[EL] Crossroads Issue Ad

[Ellen Aprill]

I agree that the IRS use of facts and circumstances is problematic and have
recently written a piece urging that IRS and Treasury should want to
promulgate regulations in this area (
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1927611), but I also
think that the two rulings have different purposes.  Rev. Rul. 2004-6 is
attempting to distinguish lobbying from campaign intervention while Rev.
Rul. 2007-41 is attempting to distinguish issue advoacy that is not
lobbying from campaign intervention.

  Ellen

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:45 AM, <JBoppjr at aol.com> wrote:

> **
> Now, it you want to be totally confused, compare Rev. Ruling 2004-6 with
> 2007-41
> Click here: Internal Revenue Bulletin - June 18, 2007 - Rev. Rul. 2007-41<http://www.irs.gov/irb/2007-25_IRB/ar09.html>
> In Rev. Ruling 2007-41, the IRS again lists factors to be consider to
> distinguish issue advocacy from political intervention.  Inexplicitly, the
> IRS does not use the same factors -- adding some and deleting others--  and
> they don't even acknowledge that they are doing that.  Most troubling is
> that they add a new one -- reference to an election in the communication --
> that they didn't mention in 2004-6, but now say that that factor is the
> most important factor!  No mention that 2004-6 is superceded either. So it
> is impossible to know what it is that the IRS is using to make this
> distinction and to know what one can now rely upon to decide this for
> ourselves.  Jim Bopp
>
>  In a message dated 11/29/2011 12:56:04 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
> ellen.aprill at lls.edu writes:
>
> Here is a link to the IRS ruling that attempts to distinguish
> issue advocacy from political campaign activity.
>
> http://www.irs.gov/irb/2004-04_IRB/ar10.html
>
>    Ellen
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 9:48 AM, Steve Klein <stephen.klein.esq at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I
>> understand to be embraced within [the functional equivalent of express
>> advocacy]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But
>> I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is
>> not that."
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Steve Gold <steve at actblue.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Perhaps I should have specified, a challenger not holding public
>>> office.  Is that not new?  I'm less well-informed about attack ads than
>>> many, so perhaps I simply missed it.  I'm also not aware of an issue ad
>>> that lists the phone number of a campaign headquarters (which seems like a
>>> really bad idea if you expect anyone to call it).
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Steven Gold
>>> General Counsel
>>> ActBlue
>>> steve at actblue.com
>>> 617.517.7636
>>> www.actblue.com
>>>
>>>
>>>   On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Jon Roland <
>>> jon.roland at constitution.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  **
>>>> On 11/29/2011 09:47 AM, Steve Gold wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Is this something we should expect to see more of from non-profits?
>>>>
>>>> We already see much of this and have for a long time. Nothing new.
>>>>
>>>> Why not simply come out and say, don't vote for Warren?
>>>>
>>>> Good question. It points out the irrationality of campaign finance
>>>> legislation (aside from it being unconstitutional).
>>>>
>>>> -- Jon
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Constitution Society               http://constitution.org
>>>> 2900 W Anderson Ln C-200-322           twitter.com/lex_rex
>>>> Austin, TX 78757 512/299-5001  jon.roland at constitution.org
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Law-election mailing list
>>>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Law-election mailing list
>>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Steve Klein
>> Staff Attorney & Research Counsel*
>> Wyoming Liberty Group
>> www.wyliberty.org
>>
>> **Licensed to practice law in Illinois. Counsel to the Wyoming Liberty
>> Group pursuant to Rule 5.5(d) of the Wyoming Rules of Professional Conduct.
>> *
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Ellen P. Aprill
> John E. Anderson Professor of Tax Law
> Loyola Law School
> 919 Albany Street
> Los Angeles, CA 90015
> 213-736-1157
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>


-- 
Ellen P. Aprill
John E. Anderson Professor of Tax Law
Loyola Law School
919 Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015
213-736-1157
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111129/08b5cf5a/attachment.html>