If you have been watching the news recently, you know that the IRS has now admitted that they were targeting conservative groups seeking tax exempt status with harassing, unnecessary and intrusive questions and investigations. In the media reports, it appears that the goal was relatively straightforward – to make it difficult for any conservative “social welfare” group to get tax exempt status. The importance of the tax exempt status is that it creates an incentive for donors to give to the group, i.e., the tax advantage that comes from the tax deductible donation. If the IRS ran the conservative groups through the proverbial administrative ringer and delayed their applications, then the IRS was handicapping those particular groups in their ability to attract donors, amass monies, and get their conservative message out to the general public.
As more and more evidence has become available, the most staggering part of the early investigation is the absence of any indication that similar treatment was provided to left-leaning ideological “social welfare” groups. In fact, the Washington Post reported that the Barack H. Obama Foundation was approved as a charitable organization within 34 days of its application – and the approval was retroactive charitable status to cover the donations that it has been soliciting and receiving prior to the approval of the application. Given that the average application for such status took between 5 to 6 months to process, the fast pass that the Barack H. Obama Foundation received smacked of special treatment and favoritism – even when it occurred several years ago. With the new information coming to light, and the knowledge of how hard the IRS worked to block conservative groups, the record-setting 34-day application process for the Barack H. Obama Foundation speaks to the manner in which the IRS was used as a political tool.
Here is the ultimate question: how did the IRS come to the determination that it was going to target conservative groups? Given what you know about the federal government, I would suggest that it is not credible to suggest that the IRS simply decided suddenly that it was going to create more work for itself by creating extra procedural hurdles for conservative applicants. After all, we do not find many employees in the private or public sector who unilaterally decide that they are going to make their jobs more difficult and onerous. This was a decision that was dictated to the low-level employees – and given the political nature of the decision - it is difficult to believe that a career bureaucrat would unilaterally make the decision to unleash the IRS hounds on unsuspecting conservative organizations. It may be possible – but it is not probable.
Congress created the IRS – and Congress delegates a great deal of authority and power to the IRS. Through legislation, Congress has empowered the IRS to draft, enact and enforce all of the regulations that define the Tax Code. Congress has the obligation to oversee the IRS and take corrective action when necessary. Congress is now attempting to figure this mess out – why in the world did the IRS become a bounty hunter seeking to harass and impede conservative social welfare groups seeking tax exempt status. In fact, the media has reported that Lois Lerner, the senior executive in charge of the IRS tax exempt office that oversaw the conservative witch hunt, received $42,531 in bonuses between 2009 and 2012. During that period of time, her base salary each year was over $170,000 for each year – meaning, with bonuses, she earned $740,931 for the four years that she was overseeing the harassment of conservative non-profit groups. I did not even know that government employees could get bonuses – or in this case likely bounties.
At a Congressional hearing last week, the plot thickened further as Lerner was subpoenaed to testify about the decision to target conservative groups seeking tax exempt status. Lois Lerner grandly started her testimony with the following statement: “I have not done anything wrong. I have not broken any laws. I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, and I have not provided false information to this or any other committee.” She then promptly asserted his Fifth Amendment Right to refuse to testify on the ground that her testimony might incriminate her.
Of course, you cannot assert your Fifth Amendment right unless you have done something criminal in nature – which she testified that she had not. By her own admission, she negated her ability to refuse to testify – and her effort was not an attempt to defend her constitutional right, but to defend something (or someone) else. I wonder what kind of bonus she will be getting this year from our tax dollars.
Please submit any questions, concerns, or comments to Susquehanna County District Attorney’s Office, P.O. Box 218, Montrose, Pennsylvania 18801 or at our website www.SusquehannaCounty-DA.org or discuss this and all articles at http://dadesk.blogspot.com/.