Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Tuesday, March 19, 2019

What Newly Released Docs Tell Us About The IRS And How It Handles Dark Money Groups

What Newly Released Docs Tell Us About The IRS And How It Handles Dark Money Groups

by Kim Barker and Theodoric Meyer, ProPublica.

A GOP-led House committee voted Wednesday to seek criminal charges against former IRS official Lois Lerner, who used to run the IRS division in charge of tax-exempt groups. In a party-line vote, the committee accused Lerner of unfairly targeting the applications of conservative groups and misleading the office of the Treasury Inspector General, which was auditing the IRS based on allegations of bias against conservative groups.

Though the committee referred Lerner to the Justice Department for prosecution, it will likely have little practical effect, as the Justice Department is already investigating the Internal Revenue Service and Lerner. But the documents released by the committee do shed some light on the inner workings of the IRS’s Exempt Organizations division and how it approached applications of social welfare nonprofits, also known as dark money groups because they spend money on elections without reporting their donors. The influence of such groups has skyrocketed since the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision.

Here are the top five takeaways ProPublica found from the documents:

1. The IRS planned to deny the application of Crossroads GPS. 

Crossroads GPS spent more than $90 million from unknown donors to elect conservatives in the 2010 and 2012 elections, far more than any other dark money group. By the beginning of 2013, the IRS was planning to deny the group’s application, the documents show.

After applying to the IRS in September 2010, Crossroads started spending, and campaign-finance watchdogs started complaining. An IRS panel considered taking a deeper look at Crossroads twice — in November 2010 and June 2011 — but rejected the idea both times. One reviewer in November 2010 said that Crossroads was a “for-profit entity,” a mistake Lerner later wrote that she found “most disturbing.”

By June 2012, the IRS created a spreadsheet on Crossroads to analyze the group’s TV ad costs and track whether the ads were political or issue advocacy. A description of the group’s website in an IRS spreadsheet said it “appears to be an anti-Obama Administration website; however there are educational materials on site.”

In late 2012, Crossroads’ application was released to ProPublica in response to a public-records request — even though it wasn’t supposed to be made public. The application showed that Crossroads told the IRS that its political spending “will be limited in amount.”

The IRS received 25 referrals on Crossroads GPS between 2010 and 2012, the documents show — a referral is a complaint about a nonprofit, and can include a formal request for investigation or simply a news article.

On January 2, 2013, an IRS spokeswoman, Michelle Eldridge, emailed Lerner and other IRS officials about questions from ProPublica over Crossroads’ application. “I recommend that we just let this one sit and wait out the deadline,” she wrote.

In an email two days later, Lerner wrote that she had read through allegations from campaign finance watchdogs about Crossroads, adding that they “were really damning.”

By January 9, 2013, the IRS was drafting a denial letter to Crossroads, the documents show. There was no more significant action until May 2, 2013, when a call was made to discuss the “draft denial letter.”

Then on May 8, 2013, documents indicate that the IRS was also looking at “the draft denial of a similar case.”

From May 13 until May 17, 2013, the IRS continued “working on draft of letter.” By May 30, 2013, the first working draft of the denial was finished and sent for review.

But by that point, the IRS had come under scrutiny for revelations that it had targeted Tea Party groups for extra review. There’s no proof that the letter to Crossroads was ever sent.

In an emailed statement Wednesday, Crossroads GPS president Steven Law said the group was still waiting to hear final action from the IRS on its application. Like the House Ways and Means Committee, Law accused Lerner of improperly singling out Crossroads for extra review.

“Crossroads GPS submitted its application to the IRS for formal recognition of its non-profit status when the group was formed in 2010,” Law said. “It is now apparent that Ms. Lerner was directly and improperly involved in targeting our application, which may explain why we are still awaiting final action.”

Meanwhile, Lerner’s lawyer, William Taylor, said that Lerner had done nothing wrong. “She did not interfere with the rights of any organization to a tax exemption,” he said in a statement.

2. The IRS also planned to deny the applications of other conservative groups that had spent on elections after telling the IRS they wouldn’t do so. 

Crossroads GPS wasn’t the only dark money group facing denial before the IRS controversy blew up.

In response to a public-records request in late 2012, the IRS had also sent ProPublica the pending applications for five other conservative social welfare nonprofits that had told the IRS that they wouldn’t spend money on politics but then did so. The groups were Americans for Responsible Leadership, Freedom Path, II, America Is Not Stupid and A Better America Now.

ProPublica wrote about the groups on January 2, 2013. Nikole Flax, the chief of staff to the acting IRS commissioner at the time, forwarded the story to Lerner and two other IRS officials on the afternoon it was published in an email with the subject line, “latest article.”

The same day, Lerner asked to set up a meeting to talk about the groups’ applications.

The Ways and Means Committee found that four of the five groups had been subjected to heightened scrutiny, and three were audited, though it’s not clear which ones. The IRS recognized both America Is Not Stupid and A Better America Now last year. Americans for Responsible Leadership was also recognized in October 2013 — despite spending almost $10 million on elections in 2012 and paying a record-breaking fine in California for violations of election laws.

In January 2013, Lerner also indicated more social welfare nonprofits would be denied. On January 31, she emailed the chief of the IRS office of appeals, saying that in the next few months her office believed appeals would “get a lot of business” regarding denials of social welfare applications.

“I told them [the appeals group] this is a place where we have worked very hard to be consistent and have all our cases worked by one group, and suggested th ey [sic] might want to do something similar,” Lerner wrote, adding that her office was being audited because of allegations of political bias in these cases. “If I were you, this is definitely something I’d want to be aware of and have a high level person overseeing and reporting regula rly [sic] to me. You were in TEGE (the Tax Exempt/Government Entities division] long enough to understand how dangerous what we do can be.”

The documents included spreadsheets of the application status of various groups, including one providing aid in Pakistan and another trying to set up a medical marijuana dispensary as a charity. One spreadsheet indicated that a Tea Party group could be approved as a social welfare nonprofit but not as a charity.

But of all the groups listed in a 2011 spreadsheet as being flagged for review, only Emerge America and its affiliates ended up being denied. Those groups trained Democratic women to run for office.

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit2
  • Print this page
  • 35

5 responses to “What Newly Released Docs Tell Us About The IRS And How It Handles Dark Money Groups”

  1. Bill Thompson says:

    No matter what side of the aisle you stand it is hard for me to believe that this is the way campaign finance organizations should be run. In my opinion none of these organizations should have text exempt status. These groups are an open invitation to political corruption and turn the IRS into an investigation and judging organization. In the end anybody that is denied by the IRS is crying foul and feel that they are being discriminated against. As far as I am concerned Organizations publicly rooting for a particular political outcome should be taxed.

    • idamag says:

      Love of money taints elections. There should be no public money spent. Every candidate should get a government grant. That way their loyalty would be to the people instead of the $$$$. And it might keep elections more honest if campaign time was limited to two months before the election. As it is, the day after the election, they start campaigning and raising money. Wouldn’t it be nice if they were actually governing instead?

  2. idamag says:

    Let me help the fringe lunatics so they won’t have to work so hard. “Another Mudslide hits Washington.” “What about Benghazi?” “Chimpanzees escape Kansas City Zoo.” What about Benghazi?” “Faint Ping Heard Where Plane May Have Gone Down.” “What about Benghazi?” “Upper Midwest Should Expect Rain Over The Weekend.” What about George Soros?”

    • BillP says:

      I don’t believe Soros is saint but one of the trolls on this site claimed that Soros was a Nazi puppet. I asked how a boy 13yo and Jewish when the Nazis invaded Hungary could be a puppet, more likely they would have sent him to a concentration camp. The 2nd comment was that Soros mad his money manipulating currencies, what he actually did was sell short $10 billion British Pounds. Short selling of securities, currencies and commodities happens every day in this country. It’s a legal transaction and at times a good strategy.

      • idamag says:

        He probably isn’t a saint. However, the facts are that he did give $140,000 to Kerry’s campaign because he honestly believed George Bush was bad for Democracy. He also funds medical research and helps third world countries. I have two friends who came from countries that did not have a democracy. Both of them will defend democracy stronger than those who would divide the country along political lines. The division stems back to money. When money talks, integrity walks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.