mbow30
Spudmeister Supreme
you're such a windbag.
following the decision in citizens united social advocacy organizations, which were recognized as social welfare org's and granted special status under s 501(c)(4) of the IRC, became more prominent political vehicles ... colloquially these are what are called 'super pacs'...
501(c)(4) corps are distinguished from 501(c)(3) corps -- what we normally think of as charities -- based on being disallowed (generally) from issuing tax receipts. but they enjoy tax exempt status.
the irs has always, ALWAYS scrutinized charitable status because of the tax benefits it confers. they obviously placed closer scrutiny on (4)'s following the decision in citizens united, which basically said that the government cannot restrain corproate political donations or the behaviour of corporate donors; the effect was increased use of these vehicles for political ends (since the 'social welfare' distinction is kind of blurry).
closer scrutiny was placed on status for all similar organizations. the problem was a directive... to this point, evidence suggests only in a limited number of irs offices... to focus specifically on organizations taht were identifiably conservative/tea party supporters, based on their names.
it is unclear if these organizations were disproportionately rejected. what we do know is that even left wing organizations have been denied status.
that isn't bs. that's cold hard fact.
http://www.salon.com/2013/05/15/meet_the_group_the_irs_actually_revoked_democrats/
