Fallout from Butina ? NRA loosing NP staus ?
 

Should the NRA fear losing its 'nonprofit status'?

NRA first Vice President Richard Childress read a note from North aloud to thousands of the gun group’s members at their annual convention in Indianapolis. It relayed news of the retired lieutenant colonel’s departure and raised the specter of an existential threat to the organization.

As North had put it in a letter to the NRA board: “I am deeply concerned that these allegations of financial improprieties could threaten our nonprofit status.”

...

But its mainstay, which North led until this leadership showdown, is what’s known as a social welfare organization under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code.

There is no charitable contribution deduction for paying NRA membership dues or donating to the social welfare organization.

What does tax-exemption do for the NRA then? Just like a charity, it generally doesn’t pay taxes on the money it raises or earns.

In exchange for that special status, the NRA must benefit the public according to a very broad definition. Advocacy and education, including about gun safety and gun ownership qualifies. The NRA must also submit mandatory paperwork to the IRS every year.

...

North’s vague allegations could point to two primary matters that could run afoul of federal tax law.

First, instead of being run to advance NRA missions like to “defend and foster the Second Amendment rights of all law-abiding Americans,” he asserts that the group mainly enriches NRA executives and boosts the bottom line of Ackerman McQueen, an advertising company that runs the NRA TV video channel. The second is admittedly odd given that North was paid by Ackerman McQueen through a contractual relationship.

Second, perhaps North is raising concerns related to media reports of allegations that the NRA illegally funneled millions of dollars in Russian money to Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

https://www.npr.org/2019/04/27/71775...tina-and-trump

...MORE THAN JUST INTERESTING

And they seem to only worry about having influence in 2020
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...mp/3631611002/

Under any other administration the NRA would have been hit with charges by now :2 cents:

This is not a charity organization in any way, shape, or form. Charity organizations should not be working to influence laws, candidates, or any government official.

I want to see where all of their money came from - and just as importantly where all of their money went.

Like Planned Parenthood? and PBS?

Holy fucking shit.

Planned parenthood is fucking doctors.

Doctors. And nurses.

Yes they are a charity.


PBS is a charity broadcast station. For the love of god, they produced Sesame Street.

These are charity.

Less then ten minutes I was on Instragram and I saw an ad from the NRA telling me which candidates I should vote for. That's not a charity.

And BOTH of them are HEAVILY involved in politics, moron.


WHy does rochard lie so much?

https://i.imgur.com/4qJvFqc.png

They are allowed to lobby for their interest.
If they NRA would have seperated it's for profit activty as a separate LLC or Corp, this would not be the problem it is.

But we all know that many NP's out there is somewhat 'hi-jacked' by big money to float funds into campaigns and allow them to take a chunk in the process. That's why there were so many forming them 8 years ago. Because those in charge can take a wage.

They need to clarify the rules and the government is helplessly underfunded to prosecute or even investigate 1000's every year.
They normally take on a few cases they think they can win without to much trouble. And even that can take years and $M's

It simply is not manageable in it's current state and deadlock to change any of it because that is how they move money.
But it did surprise me that Butina revelations showed just how far over the edge this has went.

Yes but if they separated it, then they couldn't dodge taxes..

How do you feel about the Clinton foundation?

https://i.imgur.com/1qSWQTn.gif

here we go... the clintons .... :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

There lives the problem.
But we need tighter rules for 'ALL' NPO's and it's not just a political thing, or a taxes thing.
But at present, because of the last round of election reform, it is the method of choice.
There are more 'NEW' NPO's in the last 8 years than ever existed in our history. And politics is the reason so it's going to be hard to get changes to protect 'the people' from all this political money looking for a way to filter to the politicians.

All of this reminds me that things have to get disastrous before people wake up and demand something different. All these rules are not complex by chance. Folks do not equate one or two issues with the problems they face. It's hundreds of seemingly little issues and growing.

Money = Free Speech... How much Free Speech is in your wallet.

In any case, I wonder why we are not hearing much about these investigations or exactly how many there are. I think all of them should be in the public eye so they can not be brushed under the rug and forgotten.

A 'CHARITY' org and a 'NON-PROFIT' org are not the same thing.
Not all NPO's are charities.
The Salvation Army is both.
There are also 'for profit charities'.
Trying to be clear to be fair when some take a hit from the fall-out that may likely come. Everyone's thinking about it needs to be correct.

Some years ago, they went after Goodwill Industries and the NRA is far beyond anything they were doing.