• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If Obama knew....

Vote:


  • Total voters
    59
1) Then why doesn't he take credit for it?
2) aaaaaaaah ... I see ... you're trying to sell the notion that a 3 year delay in granting 501c4 status by asking ridiculously onerous questions is not really rejecting the request.

501(c)(4) status is not granted... its presumed. You do not have to apply for it. You merely declare you are a 501(c)(4). Of course, the IRS can take that status away from you, but you own the status until that happens.

The reason there was no foul, is that no one lost their status as a result of this. They "crime" was they were asked a lot of questions. The link below is the actual "declaration" form.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/Form14449.pdf

501(c) organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

Attachments

  • Page 1 - Miller corres to Hon Oren Hatch.jpg
    Page 1 - Miller corres to Hon Oren Hatch.jpg
    98.5 KB · Views: 136
Last edited:
I suppose they thought the code was administered unfairly.

And do you suppose that govt putting pressure on some groups...and not others...is concerning?
 
No because they were also going after liberal, and progressive groups alike. The conservative groups were not singled out.
 
501(c)(4) status is not granted... its presumed. You do not have to apply for it. You merely declare you are a 501(c)(4). Of course, the IRS can take that status away from you, but you own the status until that happens.

The reason there was no foul, is that no one lost their status as a result of this. They "crime" was they were asked a lot of questions. The link below is the actual "declaration" form.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/Form14449.pdf

501(c) organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why do people request it?
Or to put it another way ... what do you think would happen to you if you declare you are, file your return that way, and then the IRS declares you're not?
And, further, seeing what we've seen so far, what do you think would happen to tea party groups who declare unilaterally they have 501c4 status?
 
A Mother Jones reader, I see.
You're being silly.

Uhhh well they did investigate liberal organizations as well.. So yea... But you can keep on believing whatever you believe.
 
No because they were also going after liberal, and progressive groups alike. The conservative groups were not singled out.

Really. Even though they specifically admitted "targeting" conservative groups. So, in essence, even in the face of an admission, people like you will still deny, deny, deny.
 
Uhhh well they did investigate liberal organizations as well.. So yea... But you can keep on believing whatever you believe.

WASHINGTON -- In the 27 months that the Internal Revenue Service put a hold on all Tea Party applications for non-profit status, it approved applications from similar liberal groups, a USA TODAY review of IRS data shows.

As applications from conservative groups sat in limbo, groups with obviously liberal names were approved in as little as nine months. With names including words like "Progress" or "Progressive," these groups applied for the same tax status and were engaged in the same kinds of activities as the conservative groups.

The controversial, 3-year-old strategy to manage the increasing number of political groups seeking tax-exempt status came under fire Tuesday. The agency's own inspector general blamed IRS leadership for "ineffective management."
 
Really. Even though they specifically admitted "targeting" conservative groups. So, in essence, even in the face of an admission, people like you will still deny, deny, deny.

Well lets see here when the IRS goes after both groups, and this 501(c)(4) stats is only supposed to be given to social welfare organizations and local associations of employees and these groups are supposed to be forbidden from endorsing and or aiding candidates for public office, but as we all know this is being abused by both liberal and conservative groups, it only makes sense that the IRS was scrutinizing them more closely. Hell its their job.
 
501(c)(4) status is not granted... its presumed. You do not have to apply for it. You merely declare you are a 501(c)(4). Of course, the IRS can take that status away from you, but you own the status until that happens.

The reason there was no foul, is that no one lost their status as a result of this. They "crime" was they were asked a lot of questions. The link below is the actual "declaration" form.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/Form14449.pdf

501(c) organization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Did you read that letter you posted?
 
Really. Even though they specifically admitted "targeting" conservative groups. So, in essence, even in the face of an admission, people like you will still deny, deny, deny.
An admission apparently isn't good enough for some fanboys ... that's what makes 'em fanboys.
 
Well lets see here when the IRS goes after both groups, and this 501(c)(4) stats is only supposed to be given to social welfare organizations and local associations of employees and these groups are supposed to be forbidden from endorsing and or aiding candidates for public office, but as we all know this is being abused by both liberal and conservative groups, it only makes sense that the IRS was scrutinizing them more closely. Hell its their job.

Let me spell it out for you....The IRS ADMITTED SPECIFICALLY TARGETING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS.
 
LEt me spell it out for you....The IRS ADMITTED SPECIFICALLY TARGETING CONSERVATIVE GROUPS.

Did i not disagree with that point? No, i didnt.
 
You proved it was false. Your inability to see that is troubling.:mrgreen:

I claimed that the IRS went after liberal and progressive groups to. They went after at least 3 we know of so far. Therefore its not false. You claimed they did not. I proved they did. If anything i could play this petty game and be the one calling you a liar. :mrgreen:
 
I claimed that the IRS went after liberal and progressive groups to. They went after at least 3 we know of so far. Therefore its not false. You claimed they did not. I proved they did. If anything i could play this petty game and be the one calling you a liar. :mrgreen:

Targeting three groups is a rounding error. Targeting 97 is targeting. Your claim is both false and silly. In the end, I don't think you're a liar; a liar would try something smarter.:mrgreen:
 
American?? What the heck?
 
Targeting three groups is a rounding error. Targeting 97 is targeting. Your claim is both false and silly. In the end, I don't think you're a liar; a liar would try something smarter.:mrgreen:
I dont get how this is so hard for you to understand. I claimed that they targetted progressive and liberal groups. You claimed that is false. I then proved they did. 3, 4, 7, 2 whatever number they still targeted them therefor its not false. :2wave:
Tea Party Group Screams IRS Persecution, But Judge Ruled They Illegally Aided the GOP in 2012

But im glad the IRS is doing its job i think they should target all 501 (c)(4) groups. Because its clear they break the law.
 
Back
Top Bottom