IRS apologizes for scrutinizing conservative groups
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has fired up conservative political groups.
May 13, 2013 at 06:45 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has fired up conservative political groups.
On Friday, the agency apologized for flagging about 300 groups with the words “tea party” or “patriot” in their names for extra scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status.
The IRS said the flagging took place during the 2012 election campaigns but that its actions weren't politically motivated. Lois Lerner, head of the IRS tax-exempt organizations division, told reporters that the agency “made some mistakes” and that “some people didn't use good judgment.”
The apology comes after the IRS previously denied that it had targeted any political groups. Not surprisingly, many conservatives aren't happy. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell is calling for the White House to conduct a transparent review of the agency. And a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, an umbrella organization for more than 3,000 local groups, said the agency workers responsible for the flagging should either be dismissed or resign.
Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters that the Obama administration feels the matter is “of concern” and “inappropriate,” and that the president would expect action to clear up what happened.
Applications for tax-exempt, or “social welfare,” organizations doubled from 2010 to 2012, and many of the latest groups are created for public issue advocacy and political campaigns. The IRS allows such groups to exist as long as social welfare remains their main mission. The agency attempted to centralize applications for further review to ensure groups were properly designated. “While centralizing cases for consistency made sense, the way we initially centralized them did not,” the IRS said in a statement.
Read Reuters and the Wall Street Journal for more information.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of the IRS and non-profits, read:
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has fired up conservative political groups.
On Friday, the agency apologized for flagging about 300 groups with the words “tea party” or “patriot” in their names for extra scrutiny when they applied for tax-exempt status.
The IRS said the flagging took place during the 2012 election campaigns but that its actions weren't politically motivated. Lois Lerner, head of the IRS tax-exempt organizations division, told reporters that the agency “made some mistakes” and that “some people didn't use good judgment.”
The apology comes after the IRS previously denied that it had targeted any political groups. Not surprisingly, many conservatives aren't happy. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell is calling for the White House to conduct a transparent review of the agency. And a co-founder of the Tea Party Patriots, an umbrella organization for more than 3,000 local groups, said the agency workers responsible for the flagging should either be dismissed or resign.
Press Secretary Jay Carney told reporters that the Obama administration feels the matter is “of concern” and “inappropriate,” and that the president would expect action to clear up what happened.
Applications for tax-exempt, or “social welfare,” organizations doubled from 2010 to 2012, and many of the latest groups are created for public issue advocacy and political campaigns. The IRS allows such groups to exist as long as social welfare remains their main mission. The agency attempted to centralize applications for further review to ensure groups were properly designated. “While centralizing cases for consistency made sense, the way we initially centralized them did not,” the IRS said in a statement.
Read Reuters and the Wall Street Journal for more information.
For more InsideCounsel coverage of the IRS and non-profits, read:
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 AllSenators Grill Visa, Mastercard Execs on Alleged Anticompetitive Practices, Fees
Trump's SEC Likely to Halt 'Off-Channel' Texting Probe That's Led to Billions in Fines
Trump Likely to Keep Up Antitrust Enforcement, but Dial Back the Antagonism
5 minute readFTC Sues Cash-Advance Fintech Dave, Says It Deceives the 'Financially Vulnerable'
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
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