|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Nov 27, 2013 19:49:58 GMT
The tax codes are explicit in establishing that a 501(c)(4) organization cannot be primarily a political action group as those groups are covered under the Political Action Committee tax codes. Political activism is limited by law related to the 501(c)(4) organizations but lax enforcement and inadequate criteria existed for proper enforcement of the law.
As others on this forum know I'm opposed to allowing wealthy political activists from hiding their political activities behind a non-profit organization status and believe that either: 1) all donors above certain limits (e.g. $2,500 family/household) should be made public, or; 2) prohibit any political activities by a non-profit tax exempt entity.
This doesn't do either of these but it does improve what we currently have were these 501(c)(4) organizations really are nothing but Political Action Committees that are hiding their large donors under tax exempt status.
Please note that these new rules and guidelines will apply to ALL 501(c)(4) organizations and are not targeting any political ideology (in-spite of the whining already coming from fanatical anti-tax right-wing extremists that don't want to pay any taxes to fund our government).
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Nov 27, 2013 21:07:49 GMT
This is kind of hilarious, considering Obama and his gang are the biggest abusers of his own 501(c)(4). They are down here in Texas right now.....in "Enroll America," the 501c3 that is supposed to enroll people for Obamacare. Enroll America is NOT supposed to be political; but it is. They also have a tax-exempt group....also a arm of OFA, called "Grassroots" that is working on trying to "turn Texas blue," and working with House and Senate campaigns. They are ALL the same group....ALL worked for OFA during the 2012 Obama campaign....and have simply stayed on and gone to work for these other non-profits. They are ALL affiliated. The personnel ALL know each other....and as one of the Managers who was recently fired for admitting on video that "we are all Obama people," they are abusing his 501(c)(4) as they confer with each other and work TOGETHER to accomplish their LIBERAL goals. That means they are breaking the rules about politics big time; right now. Because if he's now trying to change rules to make them stricter and he's not even abiding by them now as currently written.....then he's only doing it for purposes of trying to snare Republicans. In no way, do I believe Obama and his gang intends to abide by any stricter rules when they are NOT abiding by the current ones. And as long as he's in power......he KNOWS that the IRS will NOT examine his shenanigans or do a thing about it. They will simply ignore any reports about Democrats.....as they've done in the past.
Just like changing the rules in the middle of the game.....as they did with the Nuclear Bomb in the Senate.....they are trying to change rules here again that THEY believe will somehow benefit them in the next election. You can bet your bottom dollar this is the ONLY reason they'd want to change rules at this point. Let them start abiding by the current rules........
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Nov 28, 2013 11:29:02 GMT
The IRS isn't "changing the rules" for 501(c) tax exempt organizations but merely clarifying those rules.
In another thread we addressed both the Organization for America and the Tea Party Patriots and found both of these organizations were violating the intent of the law when it came to the limitations on political activism by a 501(c) organization. Both are (were) primarily political action groups and should have been designated as PAC's and required to comply with the tax codes related to PAC's (that are also non profit organizations typically but not 501(c) tax exempt organizations.
The new clarification of the rules, that don't actually change anything in the law, clarify what constitutes the activities that 501(c) organizations can and cannot use to justify their tax exempt status. Unlike others that want their own political activism to be hidden behind a veil of secrecy I believe that political activism needs to be out in the open where we know who's pulling the strings. These rules, applied across the board, will help provide that public scrutiny of political activism and we, the American People, have a Right to Know who's pulling the strings of political activity in the United States.
These new "rule clarifications" do not change what is required to be a 501(c) organization but simply prohibit using "candidate-related political activity" like running advertisements, registering voters or distributing campaign literature as being used to qualify for being a 501(c) organization. The organization is going to have to qualify based upon legitimate activities that are not politically related but then the organizations were always required to base their 501(c) tax exempt status on non-political activities to begin with.
Prior to these rule clarifications 501(c) organizations were allowed to participate in limited political activities, and nothing I read will prevent them from doing this in the future, but they won't be allowed to use those specified political activities as a basis for their 501(c) tax exempt status.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Nov 30, 2013 22:58:56 GMT
Problem is.......EVERYTHING OFA, Enroll America, and other Democrat 501(c)(4)'s and (3)'s are doing IS POLITICAL. Working to get people enrolled in Obamacare benefits Obama and the Democrats. The arm of OFA called "Grassroots Texas" is all about getting Democrats registered and to vote Democrat. The recent undercover video proves they are working together. As the fellow who got fired for telling the truth on video said....."We are ALL Obama people." He is in Texas working on "enrolling" Obamacare people, WHILE also working on a Democrat Senate campaign. How is that NOT POLITICAL?
So....IF you truly want to talk about holding people accountable to rules and laws....then start with the Democrats and Obama who we KNOW are abusing it all BIG TIME right now. THEN, I'll talk to you about the Tea Party.....
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Dec 1, 2013 17:33:02 GMT
Problem is.......EVERYTHING OFA, Enroll America, and other Democrat 501(c)(4)'s and (3)'s are doing IS POLITICAL. Working to get people enrolled in Obamacare benefits Obama and the Democrats. The arm of OFA called "Grassroots Texas" is all about getting Democrats registered and to vote Democrat. The recent undercover video proves they are working together. As the fellow who got fired for telling the truth on video said....."We are ALL Obama people." He is in Texas working on "enrolling" Obamacare people, WHILE also working on a Democrat Senate campaign. How is that NOT POLITICAL?
So....IF you truly want to talk about holding people accountable to rules and laws....then start with the Democrats and Obama who we KNOW are abusing it all BIG TIME right now. THEN, I'll talk to you about the Tea Party.....
Of interest I went to the Enroll America website and didn't find any political activism on the website itself. From what I can gather it's not trying to affect any legislation or promote any political ideology. It is strictly about enrolling people in an existing program (the ACA) that is existing law. Simply assisting people in enrolling in Obamacare, that is an existing federal program, is not political activism anymore than assisting people in getting a patent for an invention under current law.
I don't know how enrolling people would help "Democrats" over "Republicans" as the poor that Obamacare is all about providing benefits both Democrats and Republicans. I've known just as many poor Republicans (in fact more) as I have poor Democrats. Should a person, for example, not enroll in Medicaid just because they're a Republican? I know in WA that about 1/3rd of those enrolling are being covered by Medicaid and not by subsidized private health insurance since our "exchange" opened.
I can understand a Republican being opposed to the law in general but I can't see a Republican being opposed to a person taking advantage of the provisions of the law. That makes no sense at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Dec 1, 2013 19:55:56 GMT
Problem is.......EVERYTHING OFA, Enroll America, and other Democrat 501(c)(4)'s and (3)'s are doing IS POLITICAL. Working to get people enrolled in Obamacare benefits Obama and the Democrats. The arm of OFA called "Grassroots Texas" is all about getting Democrats registered and to vote Democrat. The recent undercover video proves they are working together. As the fellow who got fired for telling the truth on video said....."We are ALL Obama people." He is in Texas working on "enrolling" Obamacare people, WHILE also working on a Democrat Senate campaign. How is that NOT POLITICAL?
So....IF you truly want to talk about holding people accountable to rules and laws....then start with the Democrats and Obama who we KNOW are abusing it all BIG TIME right now. THEN, I'll talk to you about the Tea Party.....
But you only got interested once the conservative groups got involved. Nothing was said all those years that George Soros has been giving liberal 501c4's millions of dollars to try and unseat Bush and put liberals in control. Why so late to be interested and vocal? I think it's because you and others complaining now....and trying to suddenly change the rules.......just don't like the Tea Party and don't want them to have a voice. The Democrats have been involved in all this since the Campaign Finance Rules were changed back in the 90's. MoveOn.org has about 3 parts, including a 501c4......and George Soros has contributed millions to get his agenda through.
Of interest I went to the Enroll America website and didn't find any political activism on the website itself. From what I can gather it's not trying to affect any legislation or promote any political ideology. It is strictly about enrolling people in an existing program (the ACA) that is existing law. Simply assisting people in enrolling in Obamacare, that is an existing federal program, is not political activism anymore than assisting people in getting a patent for an invention under current law.
Well, duh. It's not going to be right there in plain view on their website. AND IF Enroll America (a 501c3) is mixing and mingling with OFA, (a 501c4) and also with the "Grassroots Texas," then it is illegal. And we KNOW that they are....because the lead person in Texas with Enroll America just got fired for saying so on a video!!
I don't know how enrolling people would help "Democrats" over "Republicans" as the poor that Obamacare is all about providing benefits both Democrats and Republicans. I've known just as many poor Republicans (in fact more) as I have poor Democrats. Should a person, for example, not enroll in Medicaid just because they're a Republican? I know in WA that about 1/3rd of those enrolling are being covered by Medicaid and not by subsidized private health insurance since our "exchange" opened.
It's called "sharing lists." Please watch the undercover video; I posted it somewhere on here. The young man who got fired said his sister is head of the LULAC organization in East Texas.....and so, yes, they ARE working on behalf of Democrats. He's the one who said all these organizations are Obama people....and you don't think they are political??? Really??
I can understand a Republican being opposed to the law in general but I can't see a Republican being opposed to a person taking advantage of the provisions of the law. That makes no sense at all.
No, you're missing the point. That's not what I'm talking about at all. They are also working on Democrat Senate campaigns. That's political. There are some lawsuits...and complaints to the IRS, but that's just it; the IRS is in the pocket for Obama. Do you really think they are going to investigate this fairly....or at all....to see if these Democrat organizations have shared lists......worked on campaigns while here to enroll Obamcare? One of them is OFA; Obama's organization which STILL has his campaign people in it. They aren't going to touch it with a ten foot pole.....and what's more YOU and Democrats are not going to demand it be done either.
Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country. |
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Dec 1, 2013 20:22:59 GMT
From Enroll America employee, Chris Tarango:
"I'm doing Enroll America right now. But I'm also, I shouldn't be saying this, but I'm also helping out with HD 50, so that's as partisan as it gets….I mean, there's a lot of talent that got sucked into Enroll America, but we are all Obama people."
Cause of Action filed a complaint with the IRS Friday, claiming Enroll America violated tax code. As reported by Fox News:
Chris Tarango, an employee who stated "We are all Obama people," said this on camera:
“Despite its claims of serving the public good, it appears that Enroll America has abused its tax-exempt status by using donor contributions for political and other impermissible purposes,” the group said Friday.
Cause of Action also argues Tarango’s comments indicate Enroll is “engaging in political activity by coordinating with the pro-President Obama group Organizing for Action, a 501(c)(4) organization.
Battleground Texas is a 527 political action committee. The letter this week to the IRS suggests some people who helped get Obama elected in 2012 are now with that group."
Now, Shiva......Enroll America is supposed to be NON-POLITICAL; here ONLY to enroll people in Obamacare. And yet, he admitted he's also working on a Senate campaign.....admitting it is illegal. That's one problem. And here's anothr problem.....if they are providing the list of Obamacare enrollees; their emails, cellphone #'s.....to "Grassroots Texas," or even OFA....they are breaking the laws for a non-profits. And even though he was let go because he said this on video......they officials said they broke no rules. So, why did they fire him? Obviously they really support what he did..... KNEW what he was doing.....ARE a part of it....and don't care....other than they got caught.
In case you missed the video: "this conversation never happened....."
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Dec 2, 2013 16:03:01 GMT
To be honest it was the objections by the "Tea Party" organizations that really brought to my attention that 501(c) organizations were overly involved in political action as opposed to limiting themselves predominately non-political objectives.
They brought it to my attention and that was a good thing but I don't apply partisanship to the issue of addressing the problem which others do. Admittedly I was late in addressing the issue but that doesn't imply that the situation wasn't well out of hand before I became involved in addressing it.
As I've repeatedly stated there should be no favoritism in enforcing the IRS rules. There apparently weren't in the past when the Tea Party complained as only 1/3rd of organizations that had their applications withheld pending further investigation fell into the "conservative" category based upon the news stories.
It was also logical that an political "anti-tax" group would be more likely to try and evade scrutiny than a non-political group but that was a logical deduction as opposed to a supported opinion. I did find some of the questions being sent to "conservative" Tea Party organizations as highly dubious in nature but the fact that their applications were question was not partisan by any means. The IRS does have an obligation to weed out political action committees from the 501(c) tax exemptions and the Tea Party was always a political activism movement that lead to questions as to whether they were creating an actual non-profit organization as opposed to hiding a PAC behind the 501(c) status. IRS scrutiny was also being applied to the other 2/3rds of groups that had their applications questioned as well so it wasn't just about Tea Party organizations.
I don't know if Enroll America is violating the restrictions on political activism and we certainly can't base that assumption upon the fact that a person involved with Enroll America, even a the highest level, might also be engaged in political activities outside of Enroll America. Even a person that heads a legitimate "non-profit" has a right to engage in political activism outside of the "non-profit" but they are restricted in their role as the head of the "non-profit" under the law.
What is falsely believed is that there is a political conspiracy at the IRS. I have found no actual evidence of this happening but would obviously object if political favoritism was to take place. ALL groups of dubious 501(c) status need to be investigated equally without any regard for what they're advocating politically. As we've found on other threads is that we know some groups, such as the Tea Party Patriots and the OFA are clearly not qualified 501(c) organizations as fundamentally all they're doing is engaging in political activism that violates the 501(c) guidelines.
Perhaps Enroll America is also violating the tax codes but that has to be established by the actual organizations actions and not just by statements made from people that have connections to the organization. If Enroll America itself is questionable as far as it's 501(c) status then the IRS should investigate it which is something we'd both support in that case but just because someone involved with Enroll America is also politically active doesn't imply that Enroll America is.
When it comes to enforcement what I object to is political favoritism in enforcing the tax codes. I would and have objected to the proposition that only "liberal" organizations should be investigated before any conservative organizations are investigated (or visa versa) as that reflects political favoritism.
Any organization of dubious nature related to their 501(c) status needs to be investigated and we've already established that some do not meet the criteria of being a legitimate non-profit predominately engaged in activities beneficial to society as opposed to political activists.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Dec 3, 2013 0:22:04 GMT
Shiva---you are just like Obama. You claim on the one hand you disagree with targeting of conservatives....but then everything you say after that proves that you are not! Conservative after conservative came forward and told about how they were harassed and kept out of the political system. Proof was provided by them with the publishing of the letters they got with questioning about not only them, BUT their donors. Questions like, "Do you or any of your donors EVER plan to run for any political office?" Is there a law against it.....even if they WERE planning on it? No, there's not. But they were made to answer questions like this.....questions that reeked of the 50's McCarthyism...."Sir, are you now, or have you EVER been a member of the Communist Party?"
Then there was presidential involvement.....with his campaign rhetoric naming some of the conservatives groups by name and making unfounded "innuendo" about them. I can go gather some of his public comments if you'd like......in case you don't remember, or never really paid any attention. A president has the Bully Pulpit....and to be out there making unfounded accusations against any group is unbelievable!
Again.....the IRS, Lois Lerner, the lawyers inside the White House....and Pres. Obama himself wanted these groups stopped. He made that clear when in the SOTU speech he publically called out the SC members sitting there in front of him and when he KNEW they had no opportunity to call him on his lies. And he made it clear when he publically demonized some by name. NOT very presidential....but then nothing much he does is.
So....no, I don't get the impression from your words that you are upset at all by the Democrats' non-profits; only the conservative ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Dec 3, 2013 10:49:06 GMT
I agree that some of the questions that were being asked (which did not originate at the top of the IRS but instead at field office) were highly dubious in nature. For example whether a person involved in the organization is planning on running for political office is an invalid question IMO. It doesn't matter what the person does outside of the organization.
I believe we should have common ground based upon the following:
The IRS should actively work to investigate (based upon probable cause) whether an organization is overly involved in political activities and if found to be doing this should be either put on probation (allowing the organization time to curtail it's political activities for minimal violations) or it's status revoked if it the violation is excessive. This enforcement must be without any political agenda or ideology being targeted or protected in the process.
As I've previously found based upon my personal investigation the liberal OFA should have it's 501(c) status revoked as should the Tea Party Patriots as both are PAC and not non-partisan social organizations. I'm sure there are many, many more on all sides of the political spectrum that should have their 501(c) status revoked.
|
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Dec 3, 2013 22:27:46 GMT
As long as Democrats and Obama are doing it......nothing is going to change. They need to clean up their OWN house before going after anyone else. AND they need to stop using the IRS to abuse and harass citizens whose politics differ from theirs.
Did you know that the cancer patient who went on Fox News on Nov 9th to complain about his insurance getting cancelled due to Obamacare, and who blasted Obama pretty good..........just received notice he is being audited for the year 2009? Coincidence? I don't think so. There is just TOO MUCH of this kind of thing going on under Obama for it all to be coincidental.
He's MUCH worse than Nixon.
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Dec 4, 2013 9:34:00 GMT
Here's something I don't understand. Legitimate 501(c) organizations and honest taxpayers don't have anything to fear from IRS investigations and audits.
I've been audited four times and while once I ended up owing less than $100 (due to a math error) I'm actually about $20,000 ahead because of IRS audits. I often overlook legitimate deductions I'm entitled to (because I'm lazy and sloppy in my bookkeeping sometimes) that I catch when I prepare for an IRS audit. In 2012 I was audited for 2009 and ended up with an additional $9,000 tax refund.
So unless "Republicans" are cheating on their taxes or trying to form bogus 501(c) organizations what are they worried about? |
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Dec 5, 2013 3:27:33 GMT
Who said they are worried? They don't like being treated differently than Democrats......is that too much to ask under this dictatorship-like administration?? Did you by any chance read about THIS liberal non-profit? Pay special attention to the portion I highlighted in bold. Their entire non-profit is for the purpose of going after conservatives over "dark money" contributions. AND YET......they are collecting "dark money" themselves!!! And what's more, it's legal. It is legal for conservatives AND liberals.....but they are being demonized for it; NOT the liberals. Well, I'm glad there are watch dog groups out there exposing this kind of double-standard hypocrisy. Obama, who sics the IRS on conservative groups is taking large amounts of money from un-named groups, corporations, rich fat cats...and has been ever since he got into politics. It has nothing to do with Citizens United. He simply did not like it when conservatives decided to get involved....and that's when he and the IRS tried to keep conservatives OUT.....by delaying their applications and harassing them. Anyway.....here's the most recent proof of the liberals hypocrisy:
"Liberal Center for Media and Democracy kicked off a national campaign to reveal the identities of anonymous contributors to conservative groups in an effort to unseat the GOP governor here.
Now the group may have to answer embarrassing questions about its own finances.
A Watchdog.org review of financial documents reveals the Madison-based CMD, which bills itself as a journalism organization, received $520,000 in 2011 from the Schwab Charitable Fund. That’s 60 percent of the $864,740 CMD received that year.
CMD lists no donors on its tax returns, but its website identifies numerous financial backers without any financial data. Several are highlighted in bold and labeled “current donors.” But one important name is missing: Schwab.
Schwab is a so-called donor-advised fund -- a financial institution that manages contributions to nonprofits so that donors remain anonymous. Such donor-advised funds are legal. Like many nonprofits, Watchdog.org’s parent, the Franklin Center for Government and Public Integrity, uses one, too.
But CMD and allied organizations have worked feverishly to suggest the practice is shady — and limited to conservatives. As recently as Monday, CMD attacked the practice on its own website."
www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/12/04/liberal-media-group-gets-520g-dark-money-donation-for-war-on-right/
|
|
|
|
Post by ShivaTD on Dec 5, 2013 11:44:18 GMT
I keep reading the same thing over and over. The basic statement is, "They're getting away with it so we should be able to get away with it" and I don't buy that argument. Neither should be getting away with it.
I will go back to a simple issue. When I looked at the (liberal) OFA and the (conservative) Tea Party Patriots both were predominately political action groups as opposed to social or educational organizations for the benefit of all society. They were not legitimate 501(c) organizations based upon my understanding of the law. This leads to a simple question.
Should both the OFA and Tea Party Patriots have their 501(c) tax exempt status revoked? |
|
|
|
Post by JP5 on Dec 6, 2013 16:22:12 GMT
I keep reading the same thing over and over. The basic statement is, "They're getting away with it so we should be able to get away with it" and I don't buy that argument. Neither should be getting away with it.
I will go back to a simple issue. When I looked at the (liberal) OFA and the (conservative) Tea Party Patriots both were predominately political action groups as opposed to social or educational organizations for the benefit of all society. They were not legitimate 501(c) organizations based upon my understanding of the law. This leads to a simple question.
Should both the OFA and Tea Party Patriots have their 501(c) tax exempt status revoked?
BUT to answer your bolded question......I'm pretty sure the "Tea Party Patriots" has already been examined by the IRS. And YES, I DO believe OFA should be examined thoroughly. There is no way you can turn a presidential PAC into a 501c4 with the same people involved and NOT have it be extremely political. So, where are the calls from Democrats for OFA to be examined by the IRS? |
|
