Paul Tuns:
The House of Commons Finance Committee has recommended to the federal government that it change the Income Tax Act to remove the “advancement of religion” as a charitable purpose under the tax code and, in another recommendation, strip all pro-life groups of charitable status.
Among the 462 recommendations made by the Finance Committee to the government as part of the pre-budget process, is Recommendation 429 to “no longer provide charitable status to anti-abortion organizations” and Recommendation 430 the amend the Income Tax Act to remove the “advancement of religion” as a charitable purpose with the eye to stripping churches, synagogues, temples, and mosques, and possibly their affiliated charities of the privileged status that allows them to provide a charitable tax receipt to donors.
The British Columbia Humanist Association had lobbied for the changes. BCHA noted that “to be classified as a charity an organization must have as its purpose the relief of poverty, advancement of education, advancement of religion or other purposes beneficial to the community.” It argued, “This undoubtedly breaches the state’s duty of religious neutrality by showing a preference toward theistic viewpoints over nonreligious ones. It relies on a presumed public benefit of faith.”
The proposals have been criticized by churches and pro-life groups.
Toronto Cardinal Francis Leo issued an open letter to Finance Minister Dominic LeBlanc arguing against accepting either recommendation.
Cardinal Leo said “religious charities strengthen the very fabric of our nation through their dedicated service, outreach, and care,” and that many “fill gaps in services or funding not provided by government programs.” He said often these religious charities provide care regardless of the beliefs of the beneficiaries.
Noting that about 40 per cent of the 70,000 registered charities in Canada are religious, stripping them of their favourable tax status “would have a devastating impact and send a divisive message to Canadians.”
The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada (EFC) cited the same statistics and concluded, “This proposal would destabilize the charitable sector in Canada.”
Cardinal Leo also said that “places of worship are spiritual homes for hundreds of thousands of Canadians each week, relying on these havens of hope, peace, and prayer to nurture their souls, promote emotional/mental well-being, strengthen their families, and provide a social gathering space that reinforces community life.”
EFC director of public policy Julia Beazley, in the EFC’s letter to LeBlanc, said the religious charities provide benefits both to religious adherents and the public at-large. “Religious charities foster vibrant social networks, mobilize outreach, spark local volunteerism, and foster community resiliency,” Beazley wrote. “This is a time to encourage the presence and participation of religious charities, which foster hope, mutual support, and belonging,” because “Religion teaches us that we are not alone. It helps to provide a purpose for living and hope for the future.”
She said many religious communities offer pastoral, social, and physical assistance to individuals, “and those actions flow from their religious beliefs and identity.”
Cardinal Leo said that many organizations that enjoy charitable status “with views that differ from large segments of the population” and that targeting religious and pro-life charitable organizations “is utterly deplorable and entirely unacceptable in a democracy” that supposedly protects the rights of freedom of religion and conscience.
The Christian Legal Fellowship (CLF) issued an open letter to LeBlanc, saying the proposals “undermine Canada’s identity as a pluralistic, diverse, religiously-positive country” and condemned the lack of consultations, especially with those organizations that would be directly affected. The CLF letter was also sent to the Finance Committee Chair, Liberal MP Peter Fonseca.
The CLF letter, signed by executive director Derek Ross and chair Jonathan Kulathungan, also condemned the language about “anti-abortion” groups saying that is amounted to discrimination based on belief.
Campaign Life Coalition director of communications Pete Baklinski wrote in the Western Standard that the proposals are “a direct assault on religious freedom and the values that have built this nation, founded, as our Charter states, on principles that “recognize the supremacy of God.” He noted that under Canadian law, organizations that suddenly lose their charitable status are liable for a revocation tax amounting to 100 per cent of the value of the organization’s remaining assets. Such a punitive measure would result in the closure of service charities and churches across the country.
Baklinski said those ramifications would also affect pro-life groups.
In 2022, the EFC wrote then-finance minister Chrystia Freeland urging her not to strip pro-life groups of their charitable tax status. It noted, “There is a lack of data about what specific problem or problems this change is intended to address.” They asked, “that before any process of legislative or regulatory change is undertaken, there is research, clarification and public communication about the specific problems that are spurring the change.” The government has not done so.
Cardinal Leo, in his letter, said removing charitable status from pro-life groups could inadvertently endanger “every Catholic Church and Catholic social service agency in Canada” because “of our ‘pro-life’ approach,” which he called a “deeply rooted belief” that forms “the basis of much of our work.”
The Conservative Party of Canada issued a dissenting opinion from the Finance Committee’s report, but “Conservative Party of Canada’s Dissenting Report: Canada Is Broken, Call A Carbon Tax Election Now,” makes no mention of either recommendation to remove religion as a charitable purpose or revoking charitable status from pro-life groups.
