This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2005, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

When the LDS Church talks, people on Utah's Capitol Hill listen.

And Thursday, when an attorney representing the faith urged state lawmakers debating tax reform to keep a tax deduction for charitable giving in place, the message had the desired effect.

At word of the church's scheduled statement, Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr.'s advisers pulled back a team of economists prepared to propose a 4.6 percent flat tax. They said they wanted to give the experts more time to refine their models.

Utah Taxpayers Association Vice President Mike Jerman went ahead with his proposal for a 4.9 percent flat tax which eliminates deductions for charitable giving. But he acknowledged afterward his plan will have to be tweaked to make it palatable to lawmakers.

Asked whether the charitable deduction would be included in a revised plan, Jerman said, "I'm not going to say."

Such is the influence of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the state's largest religious organization. That the statement was read in a rare appearance before a legislative committee only reinforced the sentiment.

For five months, state lawmakers and tax experts have been debating the merits of adopting a flat tax. The idea bogged down as special interest groups complained of the unintended consequences - on those with low or fixed incomes, on home ownership and on donations to nonprofit organizations. Lawmakers nearly gave up.

Huntsman and the Taxpayers Association had revived the idea this week - until the church statement.

Reading a statement approved by church leaders, attorney Jon Butler argued a flat tax does not require eliminating the deduction. Preserving the tax deduction, Butler said, will foster a culture of giving. He quoted a scriptural passage from the Book of Mormon urging people to take care of the sick and the poor.

"Our community is best served by providing tax incentives for the support of charitable activities," the statement said. "Charitable contributions help provide for society's poor and needy, fund education and the arts, and meet other important social needs beyond the reach of government resources."

Faithful LDS Church members are asked to donate 10 percent of their income to the church.

Task Force Chairman Curt Bramble acknowledged the political weight of the church statement. "When's the last time the church had a designated representative speak on the record in a committee?" Bramble asked. "The political reality is that taking a position in opposition of where the church is creates a challenge."

Lawmakers tried to clarify the meaning of the church statement.

Highland Republican Rep. John Dougall asked whether church leaders consider the debate over continuing the charity tax deduction a "moral or public policy" question.

Butler did not clarify, leading some lawmakers to conclude they can interpret the statement broadly.

"That leaves room for policymakers," said Rep. Greg Hughes, R-Draper. "[The church statement] is going to have impact with members of the committee. But the flat tax is still alive."

Huntsman's team had planned to unveil his "flatter tax" Thursday. Instead, it retreated, in part to accommodate concerns raised by the church.

"We're interested in making sure we protect middle- and low-income Utah while stimulating economic development," Huntsman adviser Keith Prescott said. But, "we need to make it acceptable to legislators."

Jerman also talked about his proposal in terms of satisfying lawmakers. "It's an issue of political realities. Our proposal is based on sound policy. But if political support is

not there, we'll have to go back to the drawing board to find something that will work," he said.

"Right now, the church, Realtors and charitable groups are opposed to the flat tax proposal. Obviously, with that kind of opposition, there will have to be some changes."

The LDS Church was not the only group to protest the change. A flat tax could do away with deductions for homeowners' mortgage interest, investment in low-income housing or setting aside money for college funds.

Representatives of Utah AARP, Utah Issues and the United Way urged lawmakers to consider the impact of a flat tax on low-income Utahns. "The Utah tax system already places a disproportionate burden on the low income," said Utah Issues' Sarah Wilhelm.

Directors of the Utah Symphony, the Utah Education Savings Plan and the Utah Housing Corporation worried Utahns will stop setting aside money for the arts, their children's education and investment in low-income housing without the incentive of tax deductions.

And a Utah Association of Realtors attorney questioned the underpinnings of flat tax theory - that a lower tax rate ultimately will lure more businesses to Utah.

"Do we want to sacrifice the mortgage interest deduction in the hope [a flat tax] will generate economic development that has not been proven in other states?" Mike Ostermiller asked. "Are we willing to throw away a system that works on speculation?"

Tax facts

Under Utah's current income tax system, about 80 percent of households pay the top rate of 7 percent.

Proposed "flat tax" alternatives would impose a single rate of 4.6 percent or 4.9 percent, but are controversial because they would eliminate popular deductions for charitable giving and home mortgages.

The top income-tax rate has been 7 percent since 1996, when it was reduced from 7.2 percent.