The real worry is that this will be used an excuse to weaken the agency and make it more reluctant to provide proper scrutiny and oversight of political groups seeking 501(c)(4) tax exempt status. No doubt this is something that many conservatives are doing right now-trying to weaken the agency, helped along by timid Dems.
“I would hope that this new information about the politicization of the IRS should put the brakes on any sort of disclosure of donors who wish to remain anonymous,” said Charlie Spies, who helps raise money for several conservative organizations and previously led the super political action committee that raised more than $140 million to benefit Mitt Romney’s presidential bid. “We’re now seeing exactly what the risk is for donors to be disclosed.”
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/irs-probe-ignored-most-influential-groups.php?ref=fpb
Yes that sounds like a pretty convenient "solution." We've already heard a lot about the horror of Tea Party groups having to present their donors. We've heard "horror stories" of people who contributed $1 million dollars to Mitt Romney being-audited. Perhaps anyone from the Tea Party should be exempt from audits in the future as well.
“I would hope that this new information about the politicization of the IRS should put the brakes on any sort of disclosure of donors who wish to remain anonymous,” said Charlie Spies, who helps raise money for several conservative organizations and previously led the super political action committee that raised more than $140 million to benefit Mitt Romney’s presidential bid. “We’re now seeing exactly what the risk is for donors to be disclosed.”
“I would hope that this new information about the politicization of the IRS should put the brakes on any sort of disclosure of donors who wish to remain anonymous,” said Charlie Spies, who helps raise money for several conservative organizations and previously led the super political action committee that raised more than $140 million to benefit Mitt Romney’s presidential bid. “We’re now seeing exactly what the risk is for donors to be disclosed.”
At least some tea party groups are unwilling to trust the agency with more enforcement power in the wake of such damaging revelations.
“The IRS’ integrity is shattered,” said Jenny Beth Martin, chairman of the Tea Party Patriots, which was among the largest nonprofit conservative groups the IRS targeted. She said that now, more than ever, donors need freedom to give money anonymously “without fear of retribution” from a politicized IRS. In the meantime, she says her organization’s influence is growing, fueled by anonymous unlimited donations.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/irs-probe-ignored-most-influential-groups.php?ref=fpb
Yes that sounds like a pretty convenient "solution." We've already heard a lot about the horror of Tea Party groups having to present their donors. We've heard "horror stories" of people who contributed $1 million dollars to Mitt Romney being-audited. Perhaps anyone from the Tea Party should be exempt from audits in the future as well.
“I would hope that this new information about the politicization of the IRS should put the brakes on any sort of disclosure of donors who wish to remain anonymous,” said Charlie Spies, who helps raise money for several conservative organizations and previously led the super political action committee that raised more than $140 million to benefit Mitt Romney’s presidential bid. “We’re now seeing exactly what the risk is for donors to be disclosed.”
At least some tea party groups are unwilling to trust the agency with more enforcement power in the wake of such damaging revelations.
“The IRS’ integrity is shattered,” said Jenny Beth Martin, chairman of the Tea Party Patriots, which was among the largest nonprofit conservative groups the IRS targeted. She said that now, more than ever, donors need freedom to give money anonymously “without fear of retribution” from a politicized IRS. In the meantime, she says her organization’s influence is growing, fueled by anonymous unlimited donations.
What needs to be done is actually simplification of the whole system. A Washington Post piece suggests ending the 501(c)(4) designation altogether.
"When Obama appeared in the East Room of the White House on Wednesday to announce the resignation of the acting IRS commissioner, he talked about implementing “new checks and new safeguards” and ensuring that “there’s not too much ambiguity surrounding these laws.”
"The solution lies in radical simplification. Let’s get rid of 501(c)(4) status. Encourage nonprofits to forswear political activity and become 501(c)(3)s. If they can’t stomach political chastity, let them become 527s: groups still exempt from taxes but required to disclose their donors."
"Anything short of that will guarantee that we haven’t seen our last “outrageous” IRS scandal."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/an-unthinkable-irs-scandal-more-like-unavoidable/2013/05/17/3f89a1ce-bd84-11e2-89c9-3be8095fe767_story_2.html
An added advantage would be that it would show that the fact that some Tea Party groups were asked to reveal their donor lists is no crime-to the contrary why should any political group not have to do so?
An added advantage would be that it would show that the fact that some Tea Party groups were asked to reveal their donor lists is no crime-to the contrary why should any political group not have to do so?
This solution makes too much sense, however, and confers no partisan advantage for the Republican party-which is all this scandal is about.
No comments:
Post a Comment