A Slight Change of Focus? New IRS Guidelines For Churches
The IRS released new guidelines for tax-exempt organizations (including churches) with respect to political activity. For the most part, these guidelines are similar if not identical to the fact sheet released in February of last year: 21 hypothetical scenarios are discussed, the same both years (though they were called "examples" last year, but "situations" this year - does someone get a raise for that kind of power editing?).
It's interesting to note a few subtle changes in the way some of those situational categories are introduced, changing the character of the document slightly, from an admonition to a procedural description. Also, it's a little bit streamlined but for my money, a tiny bit less user-friendly. Different introductory paragraphs, with rule citations and no paragraph headings come off a fraction more legalese than last year's.
None of that is to say there are major differences, certainly no new policies. Just an interesting change of tone, here and there.
The differences I found are listed are in the extended entry below.
1) No more "must"
The lead-in to examples about inviting a candidate to speak at one of your organization's functions last year read like this:
When a candidate is invited to speak at an organization event as a political candidate, the organization must take steps to ensure that:This year's discussion changes the focus:• It provides an equal opportunity to political candidates seeking the same office;
• It does not indicate any support for or opposition to the candidate (this should be stated explicitly when the candidate is introduced and in communications concerning the candidate’s attendance); and
• No political fundraising occurs.
When a candidate is invited to speak at an organization event in his or her capacity as a political candidate, factors in determining whether the organization participated or intervened in a political campaign include the following:In similar contexts throughout the document, language is changed to remove the admonishing "must" in favor of a description of the consideration process the IRS will undertake in evaluating the propriety of activity. Similarly, instead of directing the organization as to which factors it should consider, the guidelines of this year inform the organization of which factors will be considered. In effect - and this could describe the subtle changes generally - it reads not so much as guidelines for the organization and more as guidelines for the investigating IRS agent.
• Whether the organization provides an equal opportunity to participate to political candidates seeking the same office;
• Whether the organization indicates any support for or opposition to the candidate (including candidate introductions and communications concerning the candidate’s attendance); and
• Whether any political fundraising occurs.
2) Fewer helpful suggestions:
In that same section on candidate appearances, last year's admonition was preceded by this paragraph, which was for some reason omitted from this year's guidelines:
A candidate may seek to reassure the organization that it is permissible for the organization to do certain things in connection with the candidate’s appearance. An organization in this position should keep in mind that the candidate may not be familiar with the organization’s tax-exempt status and that the candidate may be focused on compliance with the election laws that apply to the candidate’s campaign rather than the federal tax law that applies to the organization. The organization will be in the best position to ensure compliance with the prohibition on political campaign intervention if it makes its own independent conclusion about its compliance with federal tax law.Sounds like a decent piece of advice doesn't it? In other instances, similar suggestions were left out of this year's document as well.
3) Less Discussion of Voter Guides
Last year's guidelines had an entire section devoted to the issue of voter guides (following example 16). That section is omitted in this year's document, though voter guides are briefly mentioned in an opening section on the law (page 2).
4) Slightly Softer Language
The most straight-forward statement of political prohibition in last year's guidelines is this:
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to all campaigns including campaigns at the federal, state and local level. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.
Compare that to this year's:
Organizations that are exempt from income tax under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code as organizations described in section 501(c)(3) may not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.Yeah, ok, that's pretty slight - changing "absolutely prohibited from" to "may not." Could be just a stylistic preference for more compact language, but it does make me wonder: why bother changing it? The one does carry a little more rhetorical force, doesn't it?