The IRS should be investigating Tea Party groups

[The dane]

This "scandal" is all over the media these days, and I keep waiting for someone to point out the obvious. The IRS was absolutely correct in investigating these Tea Party groups, and frankly they should have rejected most of the applications for tax exempt status. The real problem is not the investigations of the Tea Party groups, but rather that other political groups apparently got off easier.

These groups were applying for tax exempt status under 501(c)(4), which is only supposed to apply to so-called social welfare groups. Such groups are not allowed to be mainly political in nature, but everyone knows that most of them are. For example Crossroads GPS and Americans for Prosperity are both 501(c)(4) groups, and they are two of the most powerful political groups in the country, having spent over $100 million between them in the 2012 campaign alone, all without having to disclose any of their donors, or having to abide by the limits on political campaign contributions.

These are the groups that are buying US elections on behalf of special interests, and yet the media expects us to be outraged because they got a bit delayed in getting their tax exempt status ???

The sad thing is most people don't even realize what is going on, they just go with whatever the latest headline tells them. And it's not exactly like the IRS was that popular to begin with, so they are extremely easy to demonize, even though they were in reality looking out for the best interests of the American people.

[John Galt]

your argument is against 501(c)(4) groups in general, which are civic leagues allowed to participate in elections and still maintain their tax exempt status. 501(c)(4) groups are "allowed to self declare and hold themselves out as tax exempt"

but here's the deal: the law is the way it is not the way the dane wants it to be, so yeah, it is a scandal. they were auditing the self declared 501c4 groups if they had certain political inclinations. and now it's learned that the treasury was aware of this a year ago.

[Mr.Bill]

A few weeks of outrage and all this will be over.. The IRS in the past has done far worse, and they've weather those storms, they'll weather this one too..

The IRS has police powers and leeway beyond any other government agency.. They always had, and always will.. This is a non-story, or will be in a month.

[The Comrade]

[The dane]

[lnrw]

Not done at all?

then why pick on the tea party? Overall, they're pretty minor.

Why not some of the big fish? Get them all or once again just fry the little fish? That's the American Way.

[The dane]

[lnrw]

[John Galt]

aarp, aclu, brady campaign, nra... all bigger 501c4s

[Winchester]

I would be willing to bet most of these groups are "throw away" entities. Apply before the election, get provisional status (all new non profits get this just a matter of doting the i's and crossing the t's). The provisional status lets them operate as a non-profit entity for several years before a final determination is made. Time your application and pick a year end that will delay filing your reports (that the IRS partly uses to determine if you're acting according to your charter/articles of organization). By the time the IRS gets information from you, the final ruling no longer matters. Next election cycle rinse and repeat.

Purely speculation on my part but I believe the IRS agents were trying to weed out the bad apples ahead of time while it still mattered, my only problem is it appears they did it in a partisan manner.

The problem I have with the way this particular type of non-profit has been used is the lack of transparency, they get free speech w/o transparency... it's why the big money political operatives love them.

Require full disclosure on all "free" political speech no matter what the entity and the abuse of 501(c)4s as a political tool will diminish greatly.