HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Learn what the real IRS s...

Thu May 16, 2013, 08:15 AM

Learn what the real IRS scandal is from Lawrence O'Donnell's show last night....

The real IRS scandal: Reinterpreting the law

Here is how the tax law was written in its latest update in 1954 on 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations. The 501(c)(4) designation was to apply only to: “Civic leagues or organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare."

But a 1959 interpretation guideline written by the IRS says that: ”To be operated exclusively to promote social welfare, an organization must operate primarily to further the common good and general welfare…”


Here is a link to last night's show:
http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/05/15/the-real-irs-scandal-reinterpreting-the-law/

I sure learned plenty watching his show last night!

21 replies, 3885 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 21 replies Author Time Post
Reply Learn what the real IRS scandal is from Lawrence O'Donnell's show last night.... (Original post)
Little Star May 2013 OP
Buzz Clik May 2013 #1
leveymg May 2013 #3
malaise May 2013 #4
leveymg May 2013 #6
malaise May 2013 #19
boston bean May 2013 #5
magellan May 2013 #8
Buzz Clik May 2013 #7
amerciti001 May 2013 #13
RKP5637 May 2013 #2
patrice May 2013 #9
boston bean May 2013 #10
brush May 2013 #11
Whisp May 2013 #12
BlueCaliDem May 2013 #14
KoKo May 2013 #15
Little Star May 2013 #16
Life Long Dem May 2013 #17
Little Star May 2013 #18
jwirr May 2013 #20
Laelth May 2013 #21

Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 08:21 AM

1. Good deal.

 

The "scandal" was able to achieve traction on the left because of ignorance of the law and what IRS was doing.

It gained traction on the right because they're dopes who believe anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Buzz Clik (Reply #1)

Thu May 16, 2013, 08:27 AM

3. It still looks bad politically to go after any specific ideological groups on account of the name of

the organization. Sends a very bad message that the enforcement and compliance action is politically motivated.

Selectively delaying and blocking (c)(4) status is still objectionable and "scandalous" even if it's legal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #3)

Thu May 16, 2013, 08:34 AM

4. Partly true but

as noted on another thread, one of them flew an aircraft into a Federal tax building around the same time as this investigation started and what's more most of the groups received tax exemptions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #4)

Thu May 16, 2013, 08:55 AM

6. As we know, when white Republicans do that, it isn't an act of terrorism (worth mentioning).

Last edited Thu May 16, 2013, 01:16 PM - Edit history (1)

Who granted The Army of God Air Force a C(4)?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #6)

Thu May 16, 2013, 06:24 PM

19. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #3)

Thu May 16, 2013, 08:48 AM

5. They did it for both progressive and conservative groups.

They made lists to help them ferret through, using key words.

there just happened to be a hell of a lot more of tea party, patriot applications... what does that tell you... in light of the discrepancy in the law and the regulations??

And the only one that wasn't approved was a progressive applicant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #5)

Thu May 16, 2013, 09:03 AM

8. Yep, there were 202 non-TP applications identified as "Other" potential political cases

The IRS report doesn't say what names or keywords were used to flag the applications in the "Other" category, but that's where an unknown number of progressive groups will be found.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #3)

Thu May 16, 2013, 08:57 AM

7. Blocking? Do not happen.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #3)

Thu May 16, 2013, 11:20 AM

13. If you really understood just what a 501(c)4 organization is about...

it does not look all that bad to have scrutinized these Tea Party groups at all;

Check out some of these links for 501(c)4 organizations:

http://www.t-tlaw.com/pol-03.htm

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

http://www.grassrootsfundraising.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Raising_Money_C4_v31_n2_gfj.pdf

http://afjactioncampaign.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/AFJAC-Fundraising-Toolkit1.pdf

If you read through some of this material you my start to realize a vast right-wing conspiracy forming in the name of "social welfare"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 08:24 AM

2. Thanks for link!!! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 09:23 AM

9. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 09:56 AM

10. Kick cause this helped me to understand...

1) the regulation regarding these entities does not match the law, which leaves a grey area for the agents in the IRS to determine what is actually a charitable tax exempt organization.

2) Many tea party and patriot groups as well as progressive with a political slant applied for the tax exempt status. To help to determine if these orgs were charitable (mostly) or political (mostly) and to widdle down the huge list, they used key words to create lists for them to work on,not deny, but to research further.

3) Only 1 such group that was on these lists was denied status. And that group was a progressive group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 10:00 AM

11. Thanks for the info on the non-scandal . . .

Has anyone else noticed that the repug game plan whenever a Democratic President wins a second term is to immediately try to bog him down with ginned up "scandals" like Whitewater and Vince Foster.

Now we have the IRS, the Justice Dept. and Benghazi (the election was barely over when McCain and Graham first tried to start this up).

It's what the repulsive repugs do to try to gain traction (along with all their other dirty tricks) for the next election cycle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 11:07 AM

12. kick

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 11:34 AM

14. K&R!

Lawrence O'Donnell knows his stuff.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 01:12 PM

15. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 03:19 PM

16. kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 06:15 PM

17. Obama hints to fixing this yesterday by saying the law needs to be clear

 

I thought today's answer in the Rose Garden was more of a hint to this than even yesterday. And maybe one reason why the "I" word came out today.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Life Long Dem (Reply #17)

Thu May 16, 2013, 06:19 PM

18. I'm thinking the same thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 07:36 PM

20. Great show. I remember working with an old activist from Iowa City and the fact that he was

absolutely sure he had been targeted by the IRS and the FBI in the 60s and 70s.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Little Star (Original post)

Thu May 16, 2013, 08:11 PM

21. k&r for exposure. n/t

-Laelth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread