IRC 501(c)(3) and AZSFW

[mikaele]

It's worded in HB2072 that only IRC 501©(3) organizations are the only organizations getting the tags and they have done a lot of lobbying with Gilstrap. I found this researching IRC 501©(3) rules on the IRS site.

 

 

IRS PUB

 

 

 

8. Is there a distinction between

good legislation and bad

legislation?

For purposes of IRC 501©(3), there is no distinction between good legislation and bad

legislation. For example, Rev. Rul. 67-293,

1967-2 C.B. 185, holds that an organization

substantially engaged in promoting legislation to

protect or otherwise benefit animals is not exempt

under IRC 501©(3) even though the legislation

it advocates may be beneficial to the community. See also Rev. Rul. 67-6, supra. This is in

accord with a dictum of the Supreme Court to the effect that the statutory restriction on attempts

to influence legislation simply made explicit a longstanding judicial principle that political

agitation as such is outside the statute, however innocent the aim. Cammarano v. United States,

358 U.S. 498, 512 (1959), citing Slee, supra. For a direct holding, see Kuper v. Commissioner,

332 F.2d 562 (3rd Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 920 (1964). In Kuper, the Third Circuit

stated that it is immaterial . . . that the legislation advocated from time to time was intended

to promote sound government and was for the benefit of all citizens rather than in the interests

of a limited or selfish group. Id. at 563. Likewise, in Haswell v. United States, 500 F.2d 1133

(Ct. Cl. 1974), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 1107 (1975), the Court of Claims concluded:

An organization that engages in substantial activity aimed at

influencing legislation is disqualified from a tax exemption,

whatever the motivation. The applicability of the influencing

legislation clause is not affected by the selfish and unselfish

motives and interests of the organization, and it applies to all

organizations whether they represent private interests or the

interests of the public. Id. at 1142.

[Ringer]

I think you have hit on our next step. We can gather funding and sue to remove their 503c since they are a special interest group with a paid lobbyist pushing legislation that specifically benefits their administration , lobbyist and certain memebers that do not represent a majority of Arizona hunters. Keep this in mind and we can use this strategy.

[rthrbhntng]

Just so everyone understands, AZSFW is a 501c4 and AZSFWC is a 501c3. There are very strict restrictions on the 501c3 for political activism and the spending of money for that. The 501c4 is set up for political reasons and the money is not tax deductable.

Steve

[Bugler]

True but are the board members of both groups the same and with the same agenda?