@Ultra BobYes, we believe that "our government, rights and freedoms
for ordinary people will by lost and the American dream will die" if the
government is not held accountable for unacceptable (according the Mr. Obama)
IRS tax policies, spying on investigative journalists and covering up
incompetence in the State Department. The president's promised governmental
transparency is only a long discarded campaign promise. Change we can believe
It is right and proper and highly desirable that groups with the stated or even
unstated purpose of limiting or destroying the American government be
scrutinized. We cheer our governments efforts to expose and confront them. Some of us believe the current republican party, the Tea Party and other
of that ilk pose more danger to America than foreign enemies. It
is my belief that if the giant corporations take over our government, rights and
freedoms for ordinary people will by lost and the American dream will die.
Yea Lois Lerner. Yea America, Yea Constitution.
Statutory law is written in simple english. Apparently a lawsuit was filed
yesterday to force the courts to address the deviation of agency power. You can
find the compalint online.
Congress enacts tax laws, and the Treasury Department issues regulations giving
taxpayers and the IRS guidance on how the laws should be implemented Treasury
Regulations do not have the force of law (unless specifically granted that force
by Congress - in this case they were not). When a treasury regulation does not
agree with law, taxpayers may challenge the regulation in court and have it
overturned.The problem here is that Congress (as quoted above)
mandated that 501(c) (4) organizations should be EXCLUSIVELY for the promotion
of social welfare, but the Treasury changed the standard in the Regulations by
defining "exclusively for the promotion of social welfare" to
"primarily engaged in the promotion of the common good and general
welfare". The IRS is bound to (i.e, must) follow the treasury regulations.
And the courts have interpreted the "primarily engaged" standard as
being over 50%, leaving 501(c)(4) organizations the option to engage in
political activities up to 49.9%.Congress has done its job. Treasury
has made a mistake (by issuing a Regulation that does not reflect the intent of
the law) and they must issue a revised regulation or a court must overturn the
@donahoe and VSTI have a significant amount of experience as an
administrator of a 501c3 and these IRS codes related to 501’s. I hate to
admit it but VST is mostly right 501c4's unlike 501c3's can engage in
substantial political activates and can even engage in some limited campaigning
without losing their designation. The trade of for 501c4's is that they
cannot go after federal grants and donation to them are not tax deductible.
501c3’s can engage in some “limited” political activity but
cannot endorse any candidate or party. In my experience you are however right
that these laws are very poorly defined and even more poorly enforced.
HS Fan--Yep! Talking less is really smart. Didn't work well in Germany,
Russia, China, Cuba, and North Korea. Let's keep quite.I hope
the whole country speaks out. It's time our leaders become accountable,
and not just the people they represent.
donahoeHere is a rational point for you. If it was as simple as you seem
to think it is, then this whole thing would have ended before it started.
Either you are smarter than all members of Congress or maybe you have
oversimplified it and are only looking for an Obama way out. Now we have the
spectacle of people taking the 5th. If this was just a Republican fishing
expedition, then they possibly landed Moby Dick. Any American should be
concerned with IRS abuse for political purposes. If this scandle turns out to
be as it seems, the only people who will be defending it are the die hard Obama
supporters who put person and party over country and constitution. Do you
really want to count yourself amoung that crowd?
@VST"as long as they do not directly attack the political beliefs of
any specific individual by name who is a politician."Except a
lot of these group do that very thing. It's not like Priorities USA (a
liberal group) or Crossroads GPS (Karl Rove's group) aren't attacking
She absolutely did something wrong by overseeing a system that only went after
certain political groups seeing a charitable organization tax exempt status with
heightened scrutiny... the law clearly says ALL political groups should be
facing heightened scrutiny and should not get tax exempt status if political
action is their primary function (which for most of these groups on the left and
right, it is).
Constitutional 5th Amendment and also the Whistleblower law she didn't use
except she probably intimidated the employees under her if they didn't
follow what she doesn't want to talk about. The Commissioners involved are
both out of office, one way or another.The President has found many
ways to get around the law but some of his people must like the Constitution of
the United States of America, if it applies.
VST, Please further provide specifics how it is possible to be
"exclusively for the promotion of social welfare, or local associations of
employees, the membership of which is limited to the employees of a designated
person or persons in a particular municipality" and be a nationally funded
entity who focuses on a poltical platform. My understanding, which
may be incorrect, is that the IRS has failed to enforce the code as written -
for many decades.I remain curious, and I am more than happy to hear
an argument. It would be most welcome to read rational discussions in these
"I did nothing wrong." And because of that I will not let my employers
(the Congress and US public) pull back the curtain to let them see what was
going on. I can still keep my $103,000 bonus, right?
Worf-Yes, people can use the fifth amendment when accused of wrong doings.
Talking less and listening more may make more of the DN bloggers smarter as
Why is it that when I receive a nasty letter in the mail from the IRS asking me
questions, I can't just say 'I did nothing wrong and I refuse to
cooperate with your investigation."
Can people claim the fifth when being investigated by the IRS?
What would happen if the IRS was auditing ACORN, the President's group or
the Service Employees International Union? Do you think he would know about
that information? I would guarantee and the agency's employees,
supervisors and the Commissioner himself would be on the pavement or worse.
They would have been a DOJ target. The shoe fits sort of like OJ's gloves.
The Fifth Amendment? Do that mean she had personal interest and
knows who else knows about the process and how it came to be? Does she know
what they did with the data? She seems to be avoiding her personal obligation
as an employee or at least a person doing the will of her boss and real high
boss. Is this a tactic to go after her so they will have a fall person? This administration hasn't done anything that provides a feeling of
trust between the citizens and government forces. Government was made to
protect citizens relating to their safety/security and common defense and
general welfare.The President told Congress to vote and then read
the bill. That is really a violation of their charter as the Representatives
and Senators of the people.
We need to do as the IRS does. Freeze assets, garnish wages until they account
to the people.
A quick search of the US code deems to reveal the core issue:(A)
Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively
for the promotion of social welfare, or local associations of employees, the
membership of which is limited to the employees of a designated person or
persons in a particular municipality, and the net earnings of which are devoted
exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational urposes. (B)Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to an entity unless no part of the net
earnings of such entity inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or
individual. So, political groups (of any flavor) do not meet this
description. The only substantive issue is whether all groups were treated
uniformly; the rest is politics.