behind the IRS scandal, there is a real issue

[NJlonghorn]

Cries of "scandal" surrounding criminal or administrative investigations often suggest the presence of a legitimate underlying issue. Here, it appears likely that many political groups are wrongly claiming tax-exempt status under IRC sec. 501(c)(4).

There is a general hue and cry about the IRS's decision to scrutinize tax-exemption applications from right-leaning groups. I submit that there is nothing wrong with that scrutiny. The "scandal" is that left-leaning groups do not appear to be undergoing the same level of scrutiny.

 

[ProdigalHorn]

I don't think the IRS has the right to ask what left-wingers pray about or what their members post on Facebook any more than they so right-wingers.

There is nothing wrong with advocacy groups that are involved in causes rather than endorsing or campaigning for a specific candidate. I'm not sure why we're so OK with the power of unions I'm our process but can't stand grass roots action groups. We need people more involved in the process, not less.

 

[Seattle Husker]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[NEWDOC2002]

There is a "separate" issue, maybe, but it doesn't make the other issue less "real". Does the intimidation and complete invasion of privacy not bother you because it wasn't against your side?

Any governmental agency at any level using intimidation of the general public as a tool should cause left or right leaning AMERICANS to pause and collectively reject this perversion of power.

You could deflect without starting your own thread you know.

 

[Murphy'sBoy]

Personally, I don't think political organizations should every get tax exemption status.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Agree and I will go further. All entities (including political, religious, charities, etc.) should pay taxes. That is my opinion.

 

[majorwhiteapples]

I agree with Murphy, all entities should be taxes, no one or no business or anybody should be tax exempt or not pay something into the system.

 

[ProdigalHorn]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Larry T. Spider]

The problem is that we then get the government trying to decide what is a worthy charity and what is not.

 

[AustinBat]

I don't get the outrage. Obama promised that he would punish his enemies. What is surprising about what happened?

 

[Mr. Deez]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Clean]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[NJlonghorn]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Seattle Husker]

The IRS investigation techniques as relayed by some on this board were certainly out-of-line. The fact that they focused on "Tea Party" and "Patriot" applications was also wrong.

Congress also setup the IRS for failure by writing the laws in a way that forced the IRS to play judge/jury on whether these organizations qualified for tax exempt status. When Congress added ambiguous qualifiers like "<50% political activities" as a qualifier for tax exempt status they bastardized the tax code. I've little doubt they did so to support their own political means.

Simply put, you're a charitable organization or not. You're a religious organization or not. Any political activities means you're neither and should absolutely be taxed.

 

[pasotex]

The real issue is actually donor lists. This should all be public. I also think all of these organizations should be taxed, but this is a trivial issue compared to secret political donations.