Forum Thread

IRS admits, apologizes for singling out conservative groups

Krazen1211 9,130 425 May 10, 2013 at 01:25 PM
Link [cnn.com]

Responding to a flurry of complaints from conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, the Internal Revenue Service admitted Friday it made "mistakes" in the last few years while trying to process those requests.

Multiple tea party groups reported significant delays and excessive questioning from IRS officials while trying to obtain 501(c)(4) status.

"I think it was without doubt wrong. We knew it was wrong in the beginning," he said. "They had no right, whatsoever,...no right to deny us tax exempt status that 501(c)(4) groups routinely received."




Interesting. When Obama For America became a 501c4, it took them a few days.

2,649 Comments

1 2 3 4 5

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

#16
So the IRS comes out and says "sorry we profiled these organizations as a shortcut to our job [ensuring people are paying taxes properly]"... but your little conspiracy is that the IRS is lying, it was in fact an attempt by obama to strike a financial blow to tea party organizations???? (via an IRS led by a bush appointee??)

bwuh? LMAO

I guess its just too far fetched that the IRS would act on suspicions about tea party non profits, the same non profits who have admitted they have great disdain for the IRS and paying taxes. Its much much more than that.. yes what bulletproof logic.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined Aug 2003
L10: Grand Master
10,368 Posts
265 Reputation
#17
Quote from Gotchaforce View Post :
So the IRS comes out and says "sorry we profiled these organizations as a shortcut to our job [ensuring people are paying taxes properly]"... but your little conspiracy is that the IRS is lying, it was in fact an attempt by obama to strike a financial blow to tea party organizations???? (via an IRS led by a bush appointee??)

bwuh? LMAO

I guess its just too far fetched that the IRS would act on suspicions about tea party non profits, the same non profits who have admitted they have great disdain for the IRS and paying taxes. Its much much more than that.. yes what bulletproof logic.
with that logic it seems they should be targeting democrats in congress.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
guess what, I don't reply to you because you are on ignore!
Joined Jun 2005
All downhill from here...
9,455 Posts
386 Reputation
#18
Quote from Mike A. View Post :
Wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to be concerned with the level of taxation if you had no intention of paying them now would it?
I think if you're honest for a moment you'll acknowledge that people are much more inclined to skirt or flout laws and regulations that they feel are unjust. This does not, in any way, preclude protest of these laws or political advocacy. Speeders advocate for higher speed limits, meanwhile continuing to speed. Potheads advocate for legalizing marijuana, while finding a quack to prescribe medical MJ. Not weird at all to think anti-tax advocates would apply for tax exempt status to avoid tax liability while continuing their advocacy, whether they were quality applications or not.

This rationale is so obvious, I have to think your experiencing a moment of partisan blindness. Thinking cap > than party hat.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
bulb TIP: To avoid the stigma of literacy, listen to audio books.
#19
Quote from SigX View Post :
with that logic it seems they should be targeting democrats in congress.
With the logic that tea party doesnt like taxes, IRS should target democrats in congress. Got it.

Another day of the podium slipping deeper and deeper into "inane youtube comments: the forum"
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#20
Quote from Krazen1211 View Post :
Multiple tea party groups reported significant delays and excessive questioning from IRS officials while trying to obtain 501(c)(4) status.
ANY tp VICTIMS denied tax-exempt status? NOTHING is preventing them for suing for damages.

Another, b*tch, whine, moan, and cry thread.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
__________________ - It dives and it jumps and it ripples like the deepest ocean.
#21
And more usual from the usual......
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined Dec 2005
L8: Grand Teacher
3,610 Posts
655 Reputation
#22
Editorial cartoon says it all...
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Congress - Bingo with billions (Red Skeleton)

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Aug 2003
L10: Grand Master
10,368 Posts
265 Reputation
#23
Quote from Gotchaforce View Post :
With the logic that tea party doesnt like taxes, IRS should target democrats in congress. Got it.
wow. if that is really your conclusion from what I posted.... sad.

lets try again, this time I will really spell it out for you, if needed I can have a grade schooler come by and help.

you said:

Quote :
I guess its just too far fetched that the IRS would act on suspicions about tea party non profits, the same non profits who have admitted they have great disdain for the IRS and paying taxes.
so I suggested they go after democrats in congress.............. you know cause they have a reputations for not paying taxes [latimes.com].

I hope that helps clear this up for you and please read the article before claiming the article is not about democrats in congress. perhaps the IRS should focus on its own back yard first [washingtonpost.com].

big shock that democrats block bills [washingtonexaminer.com]that make people pay taxes they actually owe. excellent hypocrisy. claim the high ground but block any laws that would push federal workers to actually pay the taxes..
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Last edited by SigX May 12, 2013 at 07:29 AM
#24
Quote from skiman View Post :
That was a close call. I thought you might finally post something substantive.
I learned from you how's it done. Thank you for teaching me. Let's recap. I say something about Carney, who is a compete moron, and you go into automatic Obama defense mode and accuse me of bashing Obama. Hmmm. Speaking of almost posting something substantive......
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
All growth depends upon activity. There is no development physically or intellectually without effort, and effort means work. -- Calvin Coolidge
"Under Barack Obama, the only 'change' is that 'hope' is hard to find" - Marco Rubio
Joined Aug 2005
L8: Grand Teacher
3,992 Posts
1,316 Reputation
Pro
#25
Quote from skiman View Post :
I think if you're honest for a moment you'll acknowledge that people are much more inclined to skirt or flout laws and regulations that they feel are unjust. This does not, in any way, preclude protest of these laws or political advocacy. Speeders advocate for higher speed limits, meanwhile continuing to speed. Potheads advocate for legalizing marijuana, while finding a quack to prescribe medical MJ. Not weird at all to think anti-tax advocates would apply for tax exempt status to avoid tax liability while continuing their advocacy, whether they were quality applications or not.

This rationale is so obvious, I have to think your experiencing a moment of partisan blindness. Thinking cap > than party hat.
I'm the one experiencing partisan blindness? lol I understood your rationale. The problem is that it's flawed in a number of ways which seems to reflect your own bias.

First, these are not, generally speaking, organizations which are advocating against paying taxes or even against paying their "fair share." In the case of some which do more directly, then you might have a stronger point. The only tax focus of these groups is indirect related to the larger matters of size and role of government and resulting cost/priorities more generally. Simply because they may have the term "tax" in some of their names doesn't imply use in the manner which you suggest. Worse yet in cases of the term "patriot" any such association is even farther removed (and suggests more of an ideological association as below).

Second, we're not even really talking about paying taxes here. These were largely, at least as I understand it, cases related to obtaining and maintaining their tax exempt status. That is, not a question of how much they owe, but whether they met the requirements for 501(c)3 status. Based on several specific cases that I've seen the "extra scrutiny" appears to have been given to their applications for status and/or their related filings, e.g., requiring an extraordinary level of documentation and substantiation from such groups which reduced their ability to operate effectively. Given that these are political groups all representing one side versus another and that much of it was done during a political campaign just makes their aggregation for scrutiny have the appearance of someone attempting to impede that side for ideological reasons.

So based on the above in order for your line of reasoning to make sense you'd have to argue that there's some inherent ideological association of such groups with improper use of or operations under 501(c)3 status. That's clearly not the case and not even really on the table.

For the record, I'm not a member nor a particular fan of most such groups. But you don't really need to be to see what's very wrong with this at a very basic level. Even Maddow and some others clearly not in any way aligned with that side have called BS on this one.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#26
Quote from Mike A. View Post :
Even Maddow and some others clearly not in any way aligned with that side have called BS on this one.
Intelligent partisans recognize that when the music stops, the chairs might be occupied by different players......
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined Jun 2005
All downhill from here...
9,455 Posts
386 Reputation
#27
Quote from Mike A. View Post :
I'm the one experiencing partisan blindness? lol I understood your rationale. The problem is that it's flawed in a number of ways which seems to reflect your own bias.
You posted this: "Wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to be concerned with the level of taxation if you had no intention of paying them now would it?"

That's quite obviously invalid in any context, but particularly in the given context. Like night and day wrong. I don't think you're stupid, so figured there must be some reason outside of logic that motivated such an absurd "analysis."

And yes, the Tea Party and so called "Patriot" movements are quite explicitly in support of lower taxes. They quite explicitly feel that the government unjustly takes too much of their money. Hell, people of the sentiment gathers under the name of a revolutionary act in protest of unjust taxation. Their stances on taxes couldn't be plainer.

And yes, just like when the staffers High Times applies for medical MJ cards, it's not unreasonable to review the application for legitimacy with a little more scrutiny.

I don't think you'll find m/any people who think that the IRS should be used as a political weapon. It's an independent agency for good reason. I also don't think this looks like a case of that. It looks a lot more like reviewers taking shortcuts via profiling- which is not irrational, but may be unfair.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Joined Jun 2005
All downhill from here...
9,455 Posts
386 Reputation
#28
Quote from andyfico View Post :
I learned from you how's it done. Thank you for teaching me. Let's recap. I say something about Carney, who is a compete moron, and you go into automatic Obama defense mode and accuse me of bashing Obama. Hmmm. Speaking of almost posting something substantive......
Oh, jeebus. You are welcome to disagree with my posts, but it's plain to anyone that I am not part of the peanut gallery of nonsense to which you have assigned yourself. Which is sad, because I think you're capable of contributing. In fact, I think you're quite aware of how you've chosen to participate and how that contrasts with contributing posters. So let's not pretend we're here for the same reasons.

Carney made a cogent point that adequately defuses the accusations that this administration used the IRS as a political weapon to pick on Tea partiers. Somehow this prompted you to imply that he was blaming Bush, which is neither accurate nor honest. I think you understood the statement, so I assume that you misrepresented him for funsies. Whatever floats your boat. I point out the nonsensical nature of the post for those of us who have some interest in discussing the issue seriously.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
#29
Quote from Elmer View Post :
Nothing to see here... move along baggers...
Have to disagree .. when a Government Agency, especially one as powerful as the IRS targets extra scrutiny based on Politics, and in some case even requested their membership list, there is a LOT to see .. AND be concerned about.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Which came first, apathy or ignorance when it comes to politics? Are so many people apathetic when it comes to politics because of their ignorance or are they ignorant because of their apathy?.

"You cannot take any people, of any color, and exempt them from the requirements of civilization -- including work, behavioral standards, personal responsibility and all the other basic things that the clever intelligentsia disdain -- without ruinous consequences to them and to society at large.." - Thomas Sowell

Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.

Joined Aug 2005
L8: Grand Teacher
3,992 Posts
1,316 Reputation
Pro
#30
Quote from skiman View Post :
You posted this: "Wouldn't make a whole lot of sense to be concerned with the level of taxation if you had no intention of paying them now would it?"

That's quite obviously invalid in any context, but particularly in the given context. Like night and day wrong. I don't think you're stupid, so figured there must be some reason outside of logic that motivated such an absurd "analysis."

And yes, the Tea Party and so called "Patriot" movements are quite explicitly in support of lower taxes. They quite explicitly feel that the government unjustly takes too much of their money. Hell, people of the sentiment gathers under the name of a revolutionary act in protest of unjust taxation. Their stances on taxes couldn't be plainer.

And yes, just like when the staffers High Times applies for medical MJ cards, it's not unreasonable to review the application for legitimacy with a little more scrutiny.
None of which relates to advocating or practices which would suggest evading or not complying with tax requirements other than in the most stretched connection which you are attempting to make. Same as the example I gave which is an equally stretched justification.

And again it doesn't relate to the nature of the scrutiny given in this case. It was not over them not paying their taxes. It was over their applications for tax-exempt status. So if you want to better focus your argument, then it should be around what about the nature of such groups might imply that they may not be eligible for or may be abusing that status to make extra scrutiny appropriate.


Quote :
I don't think you'll find m/any people who think that the IRS should be used as a political weapon. It's an independent agency for good reason. I also don't think this looks like a case of that. It looks a lot more like reviewers taking shortcuts via profiling- which is not irrational, but may be unfair.
Short cuts as far as what? Sounds like you may not have read beyond the headlines on this one. What they are said to have done is to put more requirements on and more effort into looking at these groups. That's not a shortcut. It resulted in greater effort on both sides. It certainly wasn't a shortcut as far as identifying more generally political organizations which may be pushing 501(c)3 status. They could more easily select a representative group from that universe based on standard coded application data versus defining their own specific terms to target.

If the issue was that they'd pulled a bunch of political 501(c)3's because of a belief that these groups were pushing the envelope of what's acceptable (which btw I personally think some on all sides are), and it included terms like "political action" and included a more broad range of such groups, then I might buy it. Given the specifics here, sorry, I don't.

Just because an agency may be independent doesn't mean that there are not political influences and/or personal ideology which comes into play. I worked in and with government including such "independent" groups for a long time and very clearly saw it. In fact, I had to participate in it at times.
Reply Helpful Comment? 0 0
Page 2 of 177
1 2 3 4 5
Join the Conversation
Add a Comment
 
Copyright 1999 - 2016. Slickdeals, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Copyright / Infringement Policy  •  Privacy Policy  •  Terms of Service  •  Acceptable Use Policy (Rules)  •  Interest-Based Ads
Link Copied to Clipboard