link me to a youtube.
Chuck Schumer Calls on IRS to Crack Down on Tea Party Funding
- Thread starter beenthere
- Start date
don't be so full of yourself it's ugly.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i linked to the exact letter he wrote asking for stricter guidelines on ALL 501c4 groups.
ALL of them, not just the tea party ones.
theblaze is guilty of the lie of omission. and beenthere and company fell for it like the easily duped, partisan losers they are.
far cry from OPschumer's own site, not the huffpo.
you blithering nincompoop.
Dear Commissioner Shulman:
We write to ask the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”to immediately change the administrative framework for enforcement of the tax code as it applies to groups designated as “social welfare” organizations. These groups receive tax and other advantages under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code (hereinafter, “IRC” or the “Code”
IRS regulations have long maintained that political campaign activity by a 501(c)(4) entity must not be the “primary purpose” of the organization. These regulations are intended to implement the statute, which requires that such organizations be operated exclusively for the public welfare. But we think the existing IRS regulations run afoul of the law since they only require social welfare activities to be the 'primary purpose' of a nonprofit when the Code says this must be its 'exclusive' purpose. In recent years, this daylight between the law and the IRS regulations has been exploited by groups devoted chiefly to political election activities who operate behind a facade of charity work.
A related concern, raised in a March 7[SUP]th [/SUP]New York Times article, concerns whether certain nonprofits may be soliciting corporate contributions that are then treated by the company as a business expense eligible for a tax deduction. The Times wrote: “Under current law, there is little to no way to tell whether contributions are being deducted, especially because many of the most political companies are privately held.” This potential abuse distorts the objectives of vital revenue mechanisms and undermines the faith that we ask citizens to place in their electoral system.
We propose that the IRS make three administrative changes to curtail these questionable practices and bring IRS tax regulations back into alignment with the letter and spirit intended by those who crafted the Code:
· First, we urge the IRS to adopt a bright line test in applying its “primary purpose” regulation that is consistent with the Code’s 501(c)(4) exclusivity language. The IRS currently only requires that the purpose of these non-profits be “primarily” related to social welfare activities, without defining what “primarily” means. This standard should be spelled out more fully by the IRS. Some have suggested 51 percent as an appropriate threshold for establishing that a nonprofit is adhering to its mission, but even this number would seem to allow for more political election activity than should be permitted under the law. In the absence of clarity in the administration of section 501(c)(4), organizations are tempted to abuse its vagueness, or worse, to organize under section 501(c)(4) so that they may avail themselves of its advantages even though they are not legitimate social welfare organizations. If the IRS does not adopt a bright line test, or if it adopts one that is inconsistent with the Code’s exclusivity language, then we plan to pursue legislation codifying such a test.
· Second, such organizations should be further obligated to document in their 990 IRS form the exact percentage of their undertakings dedicated to “social welfare.” Organizations should be required to “show their math” to demonstrate that political election activities and other statutorily limited or prohibited activities do not violate the “primary purpose” regulation.
· Third, 501(c)(4) organizations should be required to state forthrightly to potential donors what percentage of a donation, if any, may be taken as a business expense deduction. As the New York Times reported in its March 7[SUP]th[/SUP]article, some of these organizations do not currently inform donors whether a contribution is tax deductible as a business expense at all.
The IRS should already possess the authority to issue immediate guidance on this matter. We urge the IRS to take these steps immediately to prevent abuse of the tax code by political groups focused on federal election activities. But if the IRS is unable to issue administrative guidance in this area then we plan to introduce legislation to accomplish these important changes.
Sincerely,
Senators Charles E. Schumer, Michael Bennet, Sheldon Whitehouse, Jeff Merkley, Tom Udall, Jeanne Shaheen and Al Franken
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
it always is with a source like theblaze.far cry from OP
they lie constantly in order to rile up right wing retards with delusions of persecution and the inability to discern legitimate information from bad information.
that's how they got them to buy into the skewed polls idiocy.
i just watch and laugh.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
I saw it on Faux News. Don't have a link for you, but it shouldn't be that hard for you to find.
bucky already pasted it in it's entirety.
You're as dumb as Bucky, the OP is not about a letter.far cry from OP
Derp de Derp
Red1966
Well-Known Member
And also not the video tape aired, which was exactly the OP. The video singled out conservatives by NAME.far cry from OP
well, "the blaze" is a right wing rag..find me another source..if red saw it, then it should be youtubed..please link me..if you don't want to link me..you lost the debate to bucky and i for not providing citation..citation is required in political forum.
find me proof non-partisan proof.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
the request to the IRS did not though.
more false outrage from deluded, easily duped, right wing partisan losers.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
No, he didn't. He posted something other than Schumer's speech. You have really got to stop grasping at such obvious ploys just because you are so desperate to "believe".
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Who elected you internet police? You being too lazy to use google doesn't prove anyone else wrong. But might explain why you're on food stamps.
excuse me..YOU are the one trying to prove YOUR point..forfeit..debate over.
Red1966
Well-Known Member
Yes, video tape is so partisan.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
i posted schumer's actual request to the IRS where he asked for additional scrutiny on ALL 501c4 groups.
do you even know what ALL means?
Red1966
Well-Known Member
That's at least the second time you've claimed you won the debate. You haven't. You refuse to believe anything that doesn't jibe with your world view. You are ignorant. Worse still, you will always be ignorant. You prefer ignorance.
You're too funny.