Latest Breaking News

Dollface

(1,590 posts)

41. They are absolutely not the same. A 501(c)(3) ruling is less complicated than a 501(c)(4).

Fri May 17, 2013, 02:11 PM

May 2013

501(c)(3) regulations are much clearer as to what type of activities qualify.

Also, the BHO foundation is so small they can probably file the return on a postcard. It has received less than $50,000 in donations since 2008. Can't bribe anyone with that.

And finally, the Obama Foundation did a retroactive request for determination, (an application must be filed within 27 months after the end of the month in which they were formed) and so had financial and program information established when they filed.

Apples and oranges

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

43 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

IRS stalled conservative groups, but gave speedy approval to Obama foundation [View all] alp227 May 2013 OP

So? OldRedneck May 2013 #1

Ditto cntrfthrs May 2013 #12

Ditto to the Ditto! SoapBox May 2013 #14

The IRS tax-exempted O'Keefe's dirty tricks group, Heritage, FreedomWorks, AFP, etc. freshwest May 2013 #21

this DU or some right wing website PatrynXX May 2013 #17

That's the way government works marshall May 2013 #37

They aren't necessarily the same situation. May not be an apple-to-apple. TwilightGardener May 2013 #2

Yep... IthinkThereforeIAM May 2013 #32

Help poor Kenyans v. Spit on Congressmen tblue May 2013 #33

They are absolutely not the same. A 501(c)(3) ruling is less complicated than a 501(c)(4). Dollface May 2013 #41

Oh, no!! We must impeach Obama NOW!!! He's worse than Bush!!! Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #3

That seems to be the position of several DUers in GD alcibiades_mystery May 2013 #16

I've been trying to point that out for days davidpdx May 2013 #26

Course in order to be impeached you need to do the following PatrynXX May 2013 #18

Here is all you need to know: Raine1967 May 2013 #4

good bowens43 May 2013 #5

Break out the pitchforks and torches Politicalboi May 2013 #6

You forgot the sarcasm emote ... Trajan May 2013 #7

I believe Obama cracked a joke at the White House Correspondence Dinner about davidpdx May 2013 #27

How I wish Obama would say that tblue May 2013 #35

I wonder if by reviewing the application, the IRS discovered... VPStoltz May 2013 #8

The Obama Foundation is a 501(c)3. Not a 501(c)4 dballance May 2013 #9

"The Obama Foundation is a 501(c)3. Not a 501(c)4" SoapBox May 2013 #15

I wrote to the author of this hit-piece... DCKit May 2013 #28

Let's lots of us write LTTE tblue May 2013 #34

Ah, you beat me to it Recursion May 2013 #30

article says it's his African brother's (step brother) foundation notadmblnd May 2013 #10

So effing what. Iliyah May 2013 #11

makes sense to me, this group doesnt sound political at all LSK May 2013 #13

+1 SunSeeker May 2013 #19

It's starting to become obvious why the IRS was going after these tea party groups. tofuandbeer May 2013 #20

Politically active groups don't qualify for tax exempt even if they are conservative W T F May 2013 #22

You don't know tax law. former9thward May 2013 #36

Washington Post is reporting on a story by the Daily Caller? EC May 2013 #23

I'm beginning to John2 May 2013 #24

Yes, a wash post blog suggested so. alp227 May 2013 #25

This is a 501(c)(3). Not really comparable to the 501(c)(4) problems Recursion May 2013 #29

Wikipedia cynzke May 2013 #40

Do your paperwork w/ history correctly thats the way IRS works for nonprofit, retroactive part also. Sunlei May 2013 #31

helping poor might not look as suspicious booley May 2013 #38

Did they advocate an out and out hostility towards the payment of taxes? No? Tommy_Carcetti May 2013 #39

Um, yeah. One group's focus is relief in Kenya. The other's is the overthrow of Doctor_J May 2013 #42

So fucking what? Zoeisright May 2013 #43