i keep hearing the phrase 'the list contained'..

[iamthebandfanman]

anybody have a link to this list somewhere concerning the IRS targeting of groups?

I keep seeing news people saying 'list includes more than expected' ..
what list?
where is this list?

how does one find said list to look at it ?

[MrSlayer]

1. Of about 300 groups, 75 were bagger groups.

Who were the rest?

[iamthebandfanman]

2. i mean, the list is out there somewhere right?

itd have to be if the media keeps adding 'more conservative groups than thought' right???

so where is it!?

id like to look at it myself.

[MrSlayer]

3. Agreed.

This is all a bunch of sensationalist horseshit.

[iamthebandfanman]

4. well thats the problem..

how is anyone supposed to make that call without the freakin' list ?

ya know?

lol

[LeftInTX]

5. I've got something on my hard drive, that I got from an article.

But for the life of me, I don't know which article!!

It may have been from this one: http://www.propublica.org/article/irs-office-that-targeted-tea-party-also-disclosed-confidential-docs or here:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/05/irs-congress-mislead-tea-party-conservative


This is cut and pasted from an IRS report that was released on May 10th. Sorry can't find the link.


March–April
2010
The Determinations Unit began searching for other requests for tax
exemption involving the Tea Party, Patriots, 9/12 and I.R.C. § 501(c)(4)
applications involving political sounding names, e.g., “We the People” or
“Take Back the Country.”

July 2010 Determinations Unit management requested its specialists to be on the lookout for Tea Party applications.

August 2010 First BOLO listing issued with criteria listed as “…various local organizations in the Tea Party movement…applying for exemption under 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4).”

July 2011 Criteria changed to “Organizations involved with political, lobbying, or advocacy for exemption under 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(4)” based on the concerns the Director, EO, raised in June 2011.

January 2012 Criteria changed to “Political action type organizations involved in limiting/expanding government, educating on the constitution and bill of rights, social economic reform/movement” based on Determinations Unit concerns that the July 2011 criteria was too generic.

May 2012 Criteria changed to “501(c)(3), 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), and 501(c)(6) organizations with indicators of significant amounts of political campaign intervention (raising questions as to exempt purpose and/or excess private benefit).”

[John1956PA]

6. IMHO, the term "targeting" is not appropriate. The issue is the level of scrutiny.

The function of the IRS is to scrutinize every Form 1023 application submitted on behalf of a group which is seeking tax-exempt status under any one of the 29 subdivisions of IRS Code Section 501(c). For an organization having $10,000 or less in annual gross receipts over a four-year period, the fee which must be submitted along with the application is $400. For an organization having in excess of $10,000 in annual gross receipts over a four-year period, the fee which must be submitted along with the application is $850.

In my opinion, with regard to a routine 501(c)4 application for which there is no indication that the goal and operations of the organization involve a significant degree of political activity, the IRS examiner who is responsible for scrutinizing the application should spend between five and ten minutes reviewing the application to make sure that (i) the principal parties of the organization are U.S. citizens, (ii) the summary of the financial data of the organization as set forth in the application appears legitimate, (iii) there is no extraordinary self-dealing between the organization and it principal parties, and (iv) the organization's purpose and methodology appears to be realistic and not primarily entwined with partisan politics.

On the other hand, it is my opinion that IRS is doing its job if it spends more time and effort in scrutinizing a Section 501(c)4 application for which there is a "red flag" indicating that the organization's activities are primarily political in nature. The use of the terms "Tea Party," "Progressive," Libertarian," "Green Party," and the like would constitute such a red flag. If I were an examiner whose duties it was to review 501(c)4 applications, I would not have know that the term "9/12" indicates a politically motivated organization, and I would have appreciated receiving from my supervisor a memorandum indicating same so that I could apply extra effort in scrutinizing an application from a group with than term in its name.