WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service is caught in an election-year struggle between Democratic lawmakers pressing for a crackdown on nonprofit political groups and conservative organizations accusing the tax agency of conducting a politically charged witch hunt.
In recent weeks, the I.R.S. has sent dozens of detailed questionnaires to Tea Party organizations applying for nonprofit tax status, demanding to know their political leanings and activities. The agency plans this year to press existing nonprofits like American Crossroads, on the Republican side, and Priorities USA, on the Democratic side, to justify their tax-protected status as “social welfare” organizations, a status that many tax professionals believe is being badly abused.
Senate Democrats are readying a fresh legislative push to demand that such groups disclose their donors and attach disclaimers to their political advertising identifying the advertisement’s primary funders. Tax experts are also raising concerns that corporate donors to “super PACs” may be deducting their contributions as business expenses.
“The shadowy attack ads we see every day should be brought into the light,” said Senator Michael Bennet, Democrat of Colorado. “The largest contributors should stand by the ads they’ve paid for, the voters should know who’s behind these ads, and these super PACs should not be allowed to abuse our tax code by masquerading as nonprofit charities.”
The pushback is likely to be just as fierce. Jay Sekulow, a conservative lawyer known more for his stands on religious freedom than for his tax work, said he is representing 16 Tea Party groups that are claiming harassment by the I.R.S., and the number is growing. He said he intended to demand an explanation from the Treasury Department on Wednesday for what he called “McCarthyism” tactics and that he would contact Republican lawmakers this week.
I don’t claim to be an expert or even close about tax laws and non-profit status. I am having a hard time figuring out why the various tea party groups are so outraged over having to justify their tax exempt status or why any of them are passing the grade for tax exempt status. The last time I had anything to do with non-profit groups, there were rules one had to follow in order to keep their status. The first rule was that you couldn’t support political candidates and keep that tax free status.
What does the tea party do if not support candidates? What should the IRS look for? ” Tea Party” seems to be a dead givaway to me. Why should donations that go to support candidates be tax exempt? They sure aren’t for the rest of us earthlings.
Don’t get me wrong. I am NEVER on the side of the IRS. It’s unAmerican. However, I am having a difficult time wrapping my brain around this one. Political groups that support candidates almost never get tax exempt status. Why does the tea party feel it’s special?
Well, they did admit to improper actions. Not that there will be any repercussions.
But the question I asked was, why is a political party entitled to tax exempt status? Let’s not side step the question. The IRS are dicks. We know that. That is not a news flash.
I just wonder why the various tea parties think they are entitled to tax exempt status when no one else is?
The IRS wields enormous power to destroy the lives of ordinary citizens. They are entrusted with a vast resource of exploitable personal information, probably more so than any other government agency. From that standpoint alone, this is a very big deal. But you’re right, Cargo–“what difference does it make?”
Let me ask this another way, why were the various tea parties trying to pull a fast one? Why should people who are trying to influence elections seeking tax free status?
Cheat on your taxes … no medicine for you … unless you don’t even pay taxes that is. The IRS and Obamacare, a match made in … some back room.
How has “obamacare” affected you, SA?
Oh, forgot. Here’s a comment posted on CNN. “People are starting to call Obama the democrats Nixon, which i find totally offensive…. to Nixon” ROFLOL, so true, and nobody died with Watergate.
I imagine it was as offensive there as I find it here….the comment that is.
I have nothing against Nixon.
Were they trying to pull a fast one? What evidence is there of that?
That is the question. Why would an organization whose purpose is to elect tea party candidates want tax emempt status?
If I saw that name I would assume that they were endorsing candidates, wouldn’t you?
I notice none of you all have given me a straight answer.
Interestingly, if people don’t pay the penalty…er, tax..for not purchasing health insurance under the PPACA, the taxpayer is supposed to report that to the IRS. However, the PPACA did not put any teeth into that reporting process. So all a person has to do is to flip the IRS the bird, not pay, not report that they didn’t purchase insurance, and not suffer any kind of consequence at all.
Do the Democrats and the Republicans get tax-exempt status?
Whether they do or don’t, the Tea Party has as much right to it as religious and other organizations that take issue advocacy positions. Of course, there’s a fine line they’re not supposed to trample over, they’re not supposed to be a front for the Republican party. Almost surely they’ve stepped over that line in places.
My point is, no one is supposed to be getting it if you support candidates.
Some religious groups also walk right up to the line on the rule as far as endorsing candidates.
@Moon-howler
Moon,
Those Tea Parties that do endorse candidates, aren’t eligible for tax exempt status. Those that don’t endorse, are eligible under 501 (c)(4). Much of the outrage on the part of the various Tea Party organizations revolves around the IRS demands for donor and member lists. I will say that (expanding) scandle needs to be investigated and ground truth established. The apperance of partisanship on the part of the IRS during an election-cycle is troubling, and reflects poorly on the administration, even in the absence of any collusion with the Whitehouse.
Finally, a straight answer!
I am still trying to figure out how a tea party organization isn’t endorsing candidates but…..
Second thing I am trying to figure out is about the ‘low level’ employees that aren’t political appointments.
There has been so much talk and no specifics. I thought the IRS targeted everyone. I know that there are certain, what we used to call ‘red flags’ that you just avoided if you didn’t want to get audited. Classes of people are targetted all the time. Those who use certain tax return individuals, those who declare offices in their homes, in the dark ages, those with 3 martini lunches.
I don’t think I have ever been politically targeted though….not by the IRS. Probably because I am cheap.
Working with a non profit/TAX EXEMPT, they are sooooooooooo careful to not even remotely appear to do anything political that I can understand the concern about ensuring that status is properly followed.
http://www.teapartypatriots.org/
Tea Party Patriots Citizens Fund
I’m sorry, common sense dictates that Tea Party Patriots, the names under which IRS was flagging strict verification of tax exempt status, does NOT qualify, under any stretch for tax exempt status. What TEA party off shoot isn’t political in nature? Isn’t the purpose of the TEA Party organization to influence policy and legislation? Anyone ever heard of Obamacare?!
There are thousands of groups that get tax exempt status who promote political causes. That is perfectly legal as long as they don’t directly support candidates. For example, NARAL is recognized as a non-profit and donations to NARAL are tax exempt. Planned Parenthood is not a non-profit, but they have an affiliated group that is.
The big deal is that people in the IRS were giving extra scrutiny to certain groups because of the political causes the advocate. The IRS also required them to submit information on donors that is not required. In fact, most of the groups harassed by the IRS eventually got tax exempt status, which shows there was nothing improper in their requests. It was just an effort to delay, intimidate and harass and of course, gather information on donors and waste the money of the tea party groups.
If you can’t see why this is a big deal, imagine your reaction if the IRS had required NARAL to submit lists of donors and given extra scrutiny to abortion groups for no reason other than the cause they supported. Now do you see what the big deal is?
So far, there is nothing to suggest that Obama has any involvement in this. But this needs to be investigated by a special prosecutor and the people who were involved need to be charged and put in jail. Politicizing the IRS is a real fast way to turn this country into a Banana Republic (and I don’t mean the clothes store)
Donations to NARAL are definitely NOT tax exempt. You chose the wrong rodeo to go after on that one.
The IRS Commissioner at the time of the heightend status checks was appointed under George W Bush, probably NOT an Obama fan.
You better talk to your tax guy or at least Google “NARAL tax deductable” You might be due a tax refund!
From http://prochoiceamerica.giftplans.org/
Contributions to NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation are tax-deductible as charitable contributions to the full extent allowed by the law. NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation is a nonprofit organization recognized as tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Contributions to NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation are tax-deductible as charitable contributions to the full extent allowed by the law.
The “business” side of Planned Parenthood is not tax exempt, but Planned Parenthood Action Fund is. Similarly, NARAL’s Foundation is tax exempt. Both have dozens of local chapters that are also tax exempt (probably one per state for each.) Google it and you’ll see more than you can count.
If this is a rodeo, I think I just roped me a steer.
Key word there is foundation. NARAL, the group that advocates for various legislative positions is not part of the FOUNDATION. When you are called and asked for a contribution by NARAL you are not being called by the foundation. You are being called to target an anti choice person running for office. Planned Parent has a foundation also.
There is no longer a local chapter of NARAL. There hasn’t been one for 20 years. There is a NARAL Pro-choice Virginia. donations to it are not tax exempt either.
I think you are getting ready to become a steer because you simply don’t know what you are talking about.
I never said Obama had anything to do with it. In fact, I said the exact opposite. “So far, there is nothing to suggest that Obama has any involvement in this.”
Nobody knows yet where the buck stops on this. It could be Bush’s IRS Commissioner. It could be somebody higher or lower. Who ever it is, Democrat or Republican needs to be fired, prosecuted and jailed.
Since we don’t have all the answers yet, that’s why it needs to be investigated and investigated by somebody who is impartial. As in, not the House and not Eric Holder. A special prosecutor at least has some independence from politics and has a better chance of getting to the truth than anybody else.
The whole point of bringing up NARAL was to show how dangerous politicizing the IRS is. Just because its a group you don’t like today, doesn’t mean it won’t be a group you like tomorrow. The IRS should NEVER be used like this and the people who did it, who ever they are, need to be punished severely.
@Elena
Elena,
Your first mistake is in comparing the various Tea Parties to 501 (c) (3) organizations. Those Tea Parties that are seeking tax-exempt status are doing so under section 501(c)(4):
“To be tax-exempt as a social welfare organization described in Internal Revenue Code (IRC) section 501(c)(4), an organization must not be organized for profit and must be operated exclusively to promote social welfare. The promotion of social welfare does not include direct or indirect participation or intervention in political campaigns on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for public office. However, a section 501(c)(4) social welfare organization may engage in some political activities, so long as that is not its primary activity. ”
Your second mistake is thinking that the Tea Parties are some sort of hierarchical, unified organization. They are not. As an example, local Mansassas Tea Party has no affiliation with the Prince William Tea Party, the NoVA Tea Party, the Virginia Tea Party Patriots, or the Tea Party Express. Just because one organization endorsed candidates, and is therefore a non-tax-exempt organization, doesn’t mean the ones who don’t endorse aren’t qualified for tax-exempt status.
@Steve, and that is exactly what bothers me about tea parties in general. Thousands of little ships all sailing under one similar name but yet different.
I am pondering your last line:
That one gave me serious stabbing pains in my temples. I am having a hard time thinking of an example of where an organization that is tea party in nature isn’t anything but political.
To qualify for tax exempt you really can’t endorse candidates.
Naral Pro-Choice America is a non profit, 501(C-4), not tax exempt. There are two different organizations. Naral Pro Choice America Foundation is tax exempt and I bet you they had to put forth a lot of paper work to distinguish the two!
I stand corrected Steve, they were filing for tax exempt under a 501(c-4)status. Which I still find unbelievable. The majority of their work is intended for the “social good”.
How much more vague can that be! Social good has to at least entail outreach and services to people in my opinion. I find it highly unlikely, during an election year, that the main objective of these TEA party/Patriot Party groups was not ABOUT the election!
I’ve been called far worse than a steer. (Usually something involving the other end of the steer.) 🙂
But I think we are arguing a sidebar. My point in bringing up NARAL is that the politics of any organization shouldn’t have an impact on their tax exempt status. And it didn’t for NARAL/NARAL Foundation. But it did (by the IRS’s own admission) for a number of Tea Party groups. That’s the problem. It’s special scrutiny for tea party groups and a different, easier set of rules for everybody else. (Again to be clear, NARAL has nothing to do with this except to use it as an example of a group that could be harassed by the IRS if this kind of thing becomes accepted.)
Nobody has any evidence to say the tea party groups weren’t following the rules for non-profits. The IRS certainly isn’t saying that at least. What the IRS is saying that they (the IRS) weren’t following the rules and created special rules for certain groups because of their politics.
This may turn out to be just a couple of rogue IRS employees. And it would be good if it was a small group of low level people involved. But it needs to be investigated by an impartial investigator and the guilty parties need to be fired, prosecuted and jailed.
Honestly, how can anyone be against that?
I also have not suggested that it is no big deal. My question was centered on why seeing tea party identifiers wouldn’t make you think that it was about endorsing candidates?
I don’t think that the IRS ought to harass anyone but if wishes were horses then beggars might fly.
I think what I am suggesting is something akin to trying to tell me that male dogs don’t lift their legs on fire hydrants. Its just what they do.
Try telling me that The Church of the Gospel (made up) isn’t a church. Naral Pro Choice isn’t pro choice. Tea Party isn’t about supporting candidates.
That is where my questioning goes.
Membership lists? Is that ever done or has it been done to any group for any reason? I don’t know.
Using any govt agency to harrass someone you don’t agree with is wrong. On the other hand, how come Al Capone got locked in the slammer? It is done locally also. Someone might want to ask Eric Findley about it. You might want to ask Moonhowler about it. It happens.
@Elena
“Social good has to at least entail outreach and services to people in my opinion.”
I think that is what is at issue…you don’t see the efforts of conservative organizations such as the Tea Party as contributing to the “social good”, and yet you see organizations such as NARAL as benefiting society, and therefore are unable to look at this situation with any degree of objectivity.
The IRS has admitted to singling out conservative organizations for extra scruitny, in an election cycle. While this may or may not have violated any laws, the question of uniformity of the application of internal policy is what will need to be answered. Were applications from more left-leaning organizations given the same level of scruitny? We they required to file an onerous level of extra supporting documentation, including membership and donor lists, as was the case with conservative leaning groups? Was this an “institutional policy” of targeting conservative groups, or really the work of over-zelous junior employees. If it was the latter, how much and how high was the managerial oversight?
These questions need to be answered, and answered quickly. Individuals responsible need to be held to account. Failure to do so will only feed the narrative that the Obama Administration’s stonewalling or deflecting responsibility is just another example of the “Chicago-style Thugocracy”, and will only add to the scent of political “blood in the water”, flowing from Benghazi and Fast and Furious. So now there will be three ongoing investigations this summer. Nixon, (Watergate) Regan (Iran Contra), Clinton (Lewinskygate)…only had to deal with one. Going to be a very interesting summer, and I do believe this will impact the VA election.
I can’t think of either of the groups mentioned as really promoting to social good. I suppose a case could be mad efor each.
Common core is that both tea party and NARAL tires to elect candidates that will support their resepctive agendas.
I think the election cycle is irrelevant. Did one or two groups get zapped or did all of the tea party groups get hit with of these issues?
Check it out. It makes no difference to me. My intent was never to come to the rescue of the IRS. I would throw any one of them to the sharks in a NY minute.
The foundation end of most of these groups is really not the business end of any organization. I have always felt that the foundation end was a place for rich people to put their money.
@Moon-howler
Moon,
Gives me a headache too! I’m getting mailers, emails and robocalls from the various campaigns for LG and AG, with each claiming affiliation or support of some group with “Tea Party” in the name. Endorsements are much more limited though, usually an individual who is a “former” somethingorother for one of the Tea Party groups actually did the endorsing.
Now if the organization is providing campaign support to a particular candidate, issued an endorsement, or is sending out flyers advocating specifically for a particular candidate, then this would clearly place the tax-exempt status at risk. But just because the organizations have similar sounding names, doesn’t make them the same organization.
This might help sort things out, regarding the various Tea party groups:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE
And if funds were funneled to these Tea Party groups from Republican organizations, wouldn’t a review of their donors be in order?
Ah, no, because the donations wouldn’t be considered charitable, and therefore tax-deductable by the donor. The IRS isn’t the Federal Election Commission. The scope of their responsibility is to ensure that taxes get paid.
And it keeps getting worse. Now there are reports that IRS employees were leaking tax documents of Republican candidates, including Mitt Romney, without the consent and release of the candidate….
http://www.nationaljournal.com/politics/benghazi-irs-create-perfect-storm-threatening-obama-s-credibility-20130513
“Internal Revenue Service officials denied for months the targeting of conservative political groups for reviews of their tax exempt status. With investigators poised to expose the chilling operation, a high-ranking IRS official acknowledged it late last week and apologized for it.
The agency blamed low-level employees, saying no high-level officials were aware. That appears to be untrue. The Associated Press reported Saturday that senior IRS officials knew agents were targeting tea party groups as early as 2011, according to a draft of an inspector general’s report.”
When a political group, publicly known to be advocating, nay hysterical, over the demise of a Democratic president, when a republican with the power of Dick Army is behind freedom fighters, all working towards the same goal of electing republicans, PERIOD, it might be simple common sense to look at organizations that are off shoots of that political group.
Steve, once again, the Commissioner at the time was a W appointee.
I guarantee you if this were on the other shoe and this was a far left wing issue, the repubs would be in a veritable fit. Oh wait, wasn’t there an investigation into a left wing group by the right, I think it was ACORN. Imagine if that had been thousands of organizations and not just one.
Of course, the difference is that the IRS had granted them status and the R’s wanted it revoked. I would say the IRS was trying to be efficient. Like I said, if the shoe were on the other foot, not only would repubs not have a problem with it, they would be insisting on investigating the off shoots of the larger organization.
I am sure the TEA party caucus isn’t all about politics either, bawaahhhh!
http://www.teapartypatriots.org/local/
just put in a search and you will find thousands of off shoots, but I am sure they all deserve tax exempt status 😉
If the IRS had real, rational, non-partisan reasons for focusing on this, they should speak up. I wouldn’t hold my breath.
We should all be able to agree at this point that at a minimum, the Obama Administration has been far from “transparent” and has a lot of sleazy behavior going on in it, by zealots presumably on crusades to stop the bad people from staving the poor and making the polar caps melt.
Clinton’s handling of Benghazi – the coverup moreso than the initial screwup – is disgusting. There’s no excuse for that level of dishonesty. I hope the woman is never elected to another office.
Barring a reasonable explanation, some heads need to roll on this IRS thing.
Since this is obviously quite humorous to you, I’ll respond with the statements issued by both of our D-VA Senators (and I commend them for doing so):
WASHINGTON – U.S. Sen. Mark R. Warner released the following statement in response to recent reports that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targeted certain organizations based on political ideology:
“These appalling actions by the IRS are completely unacceptable. We need a quick but thorough investigation, and those who are found to have been responsible for this betrayal of the public trust should be fired.”
KAINE ON IRS ALLEGATIONS: “NO EXCUSE” FOR IDEOLOGICAL DISCRIMINATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Tim Kaine released the following statement in response to recent reports the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targeted organizations based on ideology:
“I am very concerned about allegations the IRS targeted certain groups seeking tax-exempt status on political grounds, including a Virginia-based organization. There’s no excuse for ideological discrimination in our system. The Administration should take swift action to get to the bottom of this to ensure those responsible for misconduct are held accountable and establish appropriate safeguards to prevent this from ever happening again.”
Somewhat off topic, but what bothers me more is the way this whole Administration is b***s*** in every regard. Nothing’s real.
The first thing they did after elected was oversee a big influx of government money to companies like Soylindra with no due dilligence required. It fit their political narrative; who cares if it’s real. Their major achievement to date, “Obamacare” was basically what happened when they gave up on real healthcare cost control and worked up a politically viable bill that does nothing real about costs, but pretends to.
The only thing this Administration is good at is getting Liberals to swallow nonsense and to go out and parrot lines of thought that are clearly irrational. (Bush 43 had the same gift. He and Obama seem like the same guy to me).
Bush’s presidency was pretty bad. History might show this one as even worse. It’s an inexperienced man, unable to lead, feeding us our own p*** and calling it lemonade.
“But the Republicans won’t let him do anything”. Well then stand the ground and make your arguments and try to effect long-term change. Ronald Reagan style. Have core beliefs and fight for them.
But i submit to you that the Democratic Party has lost its soul, or more accurately its capacity for rational thought. They pretend to want to reduce poverty, but fight for increased immigration of low wage earners. They pretend that global warming is an imminent threat, when the earth is actually getting cooler. They pretend that gun control would make us safer but want to let in tens of millions of immigrants as citizens, while endorsing the de facto situation where any terrorist could cross our border and get a job in food packaging or preparation. It’s all baloney.
And if you voted for either party in 2012 – you did yourself a disservice.
@Elena
“Steve, once again, the Commissioner at the time was a W appointee. ”
And if the narrative is true, that this was the work of “low level IRS Agents”, then what does the party of the President who appointed the commissioner have to do with anything? Really? Elena, it’s not what may or may not have actually happened that will damage the President, it’s the perception of what happened.
So the next time you want to paint the NRA is a bunch of paranoid gun nuts, start your argument with a joke, and then claim that no one died as a result of Fast and Furious. The next time you want to paint the the right as politicizing Benghazi, first answer the question why, if the administration was being truthful, does the TRUTH require 12 (the number of drafts of the talking points) revisions? And lastly, when you want to paint conservatives who are distrustful of the federal government as “paranoid”, remember that the IRS has admitted that it did indeed target conservative groups with “Tea Party” or “Patriot” in their organizations names. I don’t think it’s funny, one bit, but it will be entertaining to watch the Administration twist itself into a pretzel, as these investigations continue, especially on Benghazi. I’m just waiting to see how long it will be, before Obama throws Hillary under a bus, and he will. That’ll be a hoot!
The IRS had nothing to do with ACORN shutting down. ACORN shut down because Congress stopped giving them money. There’s a world of difference between being tax-exempt (not having to pay taxes on your own money) and being almost entirely funded by the government. If ACORN had sources of money besides the government, they’d still be around today.
It’s good to see that at least some Democrats like Mark Warner and Tim Kaine get it. Keeping the IRS out of politics should be something everybody can agree on. It’s sad to see that not everybody does. I really hope people think about this and realize it’s not about which groups the IRS is targeting today. It’s about who they’ll target tomorrow.
What’s the old quote “First they came for the Tea Party, but I did nothing because I wasn’t in the Tea Party. Next they came for…”
@Furby McPhee
I also believe that the justification for cutting the funding for ACORN was the organization’s involvement in voter fraud (2008) and (alleged) conspiracy to aid in felonious activities, including; tax evasion, prostitution, and human sex-trafficking. The IRS wasn’t invloved in ACORN’s federal and private funding getting cut.
@Elena
I think you have to be dead or close to it.
Not sure what the qualifications are but you have to contact them. If you bring up the donation tab, you just get to donate to regular NARAL Pro-choice America with bold letters that your contribution is not tax deductible.
I haven’t bothered to keep up with the 501’s rules and regs since one was used to attack your friend locally. (It just brings tears to my eyes to talk about it, Elena)
@Rick Bentley
She wasn’t elected to THAT office. She was selected.
I hope she becomes president. Nothing sleazy about how she handled being secretary of state in my book.
How did you feel about past secretaries of state misrepresenting the question of WMD to the American people?
@Rick Bentley
Perhaps you long for seasoned politicians like Nixon or Johnson.
Old Lyndon could call up his old bourbon and branch buddies and call in old favors liek there was no tomorrow and get pretty much what he wanted.
I think that Powell’s phony speech was a real disgrace. AND, I think his viability as a Presidential candidate died with that speech.
Powell did what he did because he was a soldier more than a leader. he did what his “commanding officer” wanted him to do, and fell on his sword.
Hillary does what she does because rather than admit to a mistake or a sin – i.e. double-billing law clients – it’s her nature to let some big partisan fight rage on while she puts on some fake anger/quivering voice display “What does it matter”. She’s horrible.
The woman was the prohibitive favorite for the nomination in 2008 until everyone looked around at each other and said “Wait a minute. She’s unlikeable, not inspiring, and not experienced. Why would we nominate her?”
That’s as close as she gets I think. This last performance of hers closes the book on this woman’s attempt to parlay her marriage into high office.
@Steve Thomas
Follow up on that story is sad. The man (in San Diego)accused of human trafficking lost his job and had notified authorities.
James O’Keefe is a total POS in my eyes. He is disingenuous.
I am no fan of ACORN but they were a victim of politics more so than wrong-doing.
@Rick Bentley
Disagree.
Also Powell came out rather unscathed. He lost no face.
@Rick Bentley
That really isn’t why she didn’t come out a front runner.
You may feel about her as you want but….the reality is, Obama came along. He was more electible.
@Rick Bentley
You really haven’t gotten over the immigration issues, have you Rick?
@Moon-howler
“I am no fan of ACORN but they were a victim of politics more so than wrong-doing.”
And in the case of the TEA Party/IRS, let us hope that a thurough investigation concludes that the inverse is true, that they were victims of wrong-doing, and not politics. If it is found to be politically motivated, it will be like trying to put out a forest fire with gasoline.
“You really haven’t gotten over the immigration issues, have you Rick?”
It’s changed the way I see American politics. I used to swallow the left’s perspective on things, generally. Now I do not.
As to O’Keefe, he is a jerk more or less (Michael Moore on crack) and some of his reports are smears. (One was a joke – the woman was clearly tinkering with him). But the amoral behavior of the ACORN people in Baltimore? is well worth seeing.
The IRS was profiling, I am sure conservatives HATE profiling, especially when it involves Muslims!
There are many reasons that tax returns are “red flagged” by the IRS, I believe having a business in your home is one reason. Are all home businesses being “targeted”, not likely, but there is cause to look into whether you “qualify” as a home business.
Tea Party Patriots, if it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, sounds like a duck, it probably doesn’t qualify as a tax exempt duck.
Oh, and on the voter fraud issue, I imagine the republican that threw away voter registration was more in violation than any fake registration of Mickey Mouse EVER was. Funny, didn’t hear much from republicans about that one though.
Elena,
Facts (as opposed to gratuitous assertions of opinion) tend to support ideological arguments.
The IRS wasn’t flagging returns, they were harrassing groups, making them justify their status, based solely on the political ideology of the organization. The IRS has admitted to this, and apologized for it.
I don’t see where your “profiling Muslims” is germane to the topic, and really, do you have any facts to support this?
Now I could get all gratuitous too, and go on and on how when the Boston Marathon Bombing occurred, the Left Wing media’s first reaction was to try to pin this on the Tea Party, when it turned out to be the work of Muslim extremists, resulting in the death and injuries of 280 Americans, but that would be too easy. I could also point out that according to the Obama Administration, Muslim extremists had nothing to do with the deaths of 4 Americans in Benghazi, and it was actually the result of an anti-Islamic youtube video, but that would be childsplay.
I could point out that for as much energy the Democrats spent trying to paint Republicans as “Anti-Hispanic” at least the GOP wasn’t arming the cartels, as the Obama Administration was, during Fast and Furious, which resulted in the deaths of 300 Mexican citizens…and American Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, but this wouldn’t be relevant, because everyone knows it’s the NRA that’s doing all the killing…
And don’t even get me started on the whole “War on Women” thing, because Republicans (every single member of the GOP is a male, right?) want to deny women the basic right to end their pregnancies, and even worse, demand that abortion clinics meet the same standards as other surgical clinics…we mean Republicans, we want to deny woman the right to go see Kermit Gosnell…great humanitarian and lover of children…It’s not like he killed a woman from Woodbridge, and a whole slew of others now is it?
The IRS goes after those without offshore accounts and an army of lawyers and accountants to stonewall them.
I think the term is low hanging fruit. Go look at David and Charles Koch – during the election it was pointed out many times that Romney although taxed at a lower percent than most of us (generally speaking) paid more than most of us (generally speaking) made in a lifetime. So what. It’s all about the process not the amount, I thought.
Maybe just maybe some political party might look at the issues that impact the most of us most of the time. Tax and transportation structures. Not no new taxes – look at the process.
During the 2006 scrutiny of liberal churches, it was a Democrat congressman who demanded investigations into the IRS practice of targeting non-profits with Democratic leanings:
Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank), who unsuccessfully tried to launch a Government Accountability Office investigation into the IRS’ probes of churches nationwide last year, called the summons “a very disturbing escalation” of the agency’s scrutiny of All Saints.
“I don’t want religious organizations to become arms of campaigns,” he said. “But they should be able to talk about issues of war and peace without fear of losing tax-exempt status. If they can’t, they’ll have little to say from the pulpit.”
This was the IRS going after Liberal Churches, funny, the right was silent then, how odd….not.
@Steve Thomas
Once again, words are being put in my mouth. Acorn has nothing to do with this situation. They were defunded by Congress. They fell victim to politics. Was there wrong-doing? Not sure. They were defunded.
My question continues to be, how is an organization named tea party anything not all about influencing elections? If your organization influences elections (not implying anything illegal) than your donations cannot be tax write offs. That was the question and I still am not sure of the answer.
How about the Coffee Party? Are their contributions tax deductible?