yoyo52 Nothing comes of nothing.
Registered: 05/25/01
Posts: 29861
Loc: PA, USA
I like C&L, but this time there does seem to have been a targeting of political groups, and that's as wrong as can be. I know that the argument from the IRS people who did this has to do with the way that the law defines how funds can be used, but surely it's not only the right wing that flaps up those kinds of concerns.
Oh, and about my uncle . . . 'nuff said, eh?
_________________________ MACTECHubi dolor ibi digitus
Heard Chris Hayes last night explain it and it IS a legitimate IRS action. They have to check these groups especially the conservative ones - they say they're doing one thing ( community service) while doing political stunts!! Roves' BS is the perfect example. It's not the bad thing one first perceives!
six_of_one
Pool Bar
Registered: 04/19/02
Posts: 4088
Loc: Alexandria, VA
Originally Posted By: DLC
Heard Chris Hayes last night explain it and it IS a legitimate IRS action. They have to check these groups especially the conservative ones
I saw the same segment and they went to some pains to point out that groups trying to take advantage of the rules are not exclusively, or even mostly, conservative in nature ...
Quote:
- they say they're doing one thing ( community service) while doing political stunts!! Roves' BS is the perfect example. It's not the bad thing one first perceives!
It is if you apply the rules to only a select class of applicants ...
The problem isn't the process of screening applicants for possible ulterior political motives, which law mandates the IRS to do ... the problem is engaging that process with a bias towards groups with a particular point of view ...
The problem isn't the process of screening applicants for possible ulterior political motives, which law mandates the IRS to do ... the problem is engaging that process with a bias towards groups with a particular point of view ...
Well with Rove's history, and other conservatives following his lead - I can't totally blame them. I know it should been done more objectively and screen some "left leaning" ones too - to be fair !
A 501(c)(4) group denied tax-exempt status by the IRS would run afoul of Federal Election Commission rules and could be required to disclose its donors.
Emerge America, a group which helps Democratic women seeking elected office, said it lost it tax-exempt status last October. The IRS invoked the "private benefit doctrine" barring 501(c)(4) status for any group promoting a candidate or political party. The IRS announced its final decision in May.
garyW
mid-century modern
Registered: 04/19/02
Posts: 7405
Quote:
Robert Reich: Keep your eye on THE BIG SCANDAL!
Keep your eye on the big scandal. Although the IRS was wrong to target conservative groups for review based on their names, the bigger wrong was its failure to investigate the major groups -- such as Karl Rove's Grossroads GPS and Priorities USA -- that falsely claimed to be "social welfare organizations" under 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code in order to hide the names of their donors. And the real scandal of the 2012 election (which will be even worse next year, because they got away with it) is how many corporations and wealthy individuals used this loophole to disguise their identities while pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into campaigns. The Supreme Court in "Citizens United" at least assumed full disclosure, but the "social welfare organization" loophole in the tax laws has allowed corporations to keep political spending secret even from their own shareholders.
The worst outcome of the indignation over the IRS's targeting of conservative groups would be for the under-manned IRS to pull back from investigating all putative "social welfare organizations," thereby turning the scandalous loophole into a giant river of secret money. Our democracy is already being purchased by big corporations and the rich. At the least we should know who the buyers are.
Previous Topic
Index
