IRS commissioner dares House GOP to hold him in contempt over Tea Party

[UncleBeer 244]

As you should expect, they want less government spending unless they are doing the spending... Every notion they voice apply only to everyone else, never to themselves.

Broadbrush statements you make no effort to substantiate.

[JohnR! 5,495]

It's called profiling. If law agencies investigated everyone equally, Right Wingers would be complaining. The IRS has legal precedent to investigate tax exempt organizations, period. But at the very least, the notion that if any of these tax exempt tea party groups have not broken any tax (not a far fetched idea based on their anti government rhetoric), then they've got nothing to hide. They can and should keep a close eye on anti government groups who believe the president is illegitimate, that federal income tax is unlawful, and that such groups have a constitutional right to violently overthrow the current government.

Right on the money. It is not about anything other than complaining for the sake of publicity. The GnOP has been highjacked by the TBs and nobody is doing anything to get it back on track.

Edited April 2, 2014 by Gegel

[UncleBeer 244]

The GnOP has been highjacked by the TBs and nobody is doing anything to get it back on track.

You mean the TBs are behind all this?

[JohnR! 5,495]

You mean the TBs are behind all this?

All of them? Wow! They must be busy!!!

Edited April 2, 2014 by Gegel

[CarlosAndSveta 808]

As with all matters of law, relevance and reasonability are the criteria for whether IRS inquiries are allowed or not.

The IRS itself says that 501cs "need not disclose their donors' identities". But they are charged with determining whether these groups' activities are chiefly concerned with 'social welfare' or politics. Not an easy distinction to make, so they are allowed to pose all manner of questions in order to make this assessment. Hopefully all questions are relevant and are asked equally of all groups along the political spectrum. This was clearly not the case with what the IRS perceived as 'conservative' organisations:

I am going to explain why the IRS requesting a donors list from a tax-exempt organization is not illegal. I don’t think this will change Uncle Beer’s mind but I am really explaining this for the benefit of other VJ members.

Tax-exempt organizations are required to file annual returns by IRC section 6033(a)(1) which states that in general, except as provided in paragraph (3), every organization exempt from taxation under section 501 (a) shall file an annual return, stating specifically the items of gross income, receipts, and disbursements, and such other information for the purpose of carrying out the internal revenue laws as the Secretary may by forms or regulations prescribe, and shall keep such records, render under oath such statements, make such other returns, and comply with such rules and regulations as the Secretary may from time to time prescribe; except that, in the discretion of the Secretary, any organization described in section 401 (a) may be relieved from stating in its return any information which is reported in returns filed by the employer which established such organization.

IRS Regulation Section 1.6033-2 lists some of the items that must be included in the annual information return required to be filed under IRC Section 6033. Section 1.6033-2(a)(2)(ii)( f ) requires that an exempt organization provide the total of the contributions, gifts, grants and similar amounts received by it during the taxable year, and the names and addresses of all persons who contributed, bequeathed, or devised $5,000 or more (in money or other property) during the taxable year. In the case of a private foundation (as defined in section 509(a)), the names and addresses of all persons who became substantial contributors (as defined in section 507(d)(2)) during the taxable year shall be furnished. In addition, for its first taxable year beginning after December 31, 1969, each private foundation shall furnish the names and addresses of all persons who became substantial contributors before such taxable year. For special rules with respect to contributors and donors, see subdivision (iii) of this subparagraph.

The donor list required by the regulation is reported on Schedule B of Form 990.

So the complaint that requesting a donors list is illegal is much ado about nothing since organizations exempt from tax under IRC section 501(a) already are required to submit a donors list annually for those donors contributing $5,000 or more.

[UncleBeer 244]

I am going to explain why the IRS requesting a donors list from a tax-exempt organization is not illegal. I don’t think this will change Uncle Beer’s mind but I am really explaining this for the benefit of other VJ members.

So . .. you have no reason to believe the IRS when they say that 501cs "need not disclose their donors' identities". That's interesting. I guess the Washington Post's also not credible when they say " 501c4s can accept unlimited donations and don't have to tell a soul from whence they came". Or the CampaignLegalCenter when they say "corporations are often reluctant to be publicly associated with express election advertisements, they instead may give to various tax-exempt groups, such as 501©(4)s or ©(6)s, which can run election ads without revealing their corporate donors. " Or the LATimes when they say "But some canny political entrepreneurs, initially Democrats but now mostly Republicans, realized that 501©(4) committees could buy television commercials — to denounce Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), for example — and never disclose who their donors were." Or Wikepedia: "501©(4) groups have never had to disclose their donors, but were not allowed to take corporate or union money, otherwise they'd have to disclose their donors to the Federal Election Commission. But after the January 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Supreme Court decision, 501©4 groups can take unlimited corporate and union money, still without disclosing.^[3] "

You're obviously a rebel, CarlosAndSveta: tilting at windmills, swimming upstream, fightin' the fight, believing the incredible. A goshdarn rebel. Good for you.

[CarlosAndSveta 808]

So . .. you have no reason to believe the IRS when they say that 501cs "need not disclose their donors' identities". That's interesting. I guess the Washington Post's also not credible when they say " 501c4s can accept unlimited donations and don't have to tell a soul from whence they came". Or the CampaignLegalCenter when they say "corporations are often reluctant to be publicly associated with express election advertisements, they instead may give to various tax-exempt groups, such as 501©(4)s or ©(6)s, which can run election ads without revealing their corporate donors. " Or the LATimes when they say "But some canny political entrepreneurs, initially Democrats but now mostly Republicans, realized that 501©(4) committees could buy television commercials — to denounce Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), for example — and never disclose who their donors were." Or Wikepedia: "501©(4) groups have never had to disclose their donors, but were not allowed to take corporate or union money, otherwise they'd have to disclose their donors to the Federal Election Commission. But after the January 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Supreme Court decision, 501©4 groups can take unlimited corporate and union money, still without disclosing.^[3] "

You're obviously a rebel, CarlosAndSveta: tilting at windmills, swimming upstream, fightin' the fight, believing the incredible. A goshdarn rebel. Good for you.

I am not a rebel. I am an IRS Agent. I have worked for the IRS for 39 years, 34 as a Revenue Agent.

I will repeat again. Giving information to the IRS is not public disclosure. Tax return information is confidential and is not to be disclosed to the public. If you read the instructions for Schedule B of Form 990 you will see that it says that the tax exempt organization need not make available to the public the names of the contributors.

IRC Section 6104 deals with Publicity of information required from certain exempt organizations and certain trusts. Subsection (b) states in part that the information required to be furnished by sections 6033, 6034, and 6058, together with the names and addresses of such organizations and trusts, shall be made available to the public at such times and in such places as the Secretary may prescribe. Nothing in this subsection shall authorize the Secretary to disclose the name or address of any contributor to any organization or trust (other than a private foundation, as defined in section 509 (a) or a political organization exempt from taxation under section 527) which is required to furnish such information

Edited April 2, 2014 by CarlosAndSveta

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Thanks, Carlos. Very informative. +1

[LibCampFireClub 635]

IRC Section 6104 deals with Publicity of information required from certain exempt organizations and certain trusts. Subsection (b) states in part that the information required to be furnished by sections 6033, 6034, and 6058, together with the names and addresses of such organizations and trusts, shall be made available to the public at such times and in such places as the Secretary may prescribe. Nothing in this subsection shall authorize the Secretary to disclose the name or address of any contributor to any organization or trust (other than a private foundation, as defined in section 509 (a) or a political organization exempt from taxation under section 527) which is required to furnish such information

In your estimation as an IRS agent, does this requirement entitle IRS agents to request the content on a US citizen's prayers, and further subject a petitioner of a 501C4 to government business audits from a variety of government agencies?

Edited April 2, 2014 by ExExpat

[CarlosAndSveta 808]

In your estimation as an IRS agent, does this requirement entitle IRS agents to request the content on a US citizen's prayers, and further subject a petitioner of a 501C4 to government business audits from a variety of government agencies?

Asking about prayers is very strange. I can't think of a reason why that would be relevant. I have no ideas or comments about other audits.

[JohnR! 5,495]

I am going to explain why the IRS requesting a donors list from a tax-exempt organization is not illegal. I dont think this will change Uncle Beers mind but I am really explaining this for the benefit of other VJ members.

Tax-exempt organizations are required to file annual returns by IRC section 6033(a)(1) which states that in general, except as provided in paragraph (3), every organization exempt from taxation under section 501 (a) shall file an annual return, stating specifically the items of gross income, receipts, and disbursements, and such other information for the purpose of carrying out the internal revenue laws as the Secretary may by forms or regulations prescribe, and shall keep such records, render under oath such statements, make such other returns, and comply with such rules and regulations as the Secretary may from time to time prescribe; except that, in the discretion of the Secretary, any organization described in section 401 (a) may be relieved from stating in its return any information which is reported in returns filed by the employer which established such organization.

IRS Regulation Section 1.6033-2 lists some of the items that must be included in the annual information return required to be filed under IRC Section 6033. Section 1.6033-2(a)(2)(ii)( f ) requires that an exempt organization provide the total of the contributions, gifts, grants and similar amounts received by it during the taxable year, and the names and addresses of all persons who contributed, bequeathed, or devised $5,000 or more (in money or other property) during the taxable year. In the case of a private foundation (as defined in section 509(a)), the names and addresses of all persons who became substantial contributors (as defined in section 507(d)(2)) during the taxable year shall be furnished. In addition, for its first taxable year beginning after December 31, 1969, each private foundation shall furnish the names and addresses of all persons who became substantial contributors before such taxable year. For special rules with respect to contributors and donors, see subdivision (iii) of this subparagraph.

The donor list required by the regulation is reported on Schedule B of Form 990.

So the complaint that requesting a donors list is illegal is much ado about nothing since organizations exempt from tax under IRC section 501(a) already are required to submit a donors list annually for those donors contributing $5,000 or more.

+100!!

[UncleBeer 244]

I am not a rebel. I am an IRS Agent. I have worked for the IRS for 39 years, 34 as a Revenue Agent.

Of course you are. And I'm the Green Lantern!

I will repeat again. Giving information to the IRS is not public disclosure.

I've never said the IRS isn't allowed to ask for donors lists. But they do have a legal burden of making sure their queries are relevant, reasonable (content of prayers?), and are asked equally along the political spectrum. In post #70 I wrote:

they are charged with determining whether these groups' activities are chiefly concerned with 'social welfare' or politics. Not an easy distinction to make, so they are allowed to pose all manner of questions in order to make this assessment. Hopefully all questions are relevant and are asked equally of all groups along the political spectrum. This was clearly not the case with what the IRS perceived as 'conservative' organisations

... The IRS' own Inspector General found that questions posed to 'conservative groups were "unnecessary and burdensome" — including the request for "lists of past and future donors."

So: the IRS' own inspector general opines that the IRS' request for donor lists was unreasonable. How's that reality fit into your citation of IRS code?

Tax return information is confidential and is not to be disclosed to the public.

Tax return information is theoretically confidential, but the Obama administration doesn't take that kinda stuff overly seriously:

The National Organization for Marriage will sue the IRS on Thursday, saying it has evidence that someone within the agency leaked the organization’s private donor list to its political enemies in 2012 but that nobody has been held responsible.

Release of confidential taxpayer information is a felony, but the organization’s leaders say the Internal Revenue Service and its internal auditor, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration, have stonewalled their efforts to learn who was responsible.

Turns out the employee that leaked this information was under Lois Lerner's direct control. Unfortunately due to federal privacy regulations, the fate of the perpetrator can't be released publicly, an ironic twist of fate considering the heinous breach of privacy by a government institution. AG Eric Holder could intervene, but . . . nah.

Taxpayer compliance relies heavily on citizens' confidence that the IRS will at least "ply by the rules". At this juncture, we have very little reason to trust the IRS or those who exert influence over them.

[CarlosAndSveta 808]

Of course you are. And I'm the Green Lantern!

You can laugh all you want but it doesn't change the fact that I am an Internal Revenue Agent. That post is not the first time I've mentioned on this website that I work for the IRS.

I've never said the IRS isn't allowed to ask for donors lists. But they do have a legal burden of making sure their queries are relevant, reasonable (content of prayers?), and are asked equally along the political spectrum. In post #70 I wrote:

You need to look at page 4, post #56 where you put in parenthesis that the IRS asking for donor lists was "blatantly illegal."

So: the IRS' own inspector general opines that the IRS' request for donor lists was unreasonable. How's that reality fit into your citation of IRS code?

He did not say it was illegal though. It would have been nice if they explained why they thought it was unreasonable.

Tax return information is theoretically confidential, but the Obama administration doesn't take that kinda stuff overly seriously:

Tax return information is confidential. Employees illegally leaking stuff has occurred many times before Obama became president.

[JohnR! 5,495]

You can laugh all you want but it doesn't change the fact that I am an Internal Revenue Agent. That post is not the first time I've mentioned on this website that I work for the IRS.

You need to look at page 4, post #56 where you put in parenthesis that the IRS asking for donor lists was "blatantly illegal."

He did not say it was illegal though. It would have been nice if they explained why they thought it was unreasonable.

Tax return information is confidential. Employees illegally leaking stuff has occurred many times before Obama became president.

Thanks for taking the time to share that info with us. It makes for a better discussion point than just posting a link to a blog and running with it.

I think I speak for many when I say that the IRS is not on my top 10 list of my favorite things but all the same it is a job and someone has to do it. It is not often that someone takes the time to set us straight. It is appreciated!!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Just ignore Uncle Beer. The account is either sock puppet of a longtime member, or a former member who has come back to troll.