PDA

View Full Version : Regime using the IRS as a political weapon?



LWW
02-28-2012, 04:04 AM
Straight from the Clinton regime playbook? (http://biggovernment.com/cowens/2012/02/27/is-the-irs-attempting-to-intimidate-local-tea-parties/)

Qtec
02-28-2012, 04:18 AM
What a joke you are.

Are TP orgs/ astroturf entities immune from inspection?

Q

LWW
02-28-2012, 04:26 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What a joke you are.

Are TP orgs/ astroturf entities immune from inspection?

Q </div></div>

In this case, yes.

If donations are non deductible ... under what moral or legal power does the regime demand to see a list of donors?

Qtec
02-28-2012, 04:40 AM
Are they not a political party? They say they are.

They run ads. They support candidates.

Why the secrecy if they have nothing to hide?

Q

LWW
02-28-2012, 06:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Are they not a political party? They say they are.

They run ads. They support candidates.

Why the secrecy if they have nothing to hide?

Q </div></div>

Good point ... why doesn't Obama release his academic records, and health records, and birth records?

Why the double standard Snoop?

Qtec
02-28-2012, 07:12 AM
LOL.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Good point ... why doesn't Obama release his academic records, and health records, and birth records? </div></div>

Why should he? What's that got to do with the TP?


NOTHING.

Try keeping to the topic for once, if you can.

Q

eg8r
02-28-2012, 09:16 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why should he?</div></div>You were the one that stupidly stated...<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why the secrecy if they have nothing to hide?
</div></div>

eg8r

Soflasnapper
02-28-2012, 10:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What a joke you are.

Are TP orgs/ astroturf entities immune from inspection?

Q </div></div>

In this case, yes.

If donations are non deductible ... under what moral or legal power does the regime demand to see a list of donors? </div></div>

The letter linked at the source explains the legal issues involved that make such an inquiry germane. If you've read it, what fault do you find in the statement of tax law and attendant reasoning there?

LWW
02-28-2012, 04:50 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why should he?</div></div>You were the one that stupidly stated...<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why the secrecy if they have nothing to hide?
</div></div>

eg8r </div></div>

With doublethink, all things are valid.

LWW
02-28-2012, 04:52 PM
Did you read the letter ... or just that it was signed by six moonbat crazy leftists?

Soflasnapper
02-29-2012, 11:17 AM
Stop trolling me, it's ridiculous.

Of course I read the letter, which is why I mention there is a legal issue at stake. I always read the links, so you can stop asking that ridiculous question. I usually find and post quotes FROM your links to show why your take is false, as you may remember on multiple occasions.

The question about their tax status is that politicking is only allowed now (when it wasn't originally) IF IT IS NOT THE MAJORITY OF THEIR ACTIVITIES. If it IS the majority of their activities, they lose their tax-exempt status.

According to the letter writers, at least. If you think that's wrong, please explain using citations of experts in the law. It's almost certain that they are correct, in my opinion.

But you don't want to talk factual details, as that is not favorable ground for you, so you hurl your crap around, chimp in a zoo style? Please remember to wash your hands before eating.

LWW
02-29-2012, 03:45 PM
HERE YOU GO (http://www.independentsector.org/uploads/Policy_PDFs/LettertoIRS501c4s_021612.pdf)

Make your claim from that as to whether or not they should be allowed to view a donor list.

And, if in some spoonfed moonbat crazy leftist site you can find a convoluted argument for this, explain why the same argument apply to Gyorgy Soros and his array of groups?

Soflasnapper
02-29-2012, 05:42 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>IRS Targeting Soros, Conservatives for Political Contributions</span>

Thursday, 12 May 2011 11:57 PM

Invoking a provision of tax law that has rarely been enforced, the Internal Revenue Service is moving on big political contributors who could owe millions of dollars in contributions to nonprofit advocacy groups playing an increasing role in American politics, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>The New York Times reports.

Among the names listed in the Times article was liberal billionaire financier George Soros and the Koch brothers</span>, who are well-known contributors to conservative causes. The IRS told the Times it had sent letters to five donors, who were not identified, informing them that their contributions may be subject to gift taxes depending on whether the donations exceeded limits under the tax laws.

Advocacy groups are now drawing more scrutiny, from President Obama as well as others, as they have proliferated and funneled vast sums of money in support of campaigns and causes, without having to publicly disclose their donors, the Times reports.

Other conservative groups could be targeted – groups like Crossroads GPS, which has ties to the Republican strategist Karl Rove, and Americans for Prosperity, backed by David Koch and his brother Charles.

Spokesmen for the Koch brothers and for Soros would not comment to the Times as to whether they had paid gift taxes on these types of donations, or whether they had received letters from the I.R.S.

The timing of the agency’s moves, as the 2012 election cycle gets under way, is prompting some tax law and campaign finance experts to question whether the I.R.S. could be sending a signal in an effort to curtail big donations, the Times reported.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>A spokeswoman for the I.R.S., said that the inquiries were initiated by agency employees, not White House or other Obama administration officials, “as part of their increased efforts in the area of nonfiling of gift and estate tax returns.”</span>

The letters informed donors that investigations had been opened to determine why a gift tax form had not been filed, and requested that donors submit records of all donations in the year 2008, according to a redacted copy obtained by The New York Times.

The White House would not comment. Some members of Congress have been asking the I.R.S. to investigate the tax-exempt status of these groups, too, although lawmakers have also cautioned that since the Nixon years, the agency has been strictly prohibited from what could be considered politically motivated inquiries.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Many organizations being scrutinized were established as nonprofit corporations under a section of the tax law, 501(c)(4), and the rules governing them say their primary purpose cannot be political.</span>

In general, individuals incur gift taxes of 35 percent on any amount exceeding $13,000 in a year, with a limit for couples of $26,000. A lifetime exemption covers $5 million in gifts — to be reduced to $1 million in 2013 — but experts say many wealthy donors are likely to have used that in their estate plans, according to the Times.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>“Congress specifically exempted donors to 527 organizations from the gift tax in 2000, but it didn’t exempt contributions to (c)(4) groups because there wasn’t an issue at the time,” Alan P. Dye, a lawyer who represents a number of conservative advocacy groups, told the Times.</span>

Now that the Citizens United case permits big donors like corporations and unions to spend money in elections, Dye added, “I think it’s going to be really interesting to see how this plays out in Congress or the courts.”

Read more on Newsmax.com: IRS Targeting Soros, Conservatives for Political Contributions
Important: Do You Support Pres. Obama's Re-Election? Vote Here Now!
</div></div>

Newsmax, here (http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/irs-times-political-contributions/2011/05/12/id/396185)

LWW
03-01-2012, 03:35 AM
How much lamer can you get.

The law requires donors of more than $13K to be released ... what does that have to do with getting full donor lists?

What's that?

Nothing?

You were simply obligated to defend the regime no matter what?

But ... I already knew that.

Qtec
03-01-2012, 05:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">How much lamer can you get.

The law requires donors of more than $13K to be released ... what does that have to do with getting full donor lists?

What's that?

Nothing?

You were simply obligated to defend the regime no matter what?

But ... I already knew that. </div></div>


LOL

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 26pt'>IRS Targeting Soros,</span> Conservatives for Political Contributions </div></div>

Your claim.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is the IRS Attempting to Intimidate Local Tea Parties?
</div></div>


LOL

Do you ever check things out?


Eh....................no.


Q

Soflasnapper
03-01-2012, 11:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> How much lamer can you get.

The law requires donors of more than $13K to be released ... what does that have to do with getting full donor lists?

What's that?

Nothing? </div></div>

It's got everything to do with it, for these really rich guys.

This will never become an issue for you, so you don't actually ever need to know it personally.

However, as it's the answer to your question, I'll provide it.

Under the Uniform Gift Act, the amount of money one can give without owing a gift tax is the same set amount for the estate exclusion from estate tax, set at $5 million overall for the last couple of years, and due to be reduced to $1.25 million or something when/if the estate tax break expires without renewal, as of the end of this calendar year.

That's a very large difference, so people with estates in excess of $5 million have been routinely TAKING THAT EXEMPTED ESTATE EXCLUSION (aka total gift amount) NOW, or in recent years in the couple of years' window for which it's been in place, and ahead of the possible reduction in that exclusion/lifetime gifting amount.

IF ONE HAS USED THE ENTIRE $5 MILLION exclusion by gifting that whole amount already, then NO GIFT can be made beyond that without triggering the gift tax (currently at 35%). That's true even if the additional gift amount per person is at or below the normally allowed $13k annual level (actually double that for a couple, as each person may give that to the same individual or group).

Given that the very wealthy are among the large donors to these orgs, many have likely taken their full lifetime-capped gifting amount allowed already, and therefore owe gift tax on what would normally be gifts below the gift tax threshhold.

WHICH of them have done so? Impossible to tell without the records and an investigation. So, they've asked for the records and will then do the investigation, not only of Tea Party groups, but as the NY Times reported, and as Newsmax re-reported, and which you missed, of Soros and his groups as well.

In other words (h/t to Sean Hannity for allowing the use of his catch phrase), all of your stated concerns are based on a studied position of ignorance.