What's new
By:

IRS Targeting Right Wing Groups

You're wrong. Its just not worth the time explain to explain all the wrong points you made.
I'll think about going back and answering all your wrong points, when you go back and answer all the unanswered questions I've already posed to you.
Good day sir!
 
MoreFeasts said:
Mr. Colbert is an expert in nonprofit tax law ? awesome.
Click to expand...

Actually, he hired someone for that. There were several episodes over an extended period of time.

At this point, I just have to mention this: your argumentation is worse than Beantown and worse than PearlWatson. It just may be the worst I've ever seen on this board.
 
MoreFeasts said:
This is not proof. Your evidence does not prove what you think it proves.
Again, quote the statement that you think is proof.

The press makes a sensationalist buzz leading to an unsupported false conclusion, and your proof is the media buzz? awesome.
Click to expand...

Proof is for mathematicians and alcohol. In the real world, you can only have evidence.

I'll trust media buzz over empty accusations on a message board.
 
From the wiki reference provided by 1B

"The law allows Section 501(c)(4) organizations to self-declare and hold themselves out as tax-exempt; they do not have to obtain any approval from the Internal Revenue Service."
 
Brow, If you weren't just throwing crap on a wall, you would quote the part of your reference you think proves your point, instead of making me have to guess which part of the crap is the evidence that I am supposed to respond to.
 
https://m.usatoday.com/article/news/2159983

States that the IRS went after group's based on policy stances and not political activity. Also talks about conservative groups applications being held in suspense while liberal groups applications were given a pass. If true it shows this was about politics and not enforcing IRS law in a fair evenhanded way.
 
It is brief ,long on sensationalistic conclusions, short on data or analysis.
Are you sure they are comparing apples to apples?
Just because one liberal group got approval quickly does not mean that all did.
Maybe the tiny sample of approvals had better applications.
Maybe they had simpler organizations.
Maybe they did not have names, activities, materials, or purposes as political in nature as the Tea Party, or associations with groups that habitually involved themselves in campaigning like the Tea Party does, contrary to the spirit of the classification, as described in 1Bs reference on 501(c)(4)s.
Maybe the approvals were made by a different IRS agent.
 
MoreFeasts said:
It is brief ,long on sensationalistic conclusions, short on data or analysis.
Are you sure they are comparing apples to apples?
Just because one liberal group got approval quickly does not mean that all did.
Maybe the tiny sample of approvals had better applications.
Maybe they had simpler organizations.
Maybe they did not have names, activities, materials, or purposes as political in nature as the Tea Party, or associations with groups that habitually involved themselves in campaigning like the Tea Party does, contrary to the spirit of the classification, as described in 1Bs reference on 501(c)(4)s.
Maybe the approvals were made by a different IRS agent.
Click to expand...

Go read the OIG report in regards to the pass that liberal groups got.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top