Home › Forums › Open Discussion › The IRS is an Evil, Left-Wing Weapon!
- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 24, 2013 at 4:00 am #790438
WorldCitizenParticipantAside from not knowing the acronym above, I gotta say I’m not only “super fine” with targeting groups I happen to not agree with, I’m also fine with targeting groups I happen to mostly agree with…so long as they’re pulling some sketchy shit that I am not allowed to get away with. Double that for organizations who are stupid enough to throw up the kind of red flags that these groups did.
And no, the IRS ‘ain’t Nazi Germany.
May 24, 2013 at 4:18 am #790439
wakefloodParticipantWC, I have to say you’ve got WAY more capacity to attempt to both address the silly hyperbole AND overlook the fact that Zone doesn’t actually READ what you so intentionally write. (Which is a pity, as you address his crap with specifics that he usually ignores.)
After his uber and impeachment post, followed swiftly by invoking Nazis, I’m done. There’s no there, there. But kudos for your effort!
May 24, 2013 at 5:44 am #790440
waterworldParticipantThe part of what ZOne is saying that I understand is this, although this may not be at all how ZOne would put it: Selective enforcement is an abuse of power. If there are ten thousand organizations out there that have applied for 501(c)(4) status and the only ones the IRS sets aside for extra-special-super-duper investigation and scrutiny or audits are ones with names that sound something like “Tea Party,” then there’s a problem.
As for how big a problem it is, I think that could depend on some other factors. For example, if instead of it being Tea Party organizations that were receiving all of the extra attention and scrutiny, it had been political groups of, say, Americans of Chinese ancestry, then the issue would be one of constitutional magnitude, a clear civil rights violation.
Or, to put it a different way, in response to JoB’s question “when is investigating and prosecuting tax cheats an abuse of government power?” Well, it would be an abuse of power if the only tax cheats that the government investigated and prosecuted were black. Or, in a different context altogether, it’s an abuse of power when the only people whose cars are pulled over and searched for drugs are Hispanic. Or, it’s an abuse of power when the only members of the armed forces who cannot safely report having been sexually assaulted are the women.
But the Tea Party isn’t a protected class, so it’s not as big a deal as it would be if a protected class were involved. Certainly not as big a deal from a purely legal perspective. Still, selective enforcement on the basis of political leaning is a form of discrimination and it would be a terrible and dumb policy.
Another important factor, at least in my mind, would be the actual intent of the people who made the decisions, to the extent that can be discerned after-the-fact. Was there actually some kind of directive from a high level within the IRS to single out “Tea-Party-like” organizations? Or was there an intent to increase scrutiny across the board for political organizations that were using the 501(c)(4) form improperly? (Maybe some of you know the answer to that; I don’t.) Even if more of the scrutiny was on Tea Party organizations, if the IRS was also looking at non-Tea Party groups — maybe even ultra-liberal groups — that would look a whole lot better to me.
I totally agree with those of you who say there is nothing wrong with enforcing the IRS rules and that in fact there should be more enforcement of the 501(c)(4) rules to exclude any fundamentally political organizations that are seeking tax exempt status. But we really must insist that the IRS exercise its powers neutrally. There’s nothing neutral about singling out just one type of group or organization for enforcement actions, even if the groups the IRS selected deserved the attention.
May 24, 2013 at 5:48 am #790441
dobroParticipant“So you all agree that it’s super ok for groups you disagree with to be targeted and abused by TPTB.”
No, no one agreed with that.
“…call me crazy…”
OK, you’re crazy.
May 24, 2013 at 5:50 am #790442
wakefloodParticipantWW, I really want to say…DUH!…but I won’t.
May 24, 2013 at 7:39 am #790443
WorldCitizenParticipantIsn’t selective enforcement kind of the point? I mean, if you’re doing something so blatantly stupid as raising red flags so high and bright that you can’t help but attract the attention of the IRS, then don’t you deserve the extra attention?
Isn’t having a beacon flashing in the night a reason for people to come looking for you??
Look, I’m not saying the IRS is composed of automatons who have no personal political leanings. They’re people with the same prejudices all of us have in one way or another. But, because the power was used to single out some incredibly short-sighted groups who were basically screaming, “Hey stupid…look at me!!!” doesn’t mean they should be taken in the town square and tarred and feathered. In fact, I think the should be commended for opening up the conversation to the abuses of the system as a whole…regardless of their perceived intent.
I mean, seriously…fuck these people. They are taking their money (some of it substantial) and using it to privately further their self interests which are ruining this country. And it should be stopped…quickly. Both sides are guilty. It just seems one side is far more loud and stupid about it.
May 24, 2013 at 7:45 am #790444
WorldCitizenParticipantAnd I think we all can take the universal condemnation from both sides of Congress as testament to how much they value these groups. Who wants to take bets a few heads roll and nothing changes?
May 24, 2013 at 7:45 am #790445
WorldCitizenParticipant(Double Post)
May 24, 2013 at 3:34 pm #790446
JoBParticipanti so wanted ZOne’s post to be the tongue in cheek attempt at humor i took it for
May 24, 2013 at 5:46 pm #790447
ZOneParticipant1. waterworld ~ Thank you for so intelligently and calmly clarifying the primary point I so feebly was attempting to get across. Your last paragraph is brilliant IMHO: (neutrality is indeed key)
Last Paragraph of waterworld:
“I totally agree with those of you who say there is nothing wrong with enforcing the IRS rules and that in fact there should be more enforcement of the 501(c)(4) rules to exclude any fundamentally political organizations that are seeking tax exempt status. But we really must insist that the IRS exercise its powers neutrally. There’s nothing neutral about singling out just one type of group or organization for enforcement actions, even if the groups the IRS selected deserved the attention.”
2. I haven’t noticed any discussion from any of you being aware of epically rare fact that the IRS issued a Letter of Apology, admitted “…it was AN ERROR IN JUDGMENT” to target groups with “Tea Party, “Patriot” for extra scrutiny”.
That problem was compounded when examiners asked more intrusive questions in what’s known as a “development” process. “Some of the development letters that were send were far too broad and include things like asking for the organization’s DONOR LIST, which is not generally what we do,” Lerner said.
These groups were also asked to produce their Facebook and Twitter pages…Good Grief!
There were hundreds of articles on this rare event but here are a couple:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324787004578495412169443502.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/10/irs-apology_n_3253001.html
3. Also rare and of note to why this issue is serious: The head of this IRS group who targeted possible conservative groups TOOK THE FIFTH and refused to testify:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/22/politics/irs-targeting/index.html
And was placed on “administrative leave”.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57585938/irs-official-lois-lerner-placed-on-leave/
Thankfully, even though WC and others think this action warranted and worthy, most CITIZENS recognize as abuse of power
As to the poem, I used the original version in hopes that it would be of interest as the derivation of the many more modern modifications and not to equate the IRS with NaziS…Duh! The point of the poem remains the slippery slope to unwarranted abuse of human rights which will inevitably occur that if you say nothing about abuse toward groups or individuals who are targeted just because you disagree with the group or you are not a member of that particular group. Someday you will be a member of a targeted group. Best to insist that TPTB neutrally enforce ~ FORCE.
May 24, 2013 at 6:11 pm #790448
wakefloodParticipantGood lord, why are people spending hundreds of words to say, “the rules are there for good reason, and they should be enforced fairly”.?!?!?
You want a slippery slope, Zone? Why not try individual liberty vs just about every SCOTUS decision in the last decade (Citizens United anyone?), or the Patriot Act, thank you Congress, or gutting banking regulations, no prosecutions of Wall Street, etc, etc… You know, stuff that affects everyone??
May 24, 2013 at 6:24 pm #790449
ZOneParticipantI could not agree more with you wakeflood that the issues you so intelligently identify are the true moral hazards our country faces exponentially horrid beyond imagination and I wish I knew how to fight them. Especially the “Too big to Jail” reality alowing heinious bankers, brokers, mortage criminals to remain free. The Patriot Act is frightening and a hazard to our freedom and allows abuse of power exponential levels beyond the IRS issue.
May 27, 2013 at 3:26 pm #790450May 27, 2013 at 4:15 pm #790451
ZOneParticipantThanks for the link to this article TanDL. Of course this issue discussed above deals with “pre-crime” discrimination ala Philip K. Dick’s story which was bastardized in Tom Cruise’s movie, “Minority Report”. The IRS had to apologize because it rejected applicants because they thought them likely to break the law. The article primarily discusses how groups broke the law after they were issued the status.
Personally, I think ALL 503(C)(4) groups should be denied and disbanded. Purportedly these groups promote the social good and are allowed to participate in political activity if not their primary function and if they do not support a specific candidate. These groups have attracted huge amounts of dark pool money primarily because donor lists are not disclosed as they are if one donates directly to a candidate. Ergo, lobbyists, big corporations, criminal thugs and so on can use huge amounts of $$ to hide yet influence issues impacting all our lives. I am for open and transparent disclosure so we may discern if groups promoting this or that are puppets of or “Owe” dark pool powers who now may hide their influence. It has almost nothing to do with tax exemption as taxes woiuld be deminimus.
May 27, 2013 at 6:24 pm #790452
JoBParticipantZOne
so let me understand this..
you think the IRS targeting groups formed for the purpose of funneling dark pool money into political contests is bad
but
” I think ALL 503(C)(4) groups should be denied and disbanded.”
you would disband charitable status for all civic groups because some of them now break the law?
isn’t that just a little hypocritical?
May 27, 2013 at 7:10 pm #790453
ZOneParticipantcorrection…I am talking about 501(c) (4)groups
Well, yes I agree that would be extreme to omit all (4) groups and perhaps just ommiting the right to any involvement in political campaigns would solve the dark pool problem. Another way to shine light on who the puppet masters are would be to require public disclosure of donor lists, but I think this is unsafe and might expose citizens who suport this or that to be abused by the more powerful who do not so support and are prone to want to destroy opponents.
– Do you think the vast dark pool $$ is a serious issue?
– How to best ensure a few rich groups do not scew rational thought by paying billions to fund deceptive propoganda.?
This IRS section is vast and I was looking for a place for the non political social groups. Following are the choices:
According to the IRS Publication 557†, in the Organization Reference Chart section, the following is an exact list of 501(c) organization types and their corresponding descriptions.[1]
501(c)(1) — Corporations Organized Under Act of Congress (including Federal Credit Unions)
501(c)(2) — Title Holding Corporation for Exempt Organization[2]
501(c)(3) — Religious, Educational, Charitable, Scientific, Literary, Testing for Public Safety, to Foster National or International Amateur Sports Competition, or Prevention of Cruelty to Children or Animals Organizations
501(c)(4) — Civic Leagues, Social Welfare Organizations, and Local Associations of Employees
501(c)(5) — Labor, Agricultural, and Horticultural Organizations
501(c)(6) — Business Leagues, Chambers of Commerce, Real Estate Boards, etc.
501(c)(7) — Social and Recreational Clubs
501(c)(8) — Fraternal Beneficiary Societies and Associations
501(c)(9) — Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Associations
501(c)(10) — Domestic Fraternal Societies and Associations
501(c)(11) — Teachers’ Retirement Fund Associations
501(c)(12) — Benevolent Life Insurance Associations, Mutual Ditch or Irrigation Companies, Mutual or Cooperative Telephone Companies, etc.
501(c)(13) — Cemetery Companies
501(c)(14) — State-Chartered Credit Unions, Mutual Reserve Funds
501(c)(15) — Mutual Insurance Companies or Associations
501(c)(16) — Cooperative Organizations to Finance Crop Operations
501(c)(17) — Supplemental Unemployment Benefit Trusts
501(c)(18) — Employee Funded Pension Trust (created before June 25, 1959)
501(c)(19) — Post or Organization of Past or Present Members of the Armed Forces
501(c)(20) — Group Legal Services Plan Organizations
501(c)(21) — Black lung Benefit Trusts
501(c)(22) — Withdrawal Liability Payment Fund
501(c)(23) — Veterans Organization (created before 1880)
501(c)(24) — Section 4049 ERISA Trusts
501(c)(25) — Title Holding Corporations or Trusts with Multiple Parents
501(c)(26) — State-Sponsored Organization Providing Health Coverage for High-Risk Individuals
501(c)(27) — State-Sponsored Workers’ Compensation Reinsurance Organization
501(c)(28) — National Railroad Retirement Investment Trust
501(c)(29) — Qualified Nonprofit Health Insurance
I’ve started to research all these groups and so many are problematic, but only the (4) launder/funnel so much black/dark pool money.
May 27, 2013 at 10:04 pm #790454
JoBParticipantfor a while i was president of a Minnesota chapter of Women of Today… a 501 c 4 organization… and i am sure there are a lot of civic organizations that are very similar.
I too am not happy about the dark money
nor about organizations that are formed primarily to feed that money into politics..
which is why i am not so incensed about the “targeting” of such organizations for review.
May 27, 2013 at 10:06 pm #790455
JoBParticipantZOne.. before you ask.. we taught organizational and leadership skills, taught fundraising skills, held fundraisers and donated money and projects to charitable organizations.
my favorite project was a Red Hat photo shoot at our local senior home.
May 28, 2013 at 12:16 am #790456
ZOneParticipantJoB, I sincerely admire and applaud your work with Women of Today. I especially like it when these special non profits are funded locally by like minded citizens who seek to provide services/education not often easily available due to lack of budget $$ from local governments or because For Profits make such services/education unaffordable.
Ironically, prior to receiving your post, I was thinking of postulating a day in a decade or so when the word “Women” or “Mothers” might be targeted for special review by a yet unknown Power in charge…
Ridiculous you may think…
ok, do we both agree that in many Sovereign nations and almost countless jurisdictions (ie., some islands in Indonesia, the Philippines) globally, women have few rights and are considered property? Good grief, even in the US women were essentially property without rights less than a century ago. Right now, would these Powers want to delay for special review before granting tax exemption?
Is it so absurd to imagine that in time some dark pool funded group or some other puppet master might take political correctness to the extreme that many are convinced that no group teaching women ideas in conflict with certain ethnic/religious groups be allowed to have Federal approval via a Federal tax exemption? There are groups here fighting for a certain kind of law (starts with Sh)be applied in the US when adherents are accused?
Ok, ok, my point is even though it is tempting to turn the other way if a group you don’t like is illegally targeted, this is very dangerous and I think extremely unwise. Just think of the USSR, China, all the juntas just over the past 20 years…one day you are pc…the next you are dead, a political prisoner or worse until/if your peers are back in vogue again.
Plus know that the dark pool masters, the global puppet masters such as those who demand the sovereign nation of Cyprus must hand over all its gold, TPTB are essentially apolitical. it is all about POWER and $$$ so they HEDGE and even our large corporations hedge so that their plans will succeed no matter which US political party happens to be in power.
May 28, 2013 at 5:07 am #790457
JoBParticipantZOne..
i don’t think we have to wait for specialized targeting of organizations containing the words women or mothers, do you ? Something tells me i have seen this before……
your analogy falls flat. If organizations containing the words women or mothers were primarily engaged in defrauding the US government of taxes.. then i would be all for targeting them.
As it happens they are not, but a good number of the organizations targeted are in fact doing just that.
failing overturning citizens united… an act of subversion which i confess i am up to my armpits in.. i am more than happy to use the offices of the IRS…
i suspect the woman who planted the idea in the agent’s ear might have been better designated a trollop… but i could always be wrong.
after all, not all women are subversive ;-(
sigh.. it is my greatest regret that i didn’t teach the women of Minnesota subversion along with empowerment… ethics can be a terrible burden :(
May 28, 2013 at 6:42 am #790458
oddrealityParticipantFunny to me that conservatives think that they are the only ones that would use the word “patriot” in their organizations name.What about groups like “Americans against the Tea Party”….they would have been targeted also had they been trying to file for that status with the IRS..no?
IRS was doing their job. So sick of all this fake “scandal” from the right.
May 28, 2013 at 5:36 pm #790459
ZOneParticipantoddreality,
surely you are intelligent enough to ascertain that it was the IRS, not any “Tea Party” individual or group who broke the law and chose to segregate applications who had a name containing the word “Patriot”. Thus, your point is innane and s****d. It never ceases to amaze me how hate-think people scew facts. Must you all be so blinded by hate of certain people who think differently than you?
May 28, 2013 at 5:43 pm #790460
wakefloodParticipantUm…Zone…might want to re-read that Odd post again.
All it said was ANY group that wanted to get flagged for further “review” could do so by simply putting “Patriot” in their title. It’s called self-identification.
I have no idea what the h*ll you were talking about with inane and skewed… Oy.
May 28, 2013 at 5:44 pm #790461
ZOneParticipantJoB, sigh…am disappointed to learn your system of moral principals and cultural values is so shallow and narrow to enable you to use “ethics” in the context you related above. Very sad.
Enough said from stupid little me on this issue so I refer you to the more intelligent posts above #28 and #36.Signing off so you all may smugly gloat, sing together or whatever…have fun!
BTW, I am so far away politically from the conservative camp politically I make you guys seem uber-conservative. So stop being so flip in assuming that if someone disagrees with you they must be evil and conservative…silly.
May 28, 2013 at 6:51 pm #790462
oddrealityParticipantZOne,So you DO believe that conservative groups are the only groups that would use the words “patriot” or “teaparty” in their names?? LOL!!
It is not that you disagree with people here ZOne, it’s that you fail to read what we write.Makes for terse conversations.
Surely.. [don’t call me Shirley] I AM intelligent enough…really I am.Are you??
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.