Home
Whhhhhhhhaaaaaaa....??
No way. Those folk would never lie about their intent to raise funds. They're pseudo-conservatives. However could this happen...?
Groups Targeted by I.R.S. Tested Rules on Politics...
When CVFC, a conservative veterans’ group in California, applied for tax-exempt status with the Internal Revenue Service, its biggest expenditure that year was several thousand dollars in radio ads backing a Republican candidate for Congress.
The Wetumpka Tea Party, from Alabama, sponsored training for a get-out-the-vote initiative dedicated to the “defeat of President Barack Obama” while the I.R.S. was weighing its application.
And the head of the Ohio Liberty Coalition, whose application languished with the I.R.S. for more than two years, sent out e-mails to members about Mitt Romney campaign events and organized members to distribute Mr. Romney’s presidential campaign literature.
Representatives of these organizations have cried foul in recent weeks about their treatment by the I.R.S., saying they were among dozens of conservative groups unfairly targeted by the agency, harassed with inappropriate questionnaires and put off for months or years as the agency delayed decisions on their applications.
But a close examination of these groups and others reveals an array of election activities that tax experts and former I.R.S. officials said would provide a legitimate basis for flagging them for closer review.
“Money is not the only thing that matters,” said Donald B. Tobin, a former lawyer with the Justice Department’s tax division who is a law professor at Ohio State University. “While some of the I.R.S. questions may have been overbroad, you can look at some of these groups and understand why these questions were being asked.”
The stakes are high for both the I.R.S. and lawmakers in Congress, whose election fortunes next year will hinge in no small part on a flood of political spending by such advocacy groups. They are often favored by strategists and donors not for the tax benefits — they typically not do have significant income subject to tax — but because they do not have to reveal their donors, allowing them to pour hundreds of millions of dollars into elections without disclosing where the money came from.
The I.R.S. is already separately reviewing roughly 300 tax-exempt groups that may have engaged in improper campaign activity in past years, according to agency planning documents. Some election lawyers said they believed a wave of lawsuits against the I.R.S. and intensifying Congressional criticism of its handling of applications were intended in part to derail those audits, giving political nonprofit organizations a freer hand during the 2014 campaign.
After the tax agency was denounced in recent weeks by President Obama, lawmakers and critics for what they described as improper scrutiny of at least 100 groups seeking I.R.S. recognition, The New York Times examined more than a dozen of the organizations, most of them organized as 501(c)(4) “social welfare” groups under the tax code, or in some cases as 501(c)(3) charities. None ran major election advertising campaigns, according to the Campaign Media Analysis Group, the main activity of a small number of big-spending tax-exempt groups that emerged as major players in the 2010 and 2012 elections.
But some organized volunteers, distributed pamphlets and held rallies leading up to the 2010 elections or the 2012 presidential election, as conservatives fought to turn out Mr. Obama. ..................
The rest is here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/us/politics/nonprofit-applicants-chafing-at-irs-tested-political-limits.html?hp&_r=3&
Boy howdy them social services we provide is real hard to pay fer seppin' we ax you fer money, and I think the IRS should be a mindin' their own damn bidnes.....like collectin' back taxes from them colored folk who pick or salad fixin's.
BUT NOOOOO....!!! They gotta go meddlin' around hair-assin' us cause we's patriotically activatin' and stuff. Hell. Me and Jeb was crankin' out license plates in my garage, fer the patriotic movemit acourse, when them carpetbaggin commies come to the door a bangin' and it scared April May June (she's my youngest) so bad she went all laborin and dropped that baby right there in front of them fellers. She was a screamin' DADDY, DADDY so I come a runnin' so quick I plumb fergot my scatter gun. It was awful, just awful, I tell ya what.
Anyhow, after I showed em my homeaded driver licents, they just scratched they head and left....said they'd be in touch again someday.
Hell....don't matter nohow cause that mud feller stole the 'lection. I'll be danged if'n my grandaddy didn't roll in his grave and cry out to his kin.
They say he's only half a field hand, but in my book that's about 51% too much fer me to swaller.
Now ya'll GIT ba-fer I send Caleb to git his cousins.
Ya been warned fit an proper like.....
No way. Those folk would never lie about their intent to raise funds. They're pseudo-conservatives. However could this happen...?
Groups Targeted by I.R.S. Tested Rules on Politics...
When CVFC, a conservative veterans’ group in California, applied for tax-exempt status with the Internal Revenue Service, its biggest expenditure that year was several thousand dollars in radio ads backing a Republican candidate for Congress.
The Wetumpka Tea Party, from Alabama, sponsored training for a get-out-the-vote initiative dedicated to the “defeat of President Barack Obama” while the I.R.S. was weighing its application.
And the head of the Ohio Liberty Coalition, whose application languished with the I.R.S. for more than two years, sent out e-mails to members about Mitt Romney campaign events and organized members to distribute Mr. Romney’s presidential campaign literature.
Representatives of these organizations have cried foul in recent weeks about their treatment by the I.R.S., saying they were among dozens of conservative groups unfairly targeted by the agency, harassed with inappropriate questionnaires and put off for months or years as the agency delayed decisions on their applications.
But a close examination of these groups and others reveals an array of election activities that tax experts and former I.R.S. officials said would provide a legitimate basis for flagging them for closer review.
“Money is not the only thing that matters,” said Donald B. Tobin, a former lawyer with the Justice Department’s tax division who is a law professor at Ohio State University. “While some of the I.R.S. questions may have been overbroad, you can look at some of these groups and understand why these questions were being asked.”
The stakes are high for both the I.R.S. and lawmakers in Congress, whose election fortunes next year will hinge in no small part on a flood of political spending by such advocacy groups. They are often favored by strategists and donors not for the tax benefits — they typically not do have significant income subject to tax — but because they do not have to reveal their donors, allowing them to pour hundreds of millions of dollars into elections without disclosing where the money came from.
The I.R.S. is already separately reviewing roughly 300 tax-exempt groups that may have engaged in improper campaign activity in past years, according to agency planning documents. Some election lawyers said they believed a wave of lawsuits against the I.R.S. and intensifying Congressional criticism of its handling of applications were intended in part to derail those audits, giving political nonprofit organizations a freer hand during the 2014 campaign.
After the tax agency was denounced in recent weeks by President Obama, lawmakers and critics for what they described as improper scrutiny of at least 100 groups seeking I.R.S. recognition, The New York Times examined more than a dozen of the organizations, most of them organized as 501(c)(4) “social welfare” groups under the tax code, or in some cases as 501(c)(3) charities. None ran major election advertising campaigns, according to the Campaign Media Analysis Group, the main activity of a small number of big-spending tax-exempt groups that emerged as major players in the 2010 and 2012 elections.
But some organized volunteers, distributed pamphlets and held rallies leading up to the 2010 elections or the 2012 presidential election, as conservatives fought to turn out Mr. Obama. ..................
The rest is here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/27/us/politics/nonprofit-applicants-chafing-at-irs-tested-political-limits.html?hp&_r=3&
Boy howdy them social services we provide is real hard to pay fer seppin' we ax you fer money, and I think the IRS should be a mindin' their own damn bidnes.....like collectin' back taxes from them colored folk who pick or salad fixin's.
BUT NOOOOO....!!! They gotta go meddlin' around hair-assin' us cause we's patriotically activatin' and stuff. Hell. Me and Jeb was crankin' out license plates in my garage, fer the patriotic movemit acourse, when them carpetbaggin commies come to the door a bangin' and it scared April May June (she's my youngest) so bad she went all laborin and dropped that baby right there in front of them fellers. She was a screamin' DADDY, DADDY so I come a runnin' so quick I plumb fergot my scatter gun. It was awful, just awful, I tell ya what.
Anyhow, after I showed em my homeaded driver licents, they just scratched they head and left....said they'd be in touch again someday.
Hell....don't matter nohow cause that mud feller stole the 'lection. I'll be danged if'n my grandaddy didn't roll in his grave and cry out to his kin.
They say he's only half a field hand, but in my book that's about 51% too much fer me to swaller.
Now ya'll GIT ba-fer I send Caleb to git his cousins.
Ya been warned fit an proper like.....
