IRS's inaction on granting tax exemption status has non-profit news organizations worried
The IRS is stuck in a rut of its own making, and it appears Congress will have to come to the rescue.
December 31, 2011 at 07:00 PM
4 minute read
The IRS is stuck in a rut of its own making, and it appears Congress will have to come to the rescue. Apparently the agency has forgotten how to recognize noncommercial news organizations as exempt from tax. They have certainly done it before, as any schoolboy knows. The tax exemptions enjoyed by NPR, National Geographic, PBS, Consumer Reports, C-SPAN, etc. were acknowledged years ago and with little argument about them at the time.
So, why is it that the IRS is now sitting on the tax exemption applications of newer non-profit news organizations such as San Francisco Public Press, The Lens (New Orleans) and Investigative News Network? The legal issue seems to be that the IRS is now inexplicably reluctant to regard journalism as an “educational” activity and thereby qualify these new groups for exemption as charities under Section 501(c)(3) of the Tax Code. The mystery is compounded because though NPR may have gotten an exemption decades ago based on its educational activities, ProPublica, MinnPost, The Austin Bulldog (Texas) and Project Veritas got theirs just in the past few years. Yet, those non-profit journos are nearly identical in type to those being held in tax status limbo today. What changed?
We don't really know. But a good guess is that the IRS now sees these emerging non-profit newspapers and online services as doing exactly the same things as commercial newspapers. This is a blinkered view because it ignores the fact that the traditional economic model of newspapers has been blown up by technology. As advertising and readership decline, for-profit editors are dropping expensive investigative journalism and coverage of state legislatures and local governments. This is the gap the non-profit news groups are attempting to fill. They aren't covering sports, entertainment, or providing features such as comics and advice columns, or even the big local and national stories. They are not competing with the traditional news incumbents, and they are filling a demand among readers and viewers for their specialized coverage.
Another way to put it is that the free market has spoken, and it says it can no longer support journalism that does not pay for itself. Therefore, the market is responding by finding business structures that can survive economically while providing local news and investigative stories. Those structures tend to be non-profits that do not need to reward investors, and that rely on a mix of revenue streams including donations. But, as is so often the case, the law has lagged behind these market changes.
Hence, the significance of the IRS's inaction. These new non-profits will die on the vine without donations, and donations will be hard to come by if they are not tax-deductible. While the IRS dithers trying to figure out, once again, whether journalism fits into statutory language written 60 years ago, the natural free market forces are thwarted and the public's interest is disserved.
The solution is for Congress to save the IRS from engaging in any more definitional angst about the educational value of news reporting by creating a new section that would be numbered 501(c)(30) and be reserved specifically for journalism. Voila! Problem solved. They did it for cemetery companies, health co-ops and railroad retirees—surely noncommercial newsgathering and reporting should merit the same treatment.
A new Section 501(c)(30) reserved for journalism would also put to rest doubts about the tax status of all the existing non-profit news outlets created by the IRS's mysterious rethinking of the law. We in-house counsel for such organizations are understandably anxious when a cherished certainty such as our tax status becomes uncertain, as it now has. With a tweak of the law, Congress can foster a new wave of journalism forms, and assure the old ones.
Bruce D. Collins is corporate vice president and general counsel of C-SPAN, based in Washington, D.C. Email him at [email protected].
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
Pre-Internet High Court Ruling Hobbling Efforts to Keep Tech Giants from Using Below-Cost Pricing to Bury Rivals
6 minute readPreparing for 2025: Anticipated Policy Changes Affecting U.S. Businesses Under the Trump Administration
Senate Panel Postpones Vote on Reconfirmation of Democrat Crenshaw to SEC
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250