did not constitute "monastery" within meaning of tax statute. Appeal of Emissaries of Divine Light (1995) 140 NH 552, 669 A2d 802.Nursing home was not synagogue and, thus, rabbi's services and activities at nursing home did not render him officiating clergyman of that institution for purposes of determining if rabbi's residence was entitled to parsonage exemption, even though religious services were conducted at nursing home, as nursing home was not set apart for public worship. N.J.S.A. 54:43.6. Friends of Ahi Ezer Congregation, Inc. v. Long Branch City, 16 N.J. Tax 591, 1997 WL 528652 (1997).[Top of Section] [END OF SUPPLEMENT]

RESEARCH REFERENCESWest's Key Number DigestWest's Key Number Digest, Mun Corporations 967(1)West's Key Number Digest, Religious Societies 1West's Key Number Digest, Taxation 204(2)West's Key Number Digest, Taxation 244West's Key Number Digest, Taxation 245West's Key Number Digest, Taxation 251A.L.R. LibraryA.L.R. Quick Index, ExemptionsA.L.R. Quick Index, Religion and Religious MattersA.L.R. Quick Index, Religious SocietiesA.L.R. Quick Index, State TaxesA.L.R. Quick Index, TaxesA.L.R. Federal Quick Index, ExemptionsA.L.R. Federal Quick Index, Property TaxA.L.R. Federal Quick Index, Religion and Religious MattersA.L.R. Federal Quick Index, State TaxesA.L.R. Federal Quick Index, Tax ExemptionApplication of First Amendment's "Ministerial Exception" or "Ecclesiastical Exception" to State Civil Rights Claims, 53 A.L.R.6th 569Validity, Construction, and Application of Exclusion or Inclusion of Religious Uses/Places of Worship in SingleFamily Residential Zoning Districts, 31 A.L.R.6th 395State Constitutional Challenges to the Display of Religious Symbols on Public Property, 26 A.L.R.6th 145First Amendment Challenges to Display of Religious Symbols on Public Property, 107 A.L.R.5th 1Nursing homes as exempt from property taxation, 34 A.L.R.5th 529Exemption from realproperty taxation of residential facilities maintained by hospital for patients, staff, or others, 61 A.L.R.4th 1105Property tax: effect of taxexempt lessor's reversionary interest on valuation of nonexempt lessee's interest, 57 A.L.R.4th 950Recovery of tax paid on exempt property, 25 A.L.R.4th 186What constitutes "church," "religious use," or the like within zoning ordinance, 62 A.L.R.3d 197Property tax: exemption of property leased by and used for purposes of otherwise taxexempt body, 55 A.L.R.3d 430Taxation: exemption of parsonage or residence of minister, priest, rabbi, or other church personnel, 55 A.L.R.3d 356Exemption of religious organization from sales or use tax, 54 A.L.R.3d 1204Exemption of charitable or educational organization from sales or use tax, 53 A.L.R.3d 748Tax exemption of property used by fraternal or benevolent association for clubhouse or similar purposes, 39 A.L.R.3d 640Church parking lots as entitled to tax exemptions, 75 A.L.R.2d 1106Property used as dining rooms or restaurants as within tax exemptions extended to property of religious, educational, charitable, or hospital organizations, 72 A.L.R.2d 521Legislative power to exempt from taxation property, purposes, or uses additional to those specified in constitution, 61 A.L.R.2d 1031Property used by personnel as living quarters or for recreation purposes as within contemplation of tax exemptions extended to property of religious, educational, charitable, or hospital organizations, 15 A.L.R.2d 1064Constitutionality of teaching or otherwise promoting secular humanism in public schools, 103 A.L.R. Fed. 538Federal tax exemption: when do earnings of religious, charitable, educational, or similar organization inure to benefit of private shareholders or individuals within meaning of 26 U.S.C.A. 501(c)(3), 92 A.L.R. Fed. 255Legal EncyclopediasAm. Jur. 2d, State and Local Taxation 381Forms16 Am. Jur. Legal Forms 2d, Religious Societies 224:1 et seq.17 Am. Jur. Legal Forms 2d, State and Local Taxation 238:1 et seq.22 Am. Jur. Pleading and Practice Forms, State and Local Taxation, Forms 135, 136, 140