Campaign Finance Disclosure and Section 527 of the Code: A Look at the District Court\u27s Opinion in \u3cem\u3eNational Federation of Republican Assemblies\u3c/em\u3e

This report examines the decision of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama in National Federation of Republican Assemblies v. United States, which dealt with section 527 political organizations

Taxpayer Standing and \u3cem\u3eDaimlerChrysler v. Cuno:\u3c/em\u3e Where Do We Go From Here?

In granting certiorari in the case of Daimler-Chrysler Corp. v. Cuno, the Supreme Court asked the parties to brief whether respondents have standing to challenge Ohio\u27s investment tax credit. This report applies modern standing doctrine to the Cuno case and concludes that the Cuno plaintiffs do no have standing to raise their claims in federal court. Moreover, the authors write, allowing the Cuno plaintiffs\u27 case to be resolved in federal court would open the federal court system to a wide range of taxpayer challenges better left to the political branches of government. Nevertheless, they recognize that there may be other litigants that would have standing to challenge Ohio\u27s investment tax credit in federal court

The 2013 IRS Crisis: Where Do We Go From Here?

This article argues that the IRS’s new proposed regulation on candidate-related political activities is a good first step. It creates a bright-line standard that is easy to apply and will reduce concerns that the IRS is manipulating the enforcement process for political gain. The regulation addresses serious concerns that some independent groups are circumventing disclosure laws in the code. These groups are improperly arguing that they qualify as social welfare organizations when in fact they are political organizations subject to disclosure under section 527. A better solution would be for Congress to pass broad-based campaign disclosure laws that would apply regardless of the type of entity engaged in the activity. Absent broad-based disclosure, the IRS has the responsibility to enforce the restrictions contained in the code. Under the proposed regulation, organizations wishing to engage in candidate-related political activities may still do so. They simply must do so through a section 527 political organization and disclose their contributions and expenditures. However, absent broad-based disclosure, groups will seek out other entity structures to engage in non-disclosed candidate advocacy

Political Campaigning by Churches and Charities: Hazardous for 501(c)(3)s, Dangerous for Democracy

Nonprofit section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating or intervening in an election on behalf of a candidate for public office. Despite this prohibition, 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations have become increasingly active in political campaigns. Many organizations are either ignoring the political campaign ban or are using issue discussion or lobbying as a means of promoting candidates and testing the limits of the prohibition. Current scholarship surrounding the political campaign ban argues that the ban is either unconstitutional or inappropriate as a matter of public policy. This article argues that the ban is both meritorious and constitutional. It argues that taxpayer subsidized section 501(c)(3) organizations should not be permitted to intervene in political campaigns and that allowing them to do so will pose significant risks for the democratic system in the United States. It further argues that enforcement efforts with regard to the political campaign ban should be made public and delegated to an independent commission, outside the IRS, charged with enforcing campaign related prohibitions in the Internal Revenue Code