On 20 Sep 2015 19:04:35 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main you wrote: >>>We have only to look >>>at the actions of the IRS in recent years. >>They went after PACs on both side of the aisle, for the same types of >>violations. > >That's correct, Shmuel, though the abuses were disproportionately on one >side since that's the side wealthy donors disproportionately favor. >Moreover, "went after" consisted of sending the organizations inquiry >letters asking them for further information and justification why they >should be entitled to the particular tax status they were seeking. Yes, >that's right, inquiry letters. The letters requested basic information many >of these political organizations couldn't truthfully provide because they >simply weren't entitled to the tax status under the law.
The situation isn't that simple. I look at politics through a systems programmer eye and want to see as much data as realistic. While I am a conservative who normally votes Republican, I tend to be skeptical about the claims on both sides. I am a United States citizen living in Canada. There are two types of non-profit involved here. The first is 501C3 which are charities that do good and for which individual donations are tax deductible. These organizations are not supposed to engage in politics. Most churches, synagogues, mosques, etc. as well as institutions such as the Red Cross and the Metropolitan Museum of Art fall in this category. While I believe that churches on both sides of the political fence probably overstep the line based on public statements by various church leaders they are not at issue here because I suspect no administration wants to take on religious groups. The second is 501C4 which is a social welfare organization that is allowed to lobby and to various extents take part in political debate and advocate positions. These would include organizations such as MoveOn.org (Michael Moore's group of Bowling for Columbine fame and other progressive causes), the Sierra Club advocacy arm, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People and various conservative groups. Incidentally labor unions are tax exempt as 501c5 and chambers of commerce as 501c6. The scandal (from the Republican point of view) involves applications for 501c4 status and intensive investigations. While I would agree with anyone that organizations on both sides of the political fence have skirted or crossed the lines for 501c4, it is interesting to note that one of the key people in the IRS, Lois Lerner resigned and refused to testify before a committee of the US House of Representatives on the grounds of preventing self incrimination (5th Amendment right). It is also interesting that I don't think the committee sought to grant immunity. This issue also caused the head of the Internal Revenue Service to resign. As someone who has the SHARE button with a picture of Oliver North of Iran Contra Scandal fame saying he was a veteran of Profs, I found it unbelievable that the response to the subpoena for Lois Lerner's e-mails was that her computer had crashed. In Ollie's case when he learned he was being investigated, he deleted all of his e-mails. The investigators retrieved them from back-ups. It is the events surrounding the issue that make the story more interesting than the issue itself. Clark Morris > >There are four genuine scandals. The first is that one party in Congress >persecuted IRS officials for doing the jobs that Congress (as a whole) and >the President told them to do: to enforce the U.S. tax code. The second is >that the other party failed to defend the IRS for merely doing its job, so >much so that many people are misinformed about what actually happened and >didn't happen. The third is that one party in Congress has effectively, >unilaterally neutered a particular section of the tax code to satisfy their >own narrow political interests and those of their donors, depriving the >public of the ordinary tax revenues these commercial enterprises should be >paying under the law. The fourth is that many (if not most) of these >enterprises are scamming their donors due to high overheads and grossly >ineffective spending decisions, both not accidental. > >....I'm not sure what this has to do with mainframes or even I.T., though. >However, I'm all in favor of understanding facts. > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Timothy Sipples >IT Architect Executive, Industry Solutions, IBM z Systems, AP/GCG/MEA >E-Mail: sipp...@sg.ibm.com > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
