Get out clause?
Taken from the IRS's website, under the heading "Charities & Non-Profits".
The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501©(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501©(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.
Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances. For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner.
On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or © have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.
The Internal Revenue Service provides resources to exempt organizations and the public to help them understand the prohibition. As part of its examination program, the IRS also monitors whether organizations are complying with the prohibition.
Page Last Reviewed or Updated: May 11, 2009,
From this I see the LDS and catholic church have been doing a lot of voter education activities. Also employing many educational advisers, campaign (sorry educational) advertising and canvassing (sorry educational surveys).
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
•
United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
Press release dated: Wednesday, November 18, 2009
The Oversight & Government Reform Committee Passes the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act.
Washington, DC. Chairman Edolphus Towns (D-NY) today announced that the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform approved H.R. 2517, the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act of 2009. The legislation makes available certain employment benefits, including health care, to the same-sex domestic partners of federal employees. (H.R. 2517) promotes equality and fairness in the federal workforce, and strengthens the civil service.
The legislation is now set to move to the House floor for debate.
Another fence jumped successfully.
•
Posts: 2,418
Threads: 41
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Mood: None
Richard, I think that you have missed a very relevant point of the regulations.
Rychard the Lionheart Wrote:The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501©(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501©(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office....... [My Italics]
These tax exempt organisations are in no sense banned from political campaigning per se, they are only banned from campaigns for and against candidates for public office, they remain free to campaign on political issues. The regulations simply do not apply to the largest and most important campaigns these churches have been involved with i.e. ballot initiatives and state constitutional amendments where the voters vote directly on laws, e.g. Proposition 8 in California.
Fred
Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans.
•
Yes fred ,I did note that but both parties are still guilty of involvement in political activities like same sex marriages and the health care bill. It will be up to the IRS to decide if they have broken the rules and withdraw their tax-exempt status.
This was taken from the Lezget Real website today.
11/10/09-by Bridgette P. LaVictoire.
Representative Lynn Woolsey has called upon the Internal Revenue Service to investigate the involvement of the Roman Catholic Church in the creation and passage of the Stupak Amendment in a brief article at Politico. “The amendment makes it basically impossible for private insurance companies that participate in the new system to offer abortion coverage to women. This will effectively block women from using their own personal funds to purchase an insurance plan with abortion coverage,” according to the Human Rights Campaign statement on this amendment.
According to Rep. Woolsey:
I expect political hardball on any legislation as important as the health care bill. I just didn’t expect it from the United States Council of Catholic Bishops (USCCB). Who elected them to Congress? The role the bishops played in the pushing the Stupak amendment, which unfairly restricts access for low-income women to insurance coverage for abortions, was more than mere advocacy. They seemed to dictate the finer points of the amendment, and managed to bully members of Congress to vote for added restrictions on a perfectly legal surgical procedure.
Rep. Woolsey stated that churches in her district are careful to keep their activities non-political. Many LGBT-Americans would wish that were completely true. The recent battle in Maine showed just how willing the Catholic Church is to get involved in political matters if it regards the social agenda that they are pursuing.
Rep. Woolsey pointed out that the US Council of Catholic Bishops is a tax exempt entity. As such, the USCCB acted in a political manner without actually paying taxes.
In calling for an investigation of the RCC, Rep Woolsey has added her voice to that of LGBT-Americans who have been calling for an investigation into the campaign involvement of the Roman Catholic Church for some time now. Perhaps, as a politician, Rep. Woolsey can get further than the LGBT Community has in getting that investigation.
I hope the investigation goes ahead but I feel it won't.
•
Posts: 2,418
Threads: 41
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Mood: None
Rychard the Lionheart Wrote:Yes fred ,I did note that but both parties are still guilty of involvement in political activities like same sex marriages and the health care bill. It will be up to the IRS to decide if they have broken the rules and withdraw their tax-exempt status.
I am sorry if I am being really stupid but I don't understand what actual rules are they accused of being guilty of breaking? Same-sex marriage and the health care bill are not candidates standing for political office.
Fred
Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans.
•
Fred, I think the issue here is that does the church has the right to be political active and still be protected against paying tax. The IRS rules states that no organisation who do not pay tax is prohibited from participating in any political campaign for or against a candidate for public office. It does not say anything about other political issue which the public vote on, or is that also included as indirectly participating in a political campaign. The legal challenge will be on the church for being directly involved in political campaigning and bullying tactics at congress. If the church does lose, not only will they have a large legal bill to pay but also a very large tax demand waiting for them.
Any American lawyers or tax consultants here?
•
Posts: 2,418
Threads: 41
Joined: Oct 2008
Reputation:
0
Mood: None
Richard, thanks for the reply. It is a general presumption in American Law (and English Law too) that individuals and organisations are free to do whatever they see fit unless that conflicts with the rights of others or the law expressly forbids it. I have never heard anyone argue that political campaigning per se interferes with anyone's rights (although the object of the campaign might). Therefore the question is, is there a law about political campaigning that these tax exempt organisations have breeched? Much as I would like the answer to be yes, I have yet to hear of any allegations (beyond calling for 'an investigation') of any specific law or tax regulation that has been breached.
Fred
P.S. That reminds me of an old joke..
In America everything is permitted that is not expressly prohibited by law.
In Germany everything is prohibited that is not expressly permitted by law.
In Switzerland everything that is not prohibited by law is obligatory.
•
fredv3b Wrote:...P.S. That reminds me of an old joke..
In America everything is permitted that is not expressly prohibited by law.
In Germany everything is prohibited that is not expressly permitted by law.
In Switzerland everything that is not prohibited by law is obligatory. I am really struggling to square that last one with my experience :confused: but it sounds as though it should be funny :redface:
•
Tampa Adds Gender Identity Protections - November 19. 2009.
Tampa is the latest city in Florida to add "gender identity" to its human rights ordinance that bans discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodation.
Florida has now sixteen local government entities offer these protections in Florida, including several in Tampa Bay. Among them are: Broward County, Palm Beach County, Monroe County, Miami Beach, Gainesville, Lake Worth, West Palm Beach, Gulfport, Miami Beach, Key West, Largo, Tequesta, Wilton Manors, Dunedin, Orlando, and Oakland Park.
Nationally, 108 local city and county governments, 13 states and Washington, D.C. include "gender identity and gender expression" in their non-discrimination laws.
Protecting employees from discrimination is also considered smart business. Of the top Fortune 100 companies, 60 have expanded protections, as do many of Florida's major employers, including: Honeywell, Raymond James, Hillsborough County Bar Association, Tech Data Corp., Carlton Fields, and others.
Another step in the right direction, hopefully more will follow. 
•
Hmm, this isn't meant to be overly rude, but I can understand some people not agreeing.
I am so proud and thankful that there are young LGBTQ people out there. The older ones seem to be just happy with the way things are. They are use to it and don't feel like getting up and doing something about it. I find that wrong. I've had talks with quite a bit of people that thought the march @ DC was unnecessary. I was there. I was there from 9 am till I don't even remember when. I came from Pennsylvania with my boyfriend just for the march, and I was so glad that I did. It's sad though that a lot of the people just did it for fun or to see Lady GaGa (I love her too, but it was more than that). They probably went home and resumed normal life. Something needs to be done. Like seriously. The government is the problem, the elder are the obstacle, but the youth is definitely the solution.
It's not like it's something hard to do. Start simple, Post on your Social Network that you are holding a LGBTq/Straight Alliance meeting at your house. It doesn't have to be anything serious all the time. It can be just as simple as having some gay people and some straight people that have never met each other playing Wii or PS3 together. How hard is that? Really?
~Puppy
•
|
