Three Modes For Paying For Shuls

Orthodox rabbi Gil Student writes:

In general, there are three basic models for charging synagogue dues:

• Flat Fee — The first is to make it affordable to just about everybody so that all members pay the same amount. Then, because this will not cover all expenses, additional fundraising campaigns are required. We’re all familiar with these types of fundraisers — dinners, journals, chinese auctions, selling honors, etc.
• Discounted Fees — The other type is to have high dues and then to offer discounts and lower levels of membership to people who cannot afford the full dues. This doesn’t exempt the members from further fundraisers but it makes those campaigns less urgent.
• Service-Based Fee — The third is that there are no membership dues per se but attendees are expected to pay for each service they receive, e.g. a seat, an honor, etc.

Mike writes: "While the korbanos tzibbur were paid from a head tax, the labor costs of the Beis hamikdash, i.e. the kohanim and leviim were paid in proportion to income (T’rumah and ma’aser rishon) or in return for services (the skin of an Olah and the various portions of korbanos given to the kohanim.) Money for upkeep (bedek habayit) came from donations."

MYCROFT POSTS: An unscientific sociological observation-it is my impression that half a century or so the model for many schuls was relatively small memebership dues-with the great majority of money rased by the top 10% or so. A schul was often considered a communal obligation-it is my impression inthe past half century or so that gradually the models that schuls use are we are a club if one wants to join one pays their pro rata share-similar to the requirements of a gym club.
Of course to the extent that schuls are expensive is part of the raising of the bar to belong to Judaism or Orthodoxy. Nit nearly the problem of day schools/Yeshivas but still there.

I will note in passing that in a US context a schul could not ever legally bar the door to going to services to those who don’t belong or don’t "buy" seats etc. if they wish payments to them to be deductible under IRC as a charitable deduction.
It is my impression that ultimately the reason why schul dues etc are deductible andYeshiva tuition is not-is not because of services etc-I believe the "Goldbergs"? of LA who argued many times before various US courts that tuition should be deductible as a religious expense to the extent of limudei kodesh-because that is as much a mitzvah as davening andthus would be an unconstittutional preference to allow payments for chuch services to be deductible and not payments for study of religious texts. The answer given was that schools will bar the doorto those who don’t pay tuition, churches etc will not bar the dooor to those who don’t pay-they can give preference to seats to those who have contributed to the extent that there is no room for all-vut could not bar entrance to anyone if there was an empty seat etc at the time.

DOV WEINSTOCK WRITES: "My shul (and I am sure many many others) uses all 3 models. There is a membership fee (the price of which moves steadily upwards), people of limited means are given discounts, and the expectation is that specific services like aliyot, seats for Yamim Noraim, etc. are paid for on top of that (or included with a higher membership payment). Even so, they have difficulty making ends meet."

Mair writes: "The major problem is not the charging of dues. It’s the collection of dues. What form of sanctions does the financial officer have available to collect delinquent accounts? Very few, if any, as far as I can tell."

Arthur emails:

7.    Subventions from federations etc. nominally for the adult education programming.