[EL] why seek c4 recognition?

[Daniel Abramson]

Lloyd,

To be clear - I think Rick is asking specifically why so many groups choose
to file Form 1024, not why they operate under section 501(c)(4).  I would
like to know the answer myself.

Daniel


On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Lloyd Leonard <Leonard at lwv.org> wrote:

> Another view:
>
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/05/14/why-do-conservative-groups-want-to-be-tax-exempt-one-word-anonymity/
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:
> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Beth Kingsley
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 12:04 PM
> To: Rick Hasen; law-election at UCI.edu
> Subject: Re: [EL] why seek c4 recognition?
>
> For some groups the question is why seek recognition, not why not.
>
> The form takes time and energy to complete. If you don't know the lingo
> you risk saying something that raises a red flag and triggers further
> scrutiny, so you'll spend time and energy responding to further IRS
> inquiries. To avoid that you can hire a lawyer and spend thousands on legal
> fees. Plus it costs $850 just to file the application, for all but the very
> smallest groups.
>
> And what are the benefits? If the IRS ever happens to audit your group,
> you can rely on the determination to avoid retroactive revocation, provided
> there have been no material changes in operations. If you're pretty
> confident where you fit in the tax code, that benefit is pretty slim, and
> it can be easier just to start operating.
>
> Many groups do file a 1024, and of course my experience tends to be with
> those who decide to do so, since they've probably come to me for help.
> There are some ancillary benefits -- being able to provide assurances to
> funders and other supporters that you're operating within the law, or in
> some cases eligibility for local tax exemption. But for many the plusses
> are not worth the hassles.
>
> Beth
>
> Elizabeth Kingsley
> Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP
> 1726 M St., NW
> Suite 600
> Washington, DC 20036
> 202-328-3500
> www.harmoncurran.com
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:
> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Hasen
> Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 11:50 AM
> To: law-election at UCI.edu
> Subject: [EL] why seek c4 recognition?
>
> Over on Twitter the NYT's Nick Confessore is tweeting about the question
> why only some groups seek c4 recognition status. Apparently the
> Democratic-oriented Priorities USA has not.
>
> Can someone shed some light on the reasons why a group would not seek such
> recognition from the IRS and what the risks are?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Rick
>
> --
> Rick Hasen
> Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science UC Irvine School of Law
> 401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
> Irvine, CA 92697-8000
> 949.824.3072 - office
> 949.824.0495 - fax
> rhasen at law.uci.edu
> http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
> http://electionlawblog.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
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20130514/1c4e9e65/attachment.html>