December 16, 2013

IRS now to make its targeting of TEA Parties legal [Darleen Click]

Obama and Democrats used the IRS to suppress TEA Party activity in 2012, now they want to codify it for 2014 and beyond.

In the media blackout of Thanksgiving week, the Treasury Department dumped a new proposal to govern the political activity of 501(c)(4) groups. The administration claims this rule is needed to clarify confusing tax laws. Hardly. The rule is the IRS’s new targeting program—only this time systematic, more effective, and with the force of law.

That this rule was meant to crack down on the White House’s political opponents was never in doubt. What is new is the growing concern by House Ways and Means Committee investigators that the regulation was reverse-engineered—designed to isolate and shut down the same tea party groups victimized in the first targeting round. Treasury appears to have combed through those tea party applications, compiled all the groups’ main activities, and then restricted those activities in the new rule. [...]

Here’s how it works. To get or keep tax-exempt status, 501(c)(4) organizations must devote a majority of their work to their “primary” social-welfare purpose. Most tea party groups were set up with a primary purpose of educating Americans on pressing problems—the size of government, the erosion of the Constitution—and did so mainly via nonpartisan voter guides, speakers forums, pamphlets or voter-registration drives.

What the proposed Treasury/IRS regulation would do is to re-categorize all these efforts as “political activity”—thereby making it all but impossible for tea party groups to qualify for 501(c)(4) status. Say an outfit’s primary purpose is educating voters on our unsustainable debt, which it does mainly with a guide explaining the problem and politicians’ voting records. Under the new rule, that guide is now “political activity” (rather than “social welfare”), which likely loses the group tax-exempt status. [...]

What makes this targeting more obvious is that the Obama Treasury rule only applies to 501(c)(4) groups. The ultra-liberal League of Women Voters Education Fund is registered as a 501(c)(3)—one of those “charities” supposedly held to the strictest IRS standards on politicking. Yet it brags on its website that it holds “candidate debates and forums,” and that its “educational activities” include “understanding candidate views and ballot initiatives.”

The League will continue to be able to do its voter guides and registrations and candidate forums. Yet under this new rule, any conservative social-welfare organization that attempts to do the same will likely lose its tax-exempt status. Nor does the new rule apply the biggest spenders of all in politics—unions, which are registered as 501(c)(5)s. The only category muzzled is the one recently flooded by conservative groups that Democrats fear in the 2014 election.

And, really, does anyone think Crier Boehner will oppose this blatant move?

One Beltway to rule them all
One Beltway to find them
One Beltway to bring them all and in the darkness bind them

Posted by Darleen @ 7:37am
63 comments | Trackback

Tags: , ,

Comments (63)

  1. TAX ALL DISSIDENTS!

    “The power to tax is the power to destroy.”

    AND YOUR POINT?

  2. The Land of the Decree and the Home of the Slave

  3. Darleen,
    The non-profit economy is wholly created by IRS designations and sustained by one key deception: the lie that non-profits never “profit.”

    In order to maintain this lie, both donors and recipients must pretend that, unless a transaction nets an immediate, fiscal-year, dollar benefit, it is not ‘for-profit.’ But, the fact that simple political agitation and its subsequent electoral gains translate into both psychological gains and actual dollar gains (as elected agendas provide the agitators a claim on the public fisc), ought to put that lie to rest.

    Concepts like “Psychic Income” are scoffed-at by hard economists because they defy government technocrats’ attempts to tally abstract economies that do not rely on hard currencies. Yet, a subjective, psychic parameter always attaches to prices in any free market. Obama’s Harvard-ists know this.

    And they know that lo-fo citizens do not. So no alarm sounds when false government categories like “non-profit” proliferate to generate a swamp of dubious fronts into which pours waves of untraceable monies in pursuit of decidedly corrupt agendas. Quid gets quo in return and counts his “profit” in tomorrow’s cronyist “gifts,” instead of in today’s dollars. And the average citizen remains none-the-wiser.

    I think the IRS’s lists of 501 designations are ripe for deconstruction. They are clearly politicized. To comply with them is to accept government censorship. And, to my mind, they serve no administrative purpose in a free, American economy. And, insofar as the Left employs these categories to corrupt our nation, these arbitrary barricades represent the coils of the constrictor that is strangling America today.

    Let’s open another front against the Left by suing to demolish the for-profit “Non-profit” economy!

  4. Methinks SteveAZ is onto something.

  5. Death to Mordor on the Potomac!

  6. Perhaps we should just refer to Washington, DC, as Panem and be done with it.

  7. From an earlier article on this subject.

    In its proposal, the IRS spelled out specific activities that must be considered political, including donations to other groups that spend money on elections, voter-registration drives and voter guides. The IRS also said it would consider changing the proportion of money that 501(c)(4) organizations can spend on political activities.

    Taken together, the actions could be a major blow to the use of 501(c)(4) organizations in campaigns. By forcing the groups to count certain spending as political, the IRS would, in effect, reduce the amount of money 501(c)(4) entities can spend on campaign activities.

    Donors may choose to give to the other major type of outside campaign organization, so-called super PACs. Unlike 501(c)(4) organizations, super PACs must make public the names of their donors. And super PACs are free to spend 100% of their money on direct campaign activities.

    Now consider the penchant for progressive community organized and union groups to engage in threats of and actual violence against identified donors to conservative, or at least non-progressive loved, causes. Examples can be found in Wisconsin, California and just about anywhere the left finds itself challenged for its power. Take this one by a progressive left favorite.

    They will, by any means necessary, eliminate the tea party type people from being able to organize for political purposes. They aim to divide all opposition into isolated, helpless individuals.

  8. “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” — John F. Kennedy

  9. Golly, maybe because Tea Party organizations that work to elect firebrand conservatives aren’t actually 501(c)(4)s. Nor are liberal groups that try to do the reverse. Sorry that a certain tax exempt status, set up for one thing, doesn’t let you do something completely different.

    Rules!

  10. Golly, maybe they should have changed the rules BEFORE the election and applied them to everyone, rather than clearly targeting groups opposed to Duh Wahn?

    Maths iz hard…

  11. Yes, “non-profit” seems an odd name considering how many people make a living off them.

    How big is the benefit of “tax-exempt”? Is the tax that high or is it also the IRS filings that adds to the burden? ( I suppose if you said “screw it” and paid up, IRS auditors could still single you out for harassment).

  12. Nixon never actually targeted anyone though the IRS, although it is touted as a truism leading to his impeachment.

    Der Wahn actually had his henchmen target TEA Party groups through the IRS and hey! It’s no biggie.

    Worst. President. Ever.

  13. Instead of worst, it looks more like ClownDisaster is the least, i.e., doesn’t resemble a President in any meaningful sense of the office.

  14. I had thought of him as a latter day Warren G., but that’s taking credit away from Harding who at least while not presidential wasn’t out stirring the pot.

    Except that Teapot Dome, thing.

  15. Like The Founding Fathers, we cannot be silenced.

    We just have to be more creative, is all.

  16. People should remember about the Teapot Dome scandal that it wasn’t the actual leasing of the land that was illegal, it was the bribery and coverup that was illegal.

    And bribery has always been illegal.

  17. - The coverup is always 1000 times worse than the crime. Ask Nixon if you don’t believe that, and when some of the truth finally raises to the surface on things like F&F and Benghazi you’ll probably be able to ask Bumblefuck and the Hildebeast too.

  18. Rules for thee, but not for me

    Fixed that for Obama 2012.

  19. Golly, maybe because Tea Party organizations that work to elect firebrand conservatives aren’t actually 501(c)(4)s.

    True the Vote did no such thing, but was targeted.

    Sorry that a certain tax exempt status, set up for one thing, doesn’t let you do something completely different.

    Being a 501(c)(4) does not prevent you from political activity – being a 501(c)(3) does.

  20. steve provides ample proof—yet again!—that he has no understanding of tax schedules.

  21. - He never actually claims any knowledge, just wants the opportunity to spew agitprop for effect. I think there are several agent provocateurs in the Progessive cult who spend time trying out “narrative pitches and arguments” on Classical Liberal/Conservative sites as trial runs and to gather the enemies retorts for reference and counter memes.

  22. - As too the IRS escapades, as well as those of the Senate, I say its another case of uninteneded consequences since as soon as the WH and Congress are back in non-Progressive hands those same rule changes will be shoved right up their collectivist asses with glee.

  23. IIRC, the whole idea that non-profit orgs should refrain from political activity in exchange for their tax-exempt status came from none other than LBJ.

    Who — having won his senate seat after a tooth-and-nail fight against some non-profits in TX — went ahead and changed the IRS rules to neutralize his former foes.

    And now it’s considered sacrosanct — you want tax exemption? Keep ya mouf shut! And if’n a church speaks up about something political, shrieks of tax-exempt revocation emanate from the usual sources.

    13% flat tax and be done with it.

  24. The coverup is always 1000 times worse than the crime.

    Only in the eyes of the press and only when a Republican does it.

    Unless you want to assert that concealing a murder is worse than the actual murder.

  25. hellomynameissteve says December 16, 2013 at 10:31 am
    Golly, maybe because Tea Party organizations that work to elect firebrand conservatives aren’t actually 501(c)(4)s. Nor are liberal groups that try to do the reverse. Sorry that a certain tax exempt status, set up for one thing, doesn’t let you do something completely different.
    Rules!
    - See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52224#comments

    ShhhhThe grownuops are talking.

  26. It is axiomatic that when compared with places like, say, Italy, where tax avoidance is a national sport, I keep hearing that, and the United States where tax on revenue is largely voluntary, that is worth repeating don’t you think? Largely voluntary. Because it is simply not possible to audit everybody, in light of this axiom it is dangerously unwise to undermine trust that we note at historical lows.

    A smile crosses my whole face when I remember we really do not need the IRS at all. Not one bit. Not needed one single bit. They are a thing added on for our convenience, and now they are not.

    It makes itself known and dealt with like a cancer that is not needed, no longer useful, and actually damaging and burdensome . The EPA too, as another Departmental cancer, coming up on the corruption of BATFE or whatever it calls itself nowadays, so eager to announce its cancerous activities begging the host to remove it. Begging to recognized as too partisan too corrupted too dangerously useless too damaging to the nation to continue.

  27. Golly, maybe they should have changed the rules BEFORE the election and applied them to everyone, rather than clearly targeting groups opposed to Duh Wahn? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52224#comments

    How are these rules targeting the Tea Party – other than the Tea Party are most likely to abuse the 501c4 classification?

    He never actually claims any knowledge, just wants the opportunity to spew agitprop for effect. I think there are several agent provocateurs in the Progessive cult who spend time trying out “narrative pitches and arguments” on Classical Liberal/Conservative sites as trial runs and to gather the enemies retorts for reference and counter memes. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52224#comments

    You flatter yourself.

    As too the IRS escapades, as well as those of the Senate, I say its another case of uninteneded consequences since as soon as the WH and Congress are back in non-Progressive hands those same rule changes will be shoved right up their collectivist asses with glee. – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52224#comments

    Of course they will, Sir FucksALittle. And you’ll say, “It was the worst thing ever when you did it, so it’s like totally cool for us to do it back even harder.”

  28. It is axiomatic that when compared with places like, say, Italy, where tax avoidance is a national sport, I keep hearing that, and the United States where tax on revenue is largely voluntary, that is worth repeating don’t you think? Largely voluntary. Because it is simply not possible to audit everybody, in light of this axiom it is dangerously unwise to undermine trust that we note at historical lows.
    A smile crosses my whole face when I remember we really do not need the IRS at all. Not one bit. Not needed one single bit. They are a thing added on for our convenience, and now they are not.
    It makes itself known and dealt with like a cancer that is not needed, no longer useful, and actually damaging and burdensome . The EPA too, as another Departmental cancer, coming up on the corruption of BATFE or whatever it calls itself nowadays, so eager to announce its cancerous activities begging the host to remove it. Begging to recognized as too partisan too corrupted too dangerously useless too damaging to the nation to continue.
    - See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52224#comment-1041856

    You’ve apparently never heard of game theory. A low risk of getting caught still motivates a lot of honest people to stay honest. No risk of getting caught, and you’d see tax compliance plummet.

    BTW. When’s your trip to China scheduled for? I’d love to hear how useless the EPA is when you get back.

    Fool.

  29. “game theory.”

    See LAFFER CURVE, LOL. And Depression Starvation statistics.

    “EPA keeps US from being China”

    Sure they do steve. Lol.

  30. hellomynameissteve prattled on and on and on

    Bored now. Still.

  31. “You flatter yourself.’

    No, he accurately characterizes your uninformed drivel and horrendous lack of reasoning skills..

  32. Can someone explain #shoppingwithmattyiglesias to me? What’s he done now?

  33. You’ve apparently never heard of game theory.

    Oh boy, now you’ve stepped in it.

  34. Hay guyz have you ever heard of cosmological inflation? Obviously not! Snort! You probably don’t understand degenerate matter either. SCIENCE!(TM) you guyz! Like Brown Dwarf!

  35. You guyz obviously know nothing about memetic holography. Or protein.

  36. Take me serious guyz! I’m da real deal!

  37. Help me……help you! Pscyh! I’m not gonna help you. Ur so dumb.

  38. So we’ve gone from trying to game the rules to trying to rule the game?

    Ask Cicero and Cato the Younger and all their pals how that worked out for them.

    and they had Pompey

    kind of like how the Democrats have Barak.

  39. I’ve heard of emetic holography. Usually it’s a 3D experience of the results of emetic holography.

  40. You’ve apparently never heard of game theory. A low risk of getting caught still motivates a lot of honest people to stay honest. No risk of getting caught, and you’d see tax compliance plummet.
    BTW. When’s your trip to China scheduled for? I’d love to hear how useless the EPA is when you get back.
    Fool.
    - See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52224#sthash.om0SxwDx.dpuf
    Dump the 16th amendment, dump fucking progressive tax structure and set up a consumption tax. This of course would force all those “smarter than me” politicians in DC to balance a fucking budget like we have to do in our own homes. We don’t have endless credit like “our” government has given itself.
    Do you even know that you’re not a free person anymore Steve?

  41. game theory is one of my favorite theories

  42. “Dump the 16th amendment, dump fucking progressive tax structure and set up a consumption tax.”

    Bingo. We are no longer for sale.

  43. Game theories are raised in preserves to raise revenue via controlled hunting.

  44. McGehee says December 16, 2013 at 2:58 pm hellomynameissteve prattled on and on and on

    Bored now. Still.

    It can be annoying, having no magical or telekinetic abilities…

  45. hellomynameissteve says December 16, 2013 at 2:48 pm
    Golly, maybe they should have changed the rules BEFORE the election and applied them to everyone, rather than clearly targeting groups opposed to Duh Wahn? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52224#comments
    How are these rules targeting the Tea Party – other than the Tea Party are most likely to abuse the 501c4 classification?
    - See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52224#comment-1041846

    I can’t believe you actually believe that.
    I wonder what the actual suspension of reason feels like?

    But thanks to yo I can see its effects

  46. “you”

  47. How are these rules targeting the Tea Party – other than the Tea Party are most likely to abuse the 501c4 classification?

    Hoe the fuck is OFA a 501(c)(4) and when do you suppose the IRS will get around to turn them inside out? How did their application get approved before the ink dried on it?

  48. Can we just ban hellomynameisfailure please. :c

  49. Pellegri says December 17, 2013 at 2:08 pm
    Can we just ban hellomynameisfailure please. :c
    - See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=52224#comments

    If you ban him he won’t learn anything.

  50. I’m not sure that it a valid “if-then” argument, along the lines of “if you don’t eat your spinach, then the sun will explode in a supernova”. There is absolutely no evidence that Dog Vomit has the capacity to learn anything.

  51. I’m tired of him. You can lead a jackass to water but you can’t make him drink.

  52. He can still read comments (and posts) if he’s banned.

    He just can’t make his own comments.

    So he could, theoretically, still learn something if he were capable of doing so.

  53. If you ban him he won’t learn anything.

    Also, if you don’t ban him he won’t learn anything.

    Thus the question becomes, which action provides the rest of us with a benefit?

    A.: Ban him.

  54. If we can throw him to the lions, I’d go with that. Otherwise, a good old bum rush is in order.

  55. McGehee has me convinced. Oust the lying fucker.

    Oh, and if you want to ban Dog Vomit, too, that would be okay…

  56. - After having hundreds of posts censored on FDL DKos, HuffNpoop and other Lefturd sites, its always a bit surprising just how whack-fucked in the head Progressives actaully are. They get treated fairly in a way they never even pretend to treat non-Progs in their own Dog vomit dens, and then respond by antagonizing as much as posible. Tells you all you need to know about their collective nuerosis/asocial issues.

    - They know its all agitprop bullshit so they can’t stand to be civil for a second. At one time it might have been useful to hear what they have to say, but after years of the same old “identity politics” and narrative language games its boring and repetitive.

    - I vote “boot em”.

  57. About the only pitfall to banning steve would be he’ll whinge like a martyred soul about “free speech” and such.

    But then all trolls try that line to intimidate their hosts into letting them continue so go for it.

  58. Me vote for ban graceless idiot. He needs a dumber blog where his bullshit can really shine.

  59. Give him a good taste of what the First Amendment really means. (Since this isn’t the government, there is no such thing as “free speech”, and “freedom of association” is a more specific right covered by the First Amendment.)

  60. .. in the land of Mordor on the Potomac where the shadows lie..

  61. Sorry Steven.
    Your lack of sincerity has condemned you.

    That. And you’re a hopeless halfwit.

    and boring.

Leave a Reply