Philadelphia Yearly Meeting

Quakers Will Go to Court Against the IRS

Press Release
9/24/03

Contact: Thomas Jeavons, General Secretary of PYM, 215-241-7210

Threatened with a penalty of some $20,000 for refusing to garnish the wages of a Quaker employee, the Philadelphia Yearly Meeting [PYM] of the Religious Society of Friends today announced its plans to defend its position in court on all possible grounds, including constitutional and statutory religious freedom defenses.

This particular employee has refused to pay taxes that support the military. PYM has a policy of supporting employees who, because of conscientious objection to war, resist payment of federal taxes that fund the military. At a special meeting of its governing body on September 18, 2003, PYM decided to answer a suit brought against it by the U.S. Department of Justice (acting on behalf of the IRS), and to defend itself in court. PYM is the central Quaker organization for a four-state area, serving 12,000 members and 104 Monthly Meetings (congregations).

The Justice Department action stems from a continuing dispute between the IRS and PYM over the question of whether PYM should be required to act as a collection agent for the government when doing so will require it to violate key tenets of the Quaker faith. PYM’s defense will rest on the constitutional right to freedom of religion generally, and particularly as upheld and restated in the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1994.

The members of PYM’s board (called Interim Meeting) were particularly disturbed by the lawsuit's accusation that PYM acted "unreasonably," and would be subjected to a penalty of over $20,000 because it has adhered to its religious principles. Those principles require it to support the action of a member when the member's witness is demanded by conscience and faith consistent with historic Friends principles.

The Quaker organization sees itself as defending freedom of religion and freedom of conscience not just for itself, but for all those who desire to be both good citizens and people of faith. While PYM regrets the need to resort to legal action, it looks forward to a full airing of the issues involved in a public forum where both the sound reasons and religious principles that guide this Quaker organization’s actions may be upheld.

Background

Quakers have long been known for our religious pacifism, opposition to war, and support of religious freedom and freedom of conscience. We regret that acting on our faith has now brought us into conflict with our government. At a special meeting of our governing body on September 18, 2003, we decided to answer a suit regarding the payment of war-taxes brought against us by the U.S. Department of Justice (acting on behalf of the IRS), and to defend our position in court.

The action of the Department of Justice (on behalf of the IRS) against Philadelphia Yearly Meeting (the Quaker church body for this region), seeks to force us to act as the government’s collection agent and garnish the wages of an employee and member who refuses to pay taxes that support the military. The IRS suit alleges that our refusal to do this is “unreasonable,” even though this refusal is supported by our most basic religious convictions, our longstanding commitment to freedom of conscience and religious expression for all people, and our dedication to working for peace.

This suit demands Philadelphia Yearly Meeting [PYM] now pay the back taxes the IRS ordered us to garnish from the wages of our employee and member, Priscilla Adams of Willingboro, New Jersey. Priscilla refused to pay those taxes as a matter of conscience and religious principle, because they could be used for war. The suit also asks the court to impose a large monetary penalty on PYM for being “unreasonable” in refusing to force Priscilla to violate her conscience and religious principles.

While only a few Friends choose this form of witness - war-tax refusal - to express our religious opposition to war and violence, it is a time-honored witness. Friends have traditionally been law-abiding citizens in every respect, but have sometimes felt required by faith to challenge laws we believe are immoral and unjust. Moreover, when individual Friends test their calling to carry out such a witness by asking their own Meeting (congregation) for guidance, and are affirmed in their calling, they are exercising basic religious practices of the Quaker faith. Philadelphia Yearly Meeting’s policy is to provide all the practical, emotional, and spiritual support we can to those of our members and employees who feel called to such a principled stance of conscience, one that is in keeping with our faith and practice as an historic peace church.

Quakers have always believed, and continue to believe, that freedom of religion and conscience are core principles and essential rights that are upheld and protected by the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. In our answer to the IRS suit we seek nothing more - nor less - than the preservation of those rights for ourselves as a religious organization, and for our members and employees as citizens of faith.

We note that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the federal statute enacted in 1994 and designed to protect the free expression of religion from unnecessary and unwarranted government intrusion, says that federal agencies must allow any reasonable accommodation that they can of sincere religious exercise which prevents compliance with any obligation arising under a federal law. It is clear to us that the Congress could easily make such an accommodation through the creation of a “peace-tax fund” if it wished, but it has been unwilling to do so. (Such a fund would be an account to which taxes could be directed, and which the government would agree to use only for non-military purposes.) Even more directly to the point, the IRS could choose other means to seek the taxes due from Priscilla Adams, other than forcing the church body she is a part of to be its collection agent.

So, in compliance with the court’s instructions, PYM will file papers to answer the suit by the appointed date. (We expect that deadline to be October 24, 2003.) And, while we regret having been put in a position where we feel compelled by our religious convictions to defy our own government, we look forward to a full airing in the courtroom of the issues and principles involved. We hope the path we have chosen will ultimately forward the causes of religious freedom, peace and justice in some significant measure.