A couple of things triggered my latest pundit redux on the IRS issue. Saturday night’s NBC Network News broadcast spent an inordinate amount of time questioning plain folks around the country on just how disgusted they were with that whole heavy-handed IRS thing. Knowing nothing about anything beyond Fox News, the respondents spoke sternly as one voice that the IRS actions (not that they knew what they were) were nauseous and revolting; downright un-American. The reporter, 19-year-old Miss Blinky County of 2011, nodded her head in grave agreement. There were no follow-up questions to dig for even the slightest hint of knowledge of the subject matter from the interviewees.
The second trigger was the suggestion from a comment section contributor relating to my last submission on the IRS. The reader stated that “Well, while I totally agree with your conclusion, you’re mixing up a 501-c-3 and 501-c-4. The latter allows NON PARTISAN (caps his) advocacy-lobbying, ballot measures, etc.” I won’t repeat the whole commentary here but it concluded with the issue being “all about c-4 designation, not c-3.” I do agree the IRS issue is essentially about (c) (4’s), but there are some (c) (3) Tea Party affiliates included in the investigative (or whatever you call it) mix as well.
Tea Party and Patriot 501 (c) (3’s) laughingly described as “charitable” organizations are also constrained to remain non-partisan and cannot, under any circumstances ‘support’ a political candidate. But, (c) (3’s) can (and do) lobby as well. Into the millions as long as the expenditures conform to a certain percentage of their operating budgets. They can also get involved in “non-partisan” activities such as GOTV. A (c) (4) can participate in “some” political activities, so long as that is not its primary activity and it meets the definition of “social welfare.” (ROTFLMAO)! (C) (4’s) spend huge money on political TV ads, but open themselves to being taxed in doing so. A real problem is that the regulations are written in such a way as to be open to multiple interpretations.
To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.
I’ve visited dozens of tax sites and no two are exactly the same on the subject. I’ve seen (c) (4’s) described as “self-declaring” and their business is none of the IRS’s business for example. Or how about this gem? A social welfare organization must be operated exclusively to promote social welfare. As such, the organization cannot directly or indirectly participate or intervene in political campaigns for or against someone running for office. But they can participate in “some” political activity so long as that is not its primary activity. In most cases that should be pretty easy to quantify.
Yes, the language is oft-times vague and confusing, but it doesn’t mean that the IRS cannot seek out potential tax-evading abusers, even though such abusers might overwhelmingly represent one political party.
Republicans and their charitable and social welfare pals are ever-expanding the IRS issue so it will have legs right up to the 2014 elections. A sample copy of an IRS request letter to the attorney of TheTeaParty.net (TTP.n) group has been released by the law firm under the heading of “IRS Targeted Harassment of Grassroots Conservative 501 (c) (4) Organizations.” The author of that line was somebody at DB Capitol Strategies PLLC. This outfit provides “legal, strategic and operational guidance” to political organizations, especially with PAC and FEC compliance issues. Head Honcho, Dan Backer is especially proud of enabling “non-connected” (wink, wink, nudge, nudge) Grassroots PACs to engage in campaign contribution activity. His law buddy is Jerad Najvar. He once carried the water for Texas Republican Senators (past and present), Kay Bailey Hutchinson and John Cornyn. ‘Nuff said!
In reading the questions and requests, I was struck by two things. They are comprehensive and highly detailed. The IRS wants to know everything about the target organizations charitable or social welfare business. Secondly, there are two different references in the cover letter to a number to call at the Cincinnati IRS for questions and help, “If you have any questions, please contact the person whose name and telephone number are shown in the heading of this letter.”
There are 4 pages of “Additional Information Requested.” A few samples (some paraphrased), but by no means all the requests, include what activities and services are entailed in the organization, followed by who, when and where and time percentages. Will you conduct rallies, exhibitions or other activities for or against any public officers or political candidates? If so, describe.
There are numerous requests for copies. These include TTP.n web and Internet pages, newsletters, blogs and social media content. Materials for distribution prepared by an outside organization or person. Copies of fundraising solicitations and amounts are requested including pamphlets, flyers and brochures. Corporate minutes are on the list plus the names of volunteers, donors and grantors and whether any of them have run for public office. TTP.n’s compensation, salary, wage and reimbursement expenses make the cut, especially if they come from a political candidate.
The IRS wants to know about voter education activities and whether TTP.n has engaged in business dealings with a candidate such as renting an office or providing access to a membership list. Finally, name any other 501 or 527 organizations you’ve been associated with. These are not all the questions and requests, but you get a flavor of what the IRS is looking for. This organization under scrutiny has 3 weeks to comply though I’m sure they would be given an extension if requested. The relatively narrow time-frame for the response suggests that the IRS has tried to squeeze some answers out of these folks before.
Here are some samples from my latest visit to TTPn. “Should Barack Obama be impeached and removed from office?” That must be the social welfare part. Printed over a picture of AG Eric Holder, “Hold him accountable, sign our petition.” Before you get to the petition page, you’re asked to kick in some loot. TTP.n swears they’re not funded by billionaires or special interest groups. The petition demands a full investigation of Benghazi. The page claiming almost a half-million signatures, quotes a Lebanese Website and the Libyan Free Press as sources that say Ambassador Stevens was raped and sodomized (gotta get that gay-bashing in there).
TTP.n claims a suite in a Class A, 5-star office building next to the White House. What they most likely have is a cheapo “virtual office.” For rates starting at $99 a month, you can put that stellar address on a business card and use it as a mail drop. TTP.n claims expenses of $100,000 per month in hitting up the goobers for their last dimes for that fancy “virtual” office. If headquarters is indeed in a “virtual office”, where does the rest of that $1.2 million go? That’s what the IRS wants to know.
Republicans are pissed because the 2012 slashing of $600 million from the IRS budget didn’t cut off the inquiries. The next step is threatened lawsuits against the IRS to halt the program and recoup “damages” already spent.
Laugh line of the year. Even if the IRS finds you guilty of some stuff, you get a chance to correct the problems and promise to behave. Fines are rare.
Raised rural & small town, then lived in N.Y., Chicago & LA. Widely traveled. Returned from world wandering to pursue media life of anchorman/reporter and major, medium and small market talk radio. Highly active in politics. Once worked as orderly & security in Mens Lock Ward for the Criminally Insane at a state institution. Much more rational population than current Teapublicans. Great concern for country run by and for the extreme wealthy. The inhumane current running through this country has no precedent in modern history.
Follow me on Twitter @demwriter
