Irs Scandal: Agency Targets Tea Party, Ignores Big-Budget Groups

May 19, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Fox News

The nation's tax agency has admitted to inappropriately scrutinizing smaller tea party organizations that applied for tax-exempt status, and senior Treasury Department officials were notified in the midst of the 2012 presidential election season that an internal investigation was underway.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of180
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Gravediggers

West Palm Beach, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

4

IRS discriminates.

IRS TARGETED conservative groups.

President Obama's rhetoric foments hate, distrust.

Obama's interview with Univision radio, he said:

'we're going to PUNISH OUR ENEMIES and we're going to REWARD OUR FRIENDS who stand with us on issues that are important to us'--

This is the usual rhetoric oozing from President Obama's lips.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Those Tea Partys, are 'soft targets', now who does that sound like?

“Why Is the Right Deranged?”

Since: May 09

Lake Success, N.Y.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

1

Do any of you people even know when 501 C4's were even created? Do you people even know that in 1954, when Congress passed the 501 C4, what the specific wording was, and when it was changed?

Get back to me when you people have an honest, coherent answer to this. I already know that NO 501 C4 IS SUPPOSED TO ENGAGE IN POLITICAL ACTIVITIES! yet both sides do. I have the answer - let's see if you guy's have an inkling as to what you profess to know what you're talking about.

This should be interesting.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

I support the idea of the IRS carefully scrutinizing all organizations who seek tax exemptions. Political axe-grinding shoud be refused, no matter from whichever side. It would be worth it, as long as the Tea Party cretins don't get away with it.
Wall Street Government

Sebastian, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Gravediggers wrote:
IRS discriminates.
IRS TARGETED conservative groups.
President Obama's rhetoric foments hate, distrust.
Obama's interview with Univision radio, he said:
'we're going to PUNISH OUR ENEMIES and we're going to REWARD OUR FRIENDS who stand with us on issues that are important to us'--
This is the usual rhetoric oozing from President Obama's lips.
“If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying,‘We’re going to punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s going to be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.”


Referring specifically to Republicans such as Senator John McCain, who formerly supported an overhual but now are stressing border security and supporting strict immigration laws like Arizona’s anti-Illegal Immigration measure, Mr. Obama said,“Those aren’t the kinds of folks who represent our core American values.”

Leave it to a teabagger to put off topic "cherry picked" crap into something else and expect it to fly.

Typical teabagger.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

1

RayOne wrote:
Those Tea Partys, are 'soft targets', now who does that sound like?
That was a reference to their heads.

“Why Is the Right Deranged?”

Since: May 09

Lake Success, N.Y.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

Lawrence Wolf wrote:
I support the idea of the IRS carefully scrutinizing all organizations who seek tax exemptions. Political axe-grinding shoud be refused, no matter from whichever side. It would be worth it, as long as the Tea Party cretins don't get away with it.
The original wording of tax exempt organizations goes as follows, from 1954;

"IRC 501(c)(4) provides for exemption of:
Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare.
Local associations of employees, the membership of which is limited to the employees of a designated person or persons in a particular municipality and the net earnings of which are devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.
The statutory terms disclose that IRC 501(c)(4) embraces two general classifications:
a. Social welfare organizations, and
b. Local associations of employees."

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopici03.pd...

Note the term "exclusively" / now, the IRS, in 1959, re-wrote this specific clause to state;

"Reg. &#61479; 1.501(c)(4)-1(a)(2)(i) provides that an organization is operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare if it is primarily engaged in promoting in some way the common good and general welfare of the people of the community, i.e., primarily for the purpose of bringing about civic betterment and social improvements. Whether an organization is "primarily" engaged in promoting social welfare is a "facts and circumstances" test."

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicm95.pd...

Changing the wording from "exclusively" to "primarily" gave extremely large latitude to the growth of political organizations since then, both left and right. This law has been abused for the last 54 years, and Congress needs to change the wording to clarify this. The fact that "Tea Party" and "Patriot" type organizations ended up throwing red flags as to their actual purpose is a fault of their own, no one else's. Funny how in 1987, McConnell was all for revamping this ambiguity in the law, claiming the left was abusing this code;

"But what McConnell left out was that he used to be deeply suspicious of groups that organized as tax-exempt "social welfare" nonprofits under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code.

"The activities that the IRS has now owned up to, and that were uncovered by their inspector general, are an outrage," McConnell said Monday in a Senate floor speech.

Early in his Senate career, however, the Kentucky Republican seemed to believe that such groups -- on the left and the right -- should be subjected to tougher scrutiny.

"There are restrictions now on the kinds of activities that, for example, 501(c)(3) and (4) organizations, charitable organizations, can engage in that are being abused -- not just people on the right, but most of the so-called charitable organizations who are involved in political activity in this country, who are, in my judgment, involved in arguable violations of their tax-free status and violations of the campaign laws, happen to be groups on the left," McConnell said in a 1987 interview. "So that is a problem."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/14/mitc...

See what I mean Lawrence?

“Why Is the Right Deranged?”

Since: May 09

Lake Success, N.Y.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Lawrence Wolf wrote:
I support the idea of the IRS carefully scrutinizing all organizations who seek tax exemptions. Political axe-grinding shoud be refused, no matter from whichever side. It would be worth it, as long as the Tea Party cretins don't get away with it.
Let's not go that far Lawrence. All political groups, regardless of affiliation, have no right under the actual provisions of this law to claim any type of tax exempt status if they are partaking in any type of political solicitation or furtherance of their political agenda whatsoever.

“Why Is the Right Deranged?”

Since: May 09

Lake Success, N.Y.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

1

Gravediggers wrote:
IRS discriminates.
IRS TARGETED conservative groups.
President Obama's rhetoric foments hate, distrust.
Obama's interview with Univision radio, he said:
'we're going to PUNISH OUR ENEMIES and we're going to REWARD OUR FRIENDS who stand with us on issues that are important to us'--
This is the usual rhetoric oozing from President Obama's lips.
Learn the law, find out how multiple administration, from Nixon forward, have not fixed this issue.

The administration is not the issue - the ambiguity I the law is the problem. Stop being parrot for Faux News and get at the very least, a GED.
1 post removed
Gary

Bellingham, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

1

What scandal?

People claim tax exemptions on their income tax
return. Sometimes the IRS wants these people to justify the exemption. You know, like deducting
your cat? People try and they get turned down.
Does that mean they are being targeted?

Some group applies for tax exempt status and the
IRS wants to know why they should have an exemption.
Is that targeting?

Tea-party cry babies need to grow up.
Brad

Manchester, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Gary wrote:
What scandal?
People claim tax exemptions on their income tax
return. Sometimes the IRS wants these people to justify the exemption. You know, like deducting
your cat? People try and they get turned down.
Does that mean they are being targeted?
Some group applies for tax exempt status and the
IRS wants to know why they should have an exemption.
Is that targeting?
Tea-party cry babies need to grow up.
The IRS has already admitted they targeted certain organizations because they had conservative leanings,and,apologized for it.
What exactly are you arguing?

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's not go that far Lawrence. All political groups, regardless of affiliation, have no right under the actual provisions of this law to claim any type of tax exempt status if they are partaking in any type of political solicitation or furtherance of their political agenda whatsoever.
I know both the NRA(on the right and National Organization for Woman(on the left) have long claimed to be Tax exempt non partisan groups, to just name two.
I long ago came to the conclusion there should be no such thing as tax exempt groups and all groups should be taxed.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
The original wording of tax exempt organizations goes as follows, from 1954;
"IRC 501(c)(4) provides for exemption of:
Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare.
Local associations of employees, the membership of which is limited to the employees of a designated person or persons in a particular municipality and the net earnings of which are devoted exclusively to charitable, educational, or recreational purposes.
The statutory terms disclose that IRC 501(c)(4) embraces two general classifications:
a. Social welfare organizations, and
b. Local associations of employees."
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopici03.pd...
Note the term "exclusively" / now, the IRS, in 1959, re-wrote this specific clause to state;
"Reg. &#61479; 1.501(c)(4)-1(a)(2)(i) provides that an organization is operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare if it is primarily engaged in promoting in some way the common good and general welfare of the people of the community, i.e., primarily for the purpose of bringing about civic betterment and social improvements. Whether an organization is "primarily" engaged in promoting social welfare is a "facts and circumstances" test."
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicm95.pd...
Changing the wording from "exclusively" to "primarily" gave extremely large latitude to the growth of political organizations since then, both left and right. This law has been abused for the last 54 years, and Congress needs to change the wording to clarify this. The fact that "Tea Party" and "Patriot" type organizations ended up throwing red flags as to their actual purpose is a fault of their own, no one else's. Funny how in 1987, McConnell was all for revamping this ambiguity in the law, claiming the left was abusing this code;
"But what McConnell left out was that he used to be deeply suspicious of groups that organized as tax-exempt "social welfare" nonprofits under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code.
"The activities that the IRS has now owned up to, and that were uncovered by their inspector general, are an outrage," McConnell said Monday in a Senate floor speech.
Early in his Senate career, however, the Kentucky Republican seemed to believe that such groups -- on the left and the right -- should be subjected to tougher scrutiny.
"There are restrictions now on the kinds of activities that, for example, 501(c)(3) and (4) organizations, charitable organizations, can engage in that are being abused -- not just people on the right, but most of the so-called charitable organizations who are involved in political activity in this country, who are, in my judgment, involved in arguable violations of their tax-free status and violations of the campaign laws, happen to be groups on the left," McConnell said in a 1987 interview. "So that is a problem."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/14/mitc...
See what I mean Lawrence?
Thanks. I was aware of changes in the wording. That opened up a Pandora's Box of partisan judgement. We need to shut the tax-free door to most of these phony organizations.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

TonyT1961 wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's not go that far Lawrence. All political groups, regardless of affiliation, have no right under the actual provisions of this law to claim any type of tax exempt status if they are partaking in any type of political solicitation or furtherance of their political agenda whatsoever.
I was being a bit sarcastic. I do agree. But the loopholes need to be shut. I'm not even sure the non-partisan groups should enjoy tax-free status, unless they can prove a non-profit status, and demonstrate that they perform a service that enhances the lives of others.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
May 19, 2013
 
Laugh at this
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>That was a reference to their heads.

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

RayOne wrote:
Laugh at this
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
<quoted text>
I watched. What I saw was a political assault on Eric Holder from a Republican smearmonger named after a Roman god of intoxication.
Brad

Manchester, CT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Lawrence Wolf wrote:
<quoted text>I watched. What I saw was a political assault on Eric Holder from a Republican smearmonger named after a Roman god of intoxication.
Ted Kennedy?

“Happiness comes through giving”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Brad wrote:
<quoted text>
Ted Kennedy?
No Bradley, no. Take your seat.
2 posts removed

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
May 19, 2013
 
Lawrence Wolf wrote:
I support the idea of the IRS carefully scrutinizing all organizations who seek tax exemptions. Political axe-grinding shoud be refused, no matter from whichever side. It would be worth it, as long as the Tea Party cretins don't get away with it.
I concur with most of your statement, except the last part. ;)
The Great Iron Dictator

Podgorica, Montenegro

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
May 19, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

America is enemy of EVERY Nation on this Panet.

I hope North Korea NUKE America !!!

Kim Jong Un!!!!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of180
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••