Congressman Blake Moore's Bill to Protect the Tax-Exempt Status of Religious Organizations Passes Committee

Congressman Blake Moore's Bill to Protect the Tax-Exempt Status of Religious Organizations Passes Committee

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congressman Blake Moore's legislation to protect religious beliefs and practices and preserve the tax-exempt status of faith-based organizations passed the Ways and Means Committee.

The Fair Treatment of Religious Organizations Act ensures that faith-based organizations can continue applying religious standards to employees without jeopardizing their eligibility for federal funding and contracts. The legislation prevents federal agencies from conditioning tax benefits or funding eligibility on a religious organization's willingness to modify its positions on marriage, sexuality, or gender identity.

Additional co-sponsors of the bill include Representatives Ben Cline (VA-06), Claudia Tenney (NY-24), Nathaniel Moran (TX-01), Lance Gooden (TX-05), Burgess Owens (UT-04), Mike Kennedy (UT-03), Glenn Grothman (WI-06), Tracey Mann (KS-01), Greg Steube (FL-17), and Celeste Maloy (UT-02).

"I'm immensely proud to represent one of the most religious and charitable states in the nation-and that overlap is no coincidence. Churches across our state and country contribute billions of dollars to the economy by providing health care, housing, and a wide range of social services. They also strengthen our communities by helping Americans find purpose and meaning," Congressman Moore said. "The Fair Treatment of Religious Organizations Act protects religious beliefs and practices and prevents the government from weaponizing tax-exempt status or federal funding eligibility against these organizations."

"Faith-based organizations should not have their tax-exempt status threatened by federal regulators that disagree with one set of religious beliefs or another," said Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith (MO-08). "Representative Moore's legislation is a proactive, principled defense of a basic Constitutionally protected freedom in America. I commend him for leading the charge on ensuring our government does not infringe on religious liberty."

Background:

In 2025, the Trump administration initiated an IRS investigation to revoke the tax-exempt status of Harvard University, due in part to fostering an environment of antisemitism. The administration argued that the university should be required to follow its executive orders, including E.O. 14188, "Additional Measures to Combat Anti-Semitism," and froze $2.2 billion in the university's federal grants and contracts. Regardless of the substance of the Harvard legal battle, these actions have created concern in the faith-based community. Future administrations could attempt to revoke the tax-exempt status of faith-based organizations over their adherence or non-adherence to executive orders that pertain to marriage and sexuality.

For example, a future administration could reinstate former President Obama's E.O. 13672, which protected federal contractors from discrimination in employment based on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) and attempted to strip a faith-based organization's tax-exempt status or federal funding due to non-adherence to the executive order.

In addition, in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020), the Supreme Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Justice Gorsuch's majority opinion acknowledged the tension this ruling would create with religious employers: "We are also deeply concerned with preserving the promise of the free exercise of religion enshrined in our Constitution; that guarantee lies at the heart of our pluralistic society." The opinion noted that Title VII's existing religious employer exemptions, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), and the First Amendment could provide defenses in future cases involving religious organizations.

While the decision acknowledged the importance of religious liberty, Bostock left religious organizations in legal uncertainty-their traditional beliefs and practices on human sexuality and marriage now potentially characterized as a form of sex discrimination under federal law with the promised protections relegated to undefined future cases and the goodwill of federal officials in future administrations. Following the decision, federal agencies have moved to apply Bostock's reasoning beyond the employment context, extending SOGI protections to education (Title IX), healthcare (Section 1557 of the Affordable Care Act), housing (Fair Housing Act), and federal contracting requirements.

These regulatory expansions have heightened concerns among religious organizations that their eligibility for federal partnerships and tax benefits may become contingent on abandoning sincerely held religious convictions regarding human sexuality and marriage.

The Fair Treatment of Religious Organizations Act provides the concrete statutory protections that Bostock's dicta suggested but did not deliver. Rather than leaving religious organizations dependent on case-by-case litigation or shifting administrative interpretations, the bill establishes clear, enforceable standards ensuring that religious beliefs and practices concerning marriage, sexuality, and gender identity cannot be weaponized to strip organizations of their tax-exempt status or federal funding eligibility.

The Fair Treatment of Religious Organizations Act:

Amends Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code to prohibit the IRS from considering a religious organization's beliefs or practices concerning marriage, sexuality, or gender identity when making tax-related determinations.

• Protections extend to tax-exempt status under 501(c); eligibility to receive tax-deductible charitable contributions; and any other federal benefit or privilege tied to tax-exempt charitable status.
• An organization's religious beliefs on these matters cannot be used against them even if those beliefs are otherwise inconsistent with public policy.

Read the full bill here.