tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24213446.post8309361554939478975..comments2024-03-24T06:12:51.173-05:00Comments on jobsanger: Using IRS For Politics Is Always WrongTed McLaughlinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15035498835671628943noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24213446.post-23256539830728874422013-05-13T16:14:22.410-05:002013-05-13T16:14:22.410-05:00Um, no, not so well said. A few days ago I would h...Um, no, not so well said. A few days ago I would have agreed. But the more I learn about this, the less of an OMIGOD! it becomes.<br /><br />First, these were not criminal investigations, they were investigations of applications for 501(c)3 and 501(c)4 tax-exempt status. Obtaining that status requires that the primary focus of the organization is social welfare. Only limited political activity is allowed.<br /><br />Second, there was no "targeting" of teabagger groups. The idea was that a group with "Tea Party" or "Patriot" in its name should get a closer look because that raised a reasonable possibility that they may well be engaged in political advocacy rather than social welfare and so be ineligible for 501(c)3 or 4 status.<br /><br />Third, "tea party" and "patriot" were not the only triggers for closer examination. <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57584051/irs-targeted-tea-party-groups-earlier-than-2012/?pageNum=2" rel="nofollow">CBS News reports</a> that according to Lois Lerner, who heads the IRS division that oversees tax-exempt organizations, only about 300 of the 3400 applications for 501(c)3 or 4 status in 2012 were given extra attention and only 1/4 of those involved "tea party" or "patriot."<br /><br />Finally, if this was an attempt "to punish political enemies," is was a damned inefficient one: Lerner says that 150 of the cases have been closed and while some groups withdrew their application, no group had its tax-exempt status revoked.<br /><br />In reality, the whole thing was an attempt by the IRS to find a way to deal with the soaring number of applications. The method they chose - or, more accurately, this part of the method they chose - was surely not the best. But to turn it into some conspiracy (directed by who?) to attack political opponents is nonsense.<br /><br />A buzzword of fairly recent vintage is "optics," the idea that what something <i>is</i>, is less important than what one side or another can make it <i>appear</i> to be. This is definitely a case of that.Lotushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16774266443353774752noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-24213446.post-55367442059767374152013-05-13T10:30:12.632-05:002013-05-13T10:30:12.632-05:00Well said, Sir!Well said, Sir!David Duffhttp://duffandnonsense.typepad.com/duff_nonsense/noreply@blogger.com