Showing posts with label tax. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tax. Show all posts

Saturday, August 8, 2009

How'd This Mess Start? Part II: LWCC, Hammond, & Bachmann

As mentioned in the last post, tax-exempt organizations are limited in their political activity. The IRS Guide for churches and religious organizations explains that
…(S)ection 501(c)(3) organizations, including churches and religious 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. …(P)ublic statements of position (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of the organization in favor of … any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise tax.
Some election-related activities are fine so long as they're done in a non-partisan manner. For example, a candidates’ forum to which all candidates for an office are invited, or a get-out-the-vote drive, could be acceptable. If election-related activities favored a certain candidate or a certain group of candidates, they’d be prohibited for a church that wanted to remain tax-exempt. The IRS provides free resources, like the online guide linked above, to help churches understand the requirements.

What About Free Speech Rights?

The leaders of tax-exempt organizations DO have the right under the 1st Amendment to speak out for candidates, but they must do so as individuals and not use the organization’s platforms (services, gatherings or newsletters) to do so. A statement by a pastor at Sunday church that “I'm voting for X” would not be okay, but a statement at a campaign rally in a park would be fine, as long the pastor makes clear he speaks for himself and not the church.

What About Inviting a Candidate to Speak?

A candidate being invited to speak in a church gathering might be okay, if done in non-partisan way. Does the church provide the same opportunity to all the candidates seeking the same office? Does the church avoid showing support of or opposition to any candidate? A church in Iowa does (or at least used to) invite each candidate for President to speak at its Sunday services, one candidate per week, in the Sundays leading up to the presidential caucuses. That is acceptable because the opportunity was open to each candidate, and there were no comments by the leadership for or against anyone. Other churches have held candidate forums at which all candidates for a particular office are given the chance to talk about the issues.

Michele Bachmann Visits Living Word Christian Center

In 2006, then-State Senator Michele Bachmann was running for the U.S. Congress. On October 14, three weeks before election day, she spoke at LWCC’s Saturday night service, right after a sermon by Mac Hammond. Pastor Mac introduced her by saying,“We can’t publicly endorse as a church, and would not, any candidate, but I can tell you personally that I’m going to vote for Michele Bachmann. Because I’ve come to know her, what she stands for, and I want her to share her testimony with you tonight.”

Michele Bachmann got up and spoke for 15 minutes or more. She expressed appreciation for the opportunity to meet the "fellow believers" at LWCC. Mrs. Bachmann talked passionately about hearing God's message when she was 16 years old and being faithful to God through the stages of her life, saying she was not "lukewarm" but "hot for God." She worked in resume items--college, law school, an advanced law degree, marriage, being a foster parent and serving in the Minnesota Senate. Near the end of her talk Bachmann explained her work as a state senator on the "definition of marriage" issue. She also talked about her run for the Congress, saying,"It's one of the top three races" in the U.S. because the race would decide "which way this country will go."

(My thought: Her talk raises the question--what is the difference between "testimony" and a campaign speech? But even if her talk could be considered strictly non-partisan, Mac Hammond's endorsement from the pulpit was clearly in violation of IRS rules and potentially endangered LWCC's tax-exempt status.)

When Mrs. Bachmann had finished, Mac Hammond spoke again, saying, "It's important. We need to put people of God in office. And I don't want any more letters about 'church and politics don't mix.'"

Here is video of Mac Hammond's introduction of Michele Bachmann that night. The visual is blurry but he can be clearly heard.



10/17/06 Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed a complaint with the IRS based on Hammond's introduction of Mrs. Bachmann at the 10/14/06 church service. CREW is a non-profit group dedicated to holding public officials accountable for their actions.

CREW said that Hammond's introduction absolutely prohibtited from interfering in election under “very favorable tax benefits public charities receive” under 501(c)(3). CREW's 10/17 information release said,

On October 14, 2006 Ms. Bachmann delivered a campaign stump speech from the Living Word Christian Center’s pulpit and the church’s pastor, Mac Hammond, openly endorsed her candidacy. Pastor Hammond’s comments and Ms. Bachmann’s speech were made during the Living Word Christian Center’s weekend services, presented before the entire congregation and broadcast over the Internet. By using church resources to promote the candidacy of Ms. Bachmann, the church jeopardized its tax status.

At the time, CREW's executive director chided the IRS for having investigated "only progressive organizations such as the All Saints Church in Pasadena, California, the NAACP and Texans for Public Justice. This complaint and the clear evidence supporting it should spur the IRS to investigate the Living Word Christian Center and all 501(c)(3) charities that abuse their status, regardless of ideology.”

That was how LWCC and Mac Hammond started making the news in 2006. There has been no sanction from the IRS for the incident, but the endorsement of Bachmann set in motion some other difficulties for LWCC and Mac Hammond. And it came to light later that Mac Hammond did not live in the 6th Congressional District, and so was not eligible to vote for Michele Bachmann. Mrs. Bachmann was elected to Congress that year and reelected in 2008.


Videos of Bachmann's LWCC talk are available on You Tube here and here.

How'd This Mess Start? What does the IRS Have to do with LWCC?

This post will try to explain how LWCC’s governance and financial dealings with Mac Hammond came to the attention of the IRS, which put LWCC in a negative light in the eyes of some.

What Taxes Do

As everyone knows, the programs of our government, from the federal to the state, county and city levels, are paid for through our taxes. At the federal level, military operations, including the weapons, vehicles, rations and other supplies of our men and women overseas, are paid for through tax dollars. So are the service academies, air traffic control, homeland security, weather service, Medicare and more. The CDC and health departments do research, testing and/or sharing of information to help identify illnesses like H1N1 and prevent the spread of disease.

State funds pay for state highway construction & repair, bridges, state court system, state park management, highway patrol and more. Regionally, we support our airports and public transportation system. City or county funds pay for hospitals, road maintenance, sidewalks, streetlights, sewer, police and fire protection, and other local needs. Of course there are many other functions of government, all of which cost money.

Tax-Exemption under IRS Code 501(c)(3)

There are some who (very loudly!) object to paying taxes, say taxes are too high, or argue that their tax dollars are not being spent the way they want. I doubt if anyone agrees 100% with the way public funds are spent. But we all use or benefit from government services to a greater or lesser degree.

Most people and businesses are expected to pay income, sales and property taxes to support these various levels of government. But under section 501(c)(3) of the IRS code, religious, charitable, educational, and certain other organizations may be exempt from tax so long as they meet certain requirements. IRS Charities article

Non-profit organizations were exempted from tax in recognition of their benefit to the community. A large church such as LWCC will still use certain public services such as infrastructure (road, sewage, streetlight, etc.), fire and police protection. But unlike its residential and business neighbors, LWCC is exempt from property taxes because of 501(c)(3).

In order to keep its tax-exempt status, a church or other entity must be organized and operated for exempt purposes only (like religion, helping the poor, education, etc.) and none of its earnings may “inure to” (benefit) any individual--more about that in futures posts. In addition, it it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates. IRS on exemption requirements

More about tax exemption and the "Bachmann episode" in the next post.

 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.