• Skip to main content
Daily Citizen
  • Subscribe
  • Categories
    • Culture
    • Life
    • Religious Freedom
    • Sexuality
  • Parenting Resources
    • LGBT Pride
    • Homosexuality
    • Sexuality/Marriage
    • Transgender
  • About
    • Contributors
    • Contact
  • Donate

Policy

Jun 10 2025

Why Does the Government Want to Tax Nonprofit Organizations’ Parking Spaces?

At more than 1,100 pages, H.R. 1: One Big Beautiful Bill, isn’t what anyone might call leisurely reading. 

Containing many of President Trump’s campaign promises, the legislation aims to defund Planned Parenthood, make the 2017 tax cuts permanent and increase the Child Tax Credit, among just three of its top, positive features.

But buried within the bill is also something called a nonprofit parking tax, a curious, onerous, and wildly imaginative policy that threatens to siphon donation dollars from charitable organizations struggling to stretch their funds as far as possible.

Originally passed in 2017 as part of the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” (TCJA), the provision required nonprofits to treat the cost of employee parking spaces as taxable income to the organization. In other words, if a religious nonprofit paid $100,000 to repave or seal their parking lot, and another $50,000 to plow it throughout the winter, the organization would be on the hook for paying taxes on $150,000.

The novel idea of paying taxes on expenses rather than on income caused an absolute uproar, not to mention financially burdening nonprofit groups to shell out money to the government that was given to help the organization pursue their mission. The blowback led to its eventual repeal.

So, why is it back?

Clearly, the government is in a desperate search for funds, and many bureaucrats never met a tax they didn’t like. Others have speculated some legislators pushing this are hostile to religious nonprofits and want to financially hamstring them as much as possible.

Michael Martin, President and CEO of the Evangelical Council for Financial Accountability (ECFA), calls the proposed provision “an egregious mistake.”

“Legislators did exempt eligible church organizations this time, but that does not solve the problem for many Christian nonprofit ministries serving in our communities locally and abroad,” he writes. “It also does not address the disturbing assumption underlying the provision. Fundamentally, imposing a tax on a mission-centered expense as if it were income makes no sense, nor does subjecting ministries to significant new compliance costs to deal with that burden.”

The ECFA is inviting concerned citizens to sign a letter urging Congress to vote no on this latest effort to tax nonprofit organizations.

If the government can tax parking spaces and declare them a benefit, what’s to stop them from taxing water fountains, break room refrigerators, microwaves, vending machines, and even restrooms? 

Congress needs to “park” this absurd effort in a proverbial tow-away zone, once and for all. 

Image from Shutterstock.

Written by Paul Batura · Categorized: Culture · Tagged: Paul Random, Policy

Mar 07 2025

Trump DOJ Drops Case Against Idaho’s Pro-Life Law, Still Faces Legal Challenge

Thankfully, Idaho no longer has to fight the federal government to defend its right to protect mothers and babies from abortion.

This week, the Trump Department of Justice (DOJ) dropped the Biden DOJ’s lawsuit targeting Idaho’s pro-life law. In the self-executing motion filed with the court on Wednesday, the Trump DOJ voluntarily dismissed the case with no further action required by the court.

Background

Following the reversal of Roe v. Wade in 2022, Idaho’s Defense of Life Act went into effect, prohibiting abortion unless it is necessary to save the life of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest.

In August 2022, the Biden DOJ sued the state of Idaho over its pro-life law. 

It argued that the state law conflicted with federal law because the state law only permitted abortion in life-saving situations and not all emergency situations.

Attorneys for the state of Idaho argued that the pro-life law allows doctors to provide care to women experiencing ectopic pregnancies, miscarriages and other life-threatening conditions, which is exactly what the federal law requires.

Many in the pro-life community believe the abortion industry is using the federal law to try to create a loophole for elective abortions in Idaho.

Supreme Court Action

The cases — Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States — were argued before the Supreme Court last year.

The question before the Court was whether a federal law, known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), overrode the Idaho law regarding when an abortion can be performed.

As reported by the Daily Citizen, the Court did not decide on the merits of the case but instead dismissed it and sent it back to the lower court for continued consideration. The justices held that dismissal was appropriate because the cases had shifted in theory and arguments.

Future of Idaho’s Pro-Life Law

Idaho’s pro-life law still faces a legal challenge from St. Luke’s hospital system. St. Luke’s filed a lawsuit against the state in anticipation of the Trump DOJ dropping the case.

The hospital system, like Biden’s DOJ, is claiming that women in medical emergencies won’t be able to get an abortion to save their lives.

The district court judge granted the hospital’s request for a temporary restraining order (TRO) to allow for emergency abortions in the state.

So, for now, the TRO will remain in place and allow for emergency abortions in Idaho pending further litigation.

The Daily Citizen will continue to follow this case and provide additional updates.

Image from Getty.

Written by Nicole Hunt · Categorized: Life · Tagged: DOJ, Policy, Trump

Privacy Policy and Terms of Use | Privacy Policy and Terms of Use | © 2025 Focus on the Family. All rights reserved.

  • Cookie Policy