HOME

ABOUT US

OUR ISSUES

Federal Budget

Information & Access

Regulatory Policy


PRESS ROOM

ACTION CENTER

PUBLICATIONS

THE WATCHER

OUR BLOGS


SIGN UP

Receive news, updates, and alerts!

DONATE

Help support our work


OTHER SITES

FedSpending.org

RTK NET

NPAction

Working Group on Community Right-to-Know

Citizens for Sensible Safeguards

Open the Government

OMB Watch Logo

Promoting and protecting nonprofit advocacy for a stronger democracy

Home :  Nonprofit Issues :  Advocacy Blog : 
Advocacy Blog:     

Advocacy Blog


Monday, June 02, 2008

IRS Says New Directive on Issue Advocacy Coming

On May 28 the DC Bar Exempt Organizations Committee held a panel discussion on election year legal issues where Internal Revenue Service (IRS) senior technical advisor Judith Kindell said two field directives for IRS agents are on the way:

  • one on links between related organizations (Kindell said the IRS will not investigate links between related 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations)
  • one on issue advocacy vs. partisan activity.

According to BNA, Kindell said "issue advoacy is not just the statement, but the context of the distribution of the statement that we look to" when deciding whether a communication is partisan or not.

In its April 17 letter on 2008 enforcement the IRS acknowledged that it has encountered "a number of cases with varied fact patterns" that differ from its guidance in Rev. Rul. 2007-41."

Attorney Marcus Owens of Caplin & Drysdale also spoke, and said the IRS should come up with bright line rules defining partisan intervention in elections, since there are too many gray areas in the facts-and-circumstances test. Owens also said his firm has seen different interpretations of the test. He said the IRS appears to be broadening its standard to include "inferences derived from discussions of candidate's position on an issue...but somewhere else in the organization, another Web site or something off a Web site could carry with it a flavor of the organization's position on the same issue, and IRS could conflate those two and come to the conclusion that there was inferential intervention."

Owens said "The message is clear - it's time for a regulations project." However, Kindell said the IRS process for including an issue on its priority plan is time-consuming, requires many approvals and is a hindrance to issuing regulations.

OMB Watch filed comments on the IRS guidance priorities saying creating a bright line definition of political intervention should be their highest priority.

Posted by Kay Guinane



Entries by Theme

All Themes

Faith-Based Initiative

Elections and Issue Advocacy

Church Electioneering

Nonprofit Accountability

Charitable Giving

Speech and Lobbying Rights

Grants Streamlining

Charities and Security

General

Nonprofit Voter Mobilization

Most Recent Entries for Advocacy Blog

Editorial Calls for Total Transparency by Lobbyists

Report Finds U.S. Aid Not Regularly Impartial

More Information Released on the Surveillance on Nonviolent Activists in MD

Reform Recommendations for Security Laws Impacting Charities and Foundations

Citizens United Case Goes to Supreme Court

Georgia GOP Seeking to Shorten Early Voting

Lobbying and 501(c)(3)'s

Rules for Lobbyists in Transition

More Foundations are Using Funds to Influence Public Policy

Brennan Center for Justice Proposes Universal Voter Registration

Archived Entries for Elections and Issue Advocacy

November

October

September

August

July

June

May

April

March

February

January

December, 2007

November, 2007

October, 2007

September, 2007

August, 2007

July, 2007

June, 2007

May, 2007

April, 2007

March, 2007

February, 2007

January, 2007

December, 2006

November, 2006

October, 2006

September, 2006

August, 2006

July, 2006

June, 2006

May, 2006

April, 2006

March, 2006

February, 2006

January, 2006

December, 2005

November, 2005

October, 2005

September, 2005

August, 2005

July, 2005

June, 2005

May, 2005

April, 2005

March, 2005

February, 2005

January, 2005

December, 2004

November, 2004