[EL] big IRS story

[John Tanner]

March of Dimes Campaign?

The name of an organization is a terrible, utterly inapproporiate predicate
for triggering an investigation.  A federal investigation should only be
opened based on activity


On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Smith, Brad <BSmith at law.capital.edu> wrote:

>  Actually, they were not being targeted if they "had words in their title
> that suggested the organizations were political in nature-- ie that their
> major purpose was to engage in political activity." They were targeted if
> they had *certain* words in their title that suggested the organizations
> were political in nature-- ie that their major purpose was to engage in
> political activity.
>
>  That's a big difference, since the words selected were not neutral, like
> say, "Campaign."
>
>  Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 10, 2013, at 6:31 PM, "Trevor Potter" <tpotter at capdale.com> wrote:
>
>   To remind everyone of what we know at this point, applications for 501
> c4 social welfare status were being flagged for review by IRS staffers if
> they had words in their title that suggested the organizations were
> political in nature-- ie that their major purpose was to engage in
> political activity and therefore they should be registered as a 527 rather
> than a c4. That is one of the IRS's jobs-- to determine whether a group
> qualifies for c4 status, or is too "political" in purpose to do so. Based
> on recent cases, the IRS has certainly questioned/ challenged the
> appropriateness of c4 status of groups with both "Democrat" and "
> Republican" in their name.
>
>  Trevor Potter
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On May 10, 2013, at 6:22 PM, "Joe La Rue" <joseph.e.larue at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>    The anger should be there, regardless. NOBODY should be targeted by
> the IRS because of his or her political views. It doesn't matter to me
> whether they are targeting conservatives only, liberals only, or
> conservatives AND liberals together. And it shouldn't matter to anyone else
> who claims to love freedom. If the government can target us because of our
> political views, and can subject us to extra scrutiny and make us jump
> through extensive hoops because of we have political views, then what have
> we become?
>
>
> Joe
> ___________________
> *Joseph E. La Rue*
>  cell: 480.272.2715
> email: joseph.e.larue at gmail.com
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail message, including any attachments,
> is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain
> confidential and privileged information or otherwise be protected by law.
> Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If
> you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the
> sender and permanently delete the message.
>
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION/ATTORNEY WORK
> PRODUCT.
>
> IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any tax advice contained in this
> communication was not written and is not intended to be used for the
> purpose of (i) avoiding penalties imposed by the Internal Revenue Code or
> (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending any transaction or matter
> addressed herein.
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Byron Tau <btau at politico.com> wrote:
>
>>  I think the anger comes from the fact that they were just flagging
>> conservative-linked words. If the list also included "progressive" and
>> "liberal," I don't think the anger would be there.
>>
>>  --****
>>
>> Byron Tau****
>>
>> Lobbying and influence reporter || POLITICO****
>>
>> c: 202-441-1171****
>>
>> d: 703-341-4610****
>>
>> Follow: @byrontau <http://twitter.com/byrontau>****
>>
>> Subscribe to: http://www.politico.com/politicoinfluence/****
>>
>>
>>
>> On May 10, 2013, at 6:03 PM, "john.k.tanner at gmail.com" <
>> john.k.tanner at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>  Both are common adjectives for advocacy groups as well as the names of
>> political parties.   ADA, SDS, ....
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mark Schmitt <schmitt.mark at gmail.com>
>> Sender: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
>> Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 17:47:50
>> To: law-election at uci.edu<law-election at uci.edu>
>> Subject: Re: [EL] big IRS story
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
> <- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -> To
> ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that,
> unless specifically indicated otherwise, any tax advice contained in this
> communication (including any attachments) was not intended or written to be
> used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related
> penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or
> recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein. This
> message is for the use of the intended recipient only. It is from a law
> firm and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If
> you are not the intended recipient any disclosure, copying, future
> distribution, or use of this communication is prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please advise us by return e-mail, or
> if you have received this communication by fax advise us by telephone and
> delete/destroy the document. <-->
>
>  _______________________________________________
> 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130510/216a462d/attachment.html>