DATELINE: February 24, 2010, Chicago
The folks in the EO division of the IRS must be unhappy today. From their standpoint, the worst of all possible worlds have collided—religion, politics and taxes. That vortex scares the hell out of IRS officials. Bad enough to be forced to define what a church or religion is, now add politicians to the mix, particularly...
The Desktop Guide is Quickly Becoming the Must Have Guide for Nonprofit Executives Jack Siegel's book, A Desktop Guide for Nonprofit Directors, Officers, and Advisors: Avoiding Trouble While Doing Good, has quickly become the go-to guide for nonprofit executives and advisors. So what are people saying about the Guide? In the October 2007 edition of the The Federal Lawyer, New York lawyer George W. Gowen and nonprofit authority, wrote:
Some of our readers have followed the link to the Amazon.com Web site, but apparently have not bought the Guide. If they were turned off by the price, they should reconsider. One prominent attorney in the exempt organization field grabbed a review copy of the Guide and couldn't put it down. She has instructed a number of her clients to buy it, pointing out to them that for less than 1/2 hour of her billable time, they receive a lesson (and resource) that tells it like she would like it told. If you are starting a new charity, the Guide could save you thousands of dollars in legal fees by teaching you how to better utilize your legal counsel and framing the issues so you don't spin your wheels at $400 an hour. |
the ones that set your agency’s budget.
You’ve probably heard of that house in Washington, D.C.
where a group of conservative legislators reside. It has been the center of conservative Republican infidelity
a la South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford (sought "counseling" at the house following revelations of his Argentine lady friend), Nevada Senator John Ensign (resided there), and Mississippi
Representative Charles Pickering, Jr. (alleged to have entertained his mistress there).
We can only wonder whether they have a communal bathroom with stalls
similar to the ones in the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport. It may surprise you that this den of iniquity and Republican
hypocrisy is owned by the C Street Center, which apparently claims it is a
church or religious organization. We
are unable to verify this by reference to a Form 990 because the group
apparently claims it is exempt from filing a Form 990 as a
church, but it is listed in Publication 78. The Washington Post reported
yesterday that a group of Ohio ministers has filed a complaint with the IRS
demanding that the IRS investigate the C Street Center’s claimed status as a
tax-exempt entity. Peter Slevin, C
Street House Target of Clergy’s IRS Complaint (February 23, 2010). Interestingly, many if not all of these
religious leaders comprise a group that has been dubbed the Dirty 31. They actually operate under the moniker "Clergy VOICE." When it comes to controversy, Marcus Owens is always willing
to step into the fray. The former
director of the IRS’s EO division is providing the Ohio ministers with counsel. His successors at the IRS must be
thrilled with him. Now they get to
investigate members of the Congress.
Lucky them. Seems the problem is that the church dormitory is not open
to the public for religious services. Nor does it have any recognized creed or form of worship or distinct ecclesiastical government.
It apparently conducts no religious education, nor does it promulgate
religious teachings. C Street
apparently has claimed or at least tried to create the impression that it is
somehow affiliated with an evangelical Christian network called the Fellowship
Foundation, but Richard Carver, the president of the Fellowship Foundation,
claims there is no affiliation. With Owens involved, it comes as no surprise that the complaint is well written and grounded in case law and IRS doctrine. In addition to getting into the definition of church and religion, the complaint also raises questions of private benefit, eligible charitable class, the operational test, and violations of public policy. Although the complaint is handicapped by lack of financial information, it raises the possibility that the center is a private foundation and that it has engaged in self-dealing transactions. While we are obviously having a lot of fun with this story,
there is a serious side to it.
According to the reporting, nobody knows who owns the house or who is
funding the activities going on there.
This opens up the possibility that the politicians residing in
the house are using a charity to avoid public disclosure of what might be charitably
characterized as campaign contributions.
If the contributions are better characterized as campaign contributions, the center donors may be inappropriately deducting what are campaign contributions or lobbying expenditures as charitable contributions. At the end of the day, the more appropriate agency to conduct the
investigation might be the Justice Department. Apparently some of those who have resided in the house have recognized that the air conditioning isn't working and the house is becoming to hot too live in. Representative Bart Stupek moved out, as did Representative Mike Doyle, both Democrats. You remember Rep. Stupek. He is the one that so aptly demonstrated that health care reform would lead to the politicization of health care decisions when he added an abortion rider to the health care reform bill. If the IRS does enter the fray, it may want to start by
examining how the District of Columbia treated the house for property
taxes. It denied property
tax-exemption for 66% of the property.
The Columbus Dispatch is reporting that the house is said to be valued
at $1.8 million. Joe Hallett,
Columbus-Area Pastors Try to Lift Veil on Mysterious D.C. Organization
(February 23, 2010). We would not be surprised if the IRS undertakes a cursory
review and steers clear of this one, although the media coverage will make that
difficult. We therefore are
looking to Senator Charles Grassley, who has been on a seven-year crusade to
make sure that tax-exempt organizations, including religious ministries, are
not abused. He regularly sends his
“love letters” to groups which he believes are abusing their tax-exempt status,
demanding that they produce all sorts of documents to demonstrate that they are
not abusing that status. If
Senator Grassley determines that there is abuse, he threatens to turn the
matter over to the IRS unless reforms are undertaken. It's about time that the tables get turned on members of
Congress, who all too frequently abuse their powers with show hearings that are
aimed at making headlines rather than finding the truth—see Senator Charles
Schumer and Representative Henry Waxman, some of the worst purveyors of this
technique. You gotta love Marcus Owens. Internal Revenue Service - Circular 230 Disclosure: As provided for in Treasury regulations, any advice (but none is intended) relating to federal taxes that is contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any plan or arrangement addressed herein.
If you liked this post, please visit http://www.charitygovernance.com for a description of our training and consulting services. You will also want to acquire a copy of Jack Siegel's book, A Desktop Guide for Nonprofit Directors, Officers, and Advisors: Avoiding Trouble While Doing Good." Copyright 2010, Charity Governance Consulting LLC. All Rights Reserved. You may not copy any portion of this post to a computer "clipboard" for re-posting anywhere or e-mailing, or otherwise reproduce this post. If you want others to review this post, you may provide them with a link to this web blog. Any use of the material or ideas in this post by reporters or other publishers shall make reference to Jack Siegel, author of "A Guide for Non-Profit Directors, Officers and Advisors: Avoiding Trouble While Doing Good" and this web blog. For additional information call 773-325-2124
THE FOREGOING IS NOT AND SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS LEGAL ADVICE. IF LEGAL ADVICE IS REQUIRED, THE NONPROFIT OR OTHER PARTY IN QUESTION SHOULD SEEK THE ADVICE OF QUALIFIED LEGAL COUNSEL.