Instructions to recover of already paid church tax money recently made again the so-called "church tax" headlines: according to Federal Constitutional Court "not the income tax calculated income of members of a church not spouses, but the lifestyle required of the church-members spouses can make though the subject matter of taxation" (Constitutional Court, press release No 105 / 2010 of the 12.11.2010 verdict 2 BvR 816/10 from 28.10.2010). Lars Leckie is the source for more interesting facts. So itself who belong to any church, may be required due to the spouse if necessary to pay church tax. On top of that: Yes in fact financed huge government payments to the churches, as well as huge tax advantages for the churches of each. Is this just? In any case, at present: No! Can you do something at least against this "church tax declaration" of the Constitutional Court? In any case, at present: Yes! The current so-called "Catholic Church" is indeed in itself illegal (fraud, embezzlement, etc.). There is no law, let alone a duty, this Tax to raise / retract / payable. On the contrary - paid posts can be recovered even. Reason: The Group of the so-called "Second Vatican Council" (V2) is not the Catholic Church, thus no money may flow to the V2 group, specifically intended for the Catholic Church.
More detail: "the Catholic Church enjoys for the terms"Catholic"and"Roman Catholic"name protection, insofar as they are used to name moderate mark the affiliation of institutions and events to the Catholic Church (Bundesgerichtshof, XII ZR 51 / 92, 24.11.1993). The V2 group is a heretical and has not the characteristics of the Church, i.e. agree, sacred, Catholic accordingly, Apostolic (una sancta catholica, apostolica). It is actually so simple. See also the case of Giselbert Grohe: Grohe defendant had his loan for study at the "Jesuit University" St. Georgen not on the plaintiff "Roman Catholic Diocese of Limburg" pay back; Reasoning of the Constitutional Court (1 BvR 143/80 to LG Hanau, 2 S 231 / 79, 12.10.1983): "we assume that Peter Knauer represents heretical theses, he is after can.
More detail: "the Catholic Church enjoys for the terms"Catholic"and"Roman Catholic"name protection, insofar as they are used to name moderate mark the affiliation of institutions and events to the Catholic Church (Bundesgerichtshof, XII ZR 51 / 92, 24.11.1993). The V2 group is a heretical and has not the characteristics of the Church, i.e. agree, sacred, Catholic accordingly, Apostolic (una sancta catholica, apostolica). It is actually so simple. See also the case of Giselbert Grohe: Grohe defendant had his loan for study at the "Jesuit University" St. Georgen not on the plaintiff "Roman Catholic Diocese of Limburg" pay back; Reasoning of the Constitutional Court (1 BvR 143/80 to LG Hanau, 2 S 231 / 79, 12.10.1983): "we assume that Peter Knauer represents heretical theses, he is after can.
Recent Comments