freedom vote inc

=<div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2020/12/florida-voter-registration/">https://www.alternet.org/2020/12/florida-voter-registration/</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">broken promises 501c4</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/legal-action/legal-complaints/crew-florida-dark-money-group-violated-federal-law/">https://www.citizensforethics.org/legal-action/legal-complaints/crew-florida-dark-money-group-violated-federal-law/</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">no lnx</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Washington—The Internal Revenue Service should investigate a dark money group that appears to have violated its tax-exempt status by spending 99.6% of its funds on political expenses, mostly to support a suspected spoiler candidate running for state office, despite being registered as a social welfare organization, according to a complaint sent today by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington to the IRS. It is apparent from its tax documents that the appropriately named Broken Promises failed to properly disclose its political contributions and served to primarily influence political campaigns.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Documents show that in 2018, Broken Promises made seven political contributions to political committees in Florida. According to its 2018 tax year documents, the dark money group spent a total of $161,010, though it failed to disclose that $160,470 of it went towards political activity. Most of the money was in-kind contributions of advertising or direct mail provided to the political committee Friends of Charles Goston, which supported an independent candidate whose state Senate race candidacy was directly backed by donations from Republican lobbyists, raising suspicions that it was part of a spoiler effort “to split the Democratic vote to help Republicans.” </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Rather than disclosing this spending, Broken Promises told the IRS that it did not engage in any “direct or indirect political campaign activities on behalf of or in opposition to candidates for public office” and failed to file relevant documents related to its political expenditures and grants. With more than 99 percent of the group’s total spending going toward political activity, Broken Promises is in clear violation of its tax-exempt status. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“Broken Promises blatantly misled the IRS about its primary activities and exploited our federal tax laws to get the benefits nonprofits are entitled to while secretly acting as a political organization,” said CREW Executive Director Noah Bookbinder. “The law is clear that tax-exempt organizations that receive tax benefits and do not disclose donors cannot spend the majority of their money on politics, but that is exactly what Broken Promises did.” </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Nonprofits like Broken Promises are allowed to spend money on elections, though it cannot be their primary activity, which is commonly understood to be more than 50 percent of its total spending. Tax-exempt organizations like Broken Promises also must report information about their political campaign activity for or against candidates to the IRS. Contributions to political action committees, like the ones Broken Promises made in 2018, clearly meet the IRS’ definition of political expenditures, which includes “[a]ll activities that support or oppose candidates for elective federal, state, or local public office.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div>CREW has previously filed complaints against other 501(c)(4) organizations for failing to report political activity and providing misleading information about their operations to the IRS. In 2019, dark money group Freedom Vote, Inc. paid a penalty to the IRS following a complaint CREW filed in June 2018 alleging that the group was primarily operating in violation of its tax-exempt status to influence political campaigns. </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“For far too long, dark money groups have secretly wielded their influence to overshadow the voices and interests of the American public, and it is past time for the IRS to ensure that nonprofit groups do not abuse their tax status to improperly influence politics,” said Bookbinder. “The IRS should open an investigation into Broken Promises’ behavior and should they be found in violation of the law, act swiftly to reconsider their tax status.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"> </div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-investigations/freedom-vote-shut-down-following-crew-complaints/">https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-investigations/freedom-vote-shut-down-following-crew-complaints/</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="">...It appears the IRS may have actually taken action against a dark money group. In June 2018, CREW filed an <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/legacy/2018/06/Freedom-Vote-IRS-complaint-6-8-18.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">IRS complaint</a> against Freedom Vote, Inc., a politically-active nonprofit formed in 2010. The complaint requested that the tax agency investigate whether the nonprofit group was operated primarily to influence political campaigns in violation of its tax-exempt status and if the group violated federal law by failing to disclose more than $1 million it spent to run <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4438794-Freedom-Vote-Anti-Strickland-Ad-Transcript-w.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">an ad</a> targeting the Ohio Senate race in 2016. In a previous <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/legacy/2017/03/Freedom-Vote-IRS-complaint-6-15-16.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">complaint filed against the group in 2016</a>, CREW also questioned the group’s political spending during the 2014 election.   Almost exactly a year after CREW filed its most recent complaint, the politically active nonprofit, which was organized under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code, filed its <a href="https://apps.irs.gov/pub/epostcard/cor/273004397_201909_990EO_2019082916607201.pdf" style="background-color: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">final tax return</a> with the IRS as the group <a href="https://bizimage.ohiosos.gov/api/image/pdf/201914901112" style="background-color: transparent; box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">officially terminated</a> its existence on May 31, 2019. On the final page of the tax return, Freedom Vote revealed that before shutting down it <a href="https://apps.irs.gov/pub/epostcard/cor/273004397_201909_990EO_2019082916607201.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">paid $23,096 to the IRS</a> for what it described as “tax, penalty, interest.” <img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-164511 aligncenter lazy-load" alt="" data-src="https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/freedom990.jpg" src="https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/freedom990.jpg" style="box-sizing: border-box; vertical-align: middle; max-width: 100%; height: auto; border-style: none; opacity: 0;" />Freedom Vote’s tax return does not offer any details on what it was penalized for. It is also unclear exactly how the money was apportioned among those three descriptions, but the payment accounted for roughly a quarter of the money Freedom Vote spent while winding down. If the IRS did penalize Freedom Vote for the extensive political activity detailed in one or both of CREW’s complaints, it would represent an extremely rare instance of the IRS cracking down on a social welfare nonprofit over its efforts to influence elections. Last year, ProPublica’s Maya Miller <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/irs-political-dark-money-groups-501c4-tax-regulation" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">reported</a> that “the IRS’ attempts to police this class of nonprofits have almost completely broken down.”Nonprofits like Freedom Vote are allowed to spend money on elections, but it <a href="https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/other-non-profits/political-activity-and-social-welfare" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">cannot</a> be their primary activity, which is commonly defined as not dedicating more than 50 percent of total spending to politics. They also <a href="https://www.irs.gov/forms-pubs/about-schedule-c-form-990-or-990-ez" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">must report information</a> about their political campaign activity to the IRS on their tax returns. Since these groups are not required to disclose their contributors, they are commonly referred to as “dark money” groups when they spend money to intervene in elections. The Center for Responsive Politics recently <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/reports/a-decade-under-citizens-united" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">noted</a> that dark money groups have “flooded elections with $963 million in outside spending” since the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/citizens-united-money-in-politics/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">a decade ago</a>. Freedom Vote was <a href="https://bizimage.ohiosos.gov/api/image/pdf/201018700812" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">established</a> as a nonprofit in Ohio in 2010 less than six months after the Citizens United <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">ruling</a>. Politico reported that it was <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2010/09/state-parties-look-past-rnc-for-cash-041733" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">formed</a> “with the express purpose of raising money to help pay for the type of turnout operations traditionally underwritten by the [Republican National Committee].” According to its first two <a href="https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/display_990/273004397/2011_09_EO%2F27-3004397_990O_201009" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">tax</a> <a href="https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/display_990/273004397/2012_09_EO%2F27-3004397_990O_201109" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">returns</a>, which cumulatively cover the 2010 election, Freedom Vote spent heavily on what it called “issues education” and “voter registration efforts.” It did not report any political activity to either the IRS or the Federal Election Commission (FEC). During that period, Freedom Vote, which does not disclose its donors, received <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/contrib.php?cmte=C90014754&cycle=2014" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">hundreds of thousands</a> of dollars in grants from <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/press-release/koch-brothers-groups-hit-massive-fines-crew-complaint/" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">dark money groups</a> that <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/what-karl-roves-dark-money-nonprofit-told-the-irs" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">supported</a> Republican candidates in 2010. The group’s fundraising and spending dropped significantly over the next <a href="https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/display_990/273004397/2013_08_EO%2F27-3004397_990O_201209" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">two</a> <a href="https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/display_990/273004397/2014_08_EO%2F27-3004397_990O_201309" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">years</a> and it did not report any political expenditures. During the 2014 election, however, Freedom Vote reported to the FEC that it spent <a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C90014754/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">$174,607</a> on independent expenditures <a href="https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C90014754/939676/f57" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">supporting</a> <a href="https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-bin/forms/C90014754/939780/f57" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">then-House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH)</a> in his primary election. All of the spending occurred during Freedom Vote’s 2013 tax year, covering October 1, 2013 to September 30, 2014, when the nonprofit <a href="https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/display_990/273004397/2015_09_EO%2F27-3004397_990O_201409" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">told the IRS</a> it spent $284,754 overall. As CREW noted in its first IRS complaint, that meant that political activity accounted for <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Freedom-Vote-IRS-complaint-6-15-16.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">61 percent</a> of Freedom Vote’s total spending, apparently making politics the group’s primary activity.    Freedom Vote spent even more money on politics during the 2016 election. Between December 29, 2015 and October 5, 2016, Freedom Vote contributed <a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/receipts/?data_type=processed&contributor_name=freedom+vote&contributor_name=freedomvote" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">$1.975 million</a> to Fighting for Ohio Fund, a super PAC <a href="https://www.cleveland.com/open/2016/05/rob_portman_super_pac_launches.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">supporting</a> Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) in his reelection efforts. Freedom Vote’s contributions, the true source of which are unknown, accounted for roughly 20 percent of the super PAC’s <a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00573014/?cycle=2016" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">total funding</a> during the 2016 election. On its <a href="https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/273004397/201732279349301403/full" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">2015 tax return</a>, covering October 1, 2015 to September 30, 2016, Freedom Vote acknowledged the $1.7 million in super PAC contributions it made during that time period as political activity as well as a little more than $44,000 in additional political spending that it did not detail. The acknowledged political  spending alone accounted for 48.8 percent of Freedom Vote’s total spending that year.The super PAC contributions were not the only way Freedom Vote backed Portman during the election though. During June and July  of 2016, Freedom Vote also <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/ad-data/document?id=43345754" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">paid</a> to run an <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/ad-data/document?id=39730051" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">ad</a> on Ohio television stations attacking Portman’s opponent, former Ohio Gov. Ted Strickland. Freedom Vote never made the ad publicly available online, but CREW obtained a <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4438794-Freedom-Vote-Anti-Strickland-Ad-Transcript-w.html" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">copy of the ad</a> that aired on a Cincinnati television station in June 2016. In the ad, Freedom Vote criticized Strickland for job losses in Ohio while he was in office, claiming, “If you assembled everyone who lost their job under Strickland, you’d have Ohio’s third largest city.” The ad then referred to Strickland’s Senate candidacy, saying he now “wants to bring his job-killing policies to Washington” while flashing an image of the U.S. Capitol. The ad closed by suggesting Strickland should not be allowed to go to Washington as a senator, arguing that “we can’t afford more lost jobs.” <img class="size-full wp-image-164510 aligncenter lazy-load" alt="" data-src="https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/freedomvote.png" src="https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/freedomvote.png" style="box-sizing: border-box; vertical-align: middle; max-width: 100%; height: auto; border-style: none; opacity: 0;" />Freedom Vote <a href="https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C90014754/" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">did not report</a> any of its ad spending to the FEC as independent expenditures or to the IRS as political activity on its 2015 tax return, so the exact amount spent to run the plainly political ad is unclear. CREW, however, <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/196mO33q8_On-vUBDFWfPP7uzEKqqqZY-Q989NhyJKrk/edit?usp=sharing" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">analyzed</a> ad buying contracts on file with the Federal Communications Commission and <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/ad-data" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">collected</a> by the Center for Responsive Politics, <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Freedom-Vote-IRS-complaint-6-8-18.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">estimating</a> that the nonprofit spent more than $1 million to run ads in June and July 2016. Freedom Vote did report on its <a href="https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/273004397/201732279349301403/full" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">tax return</a> that it spent $1,121,077 on “issue advocacy” during its 2015 tax year, an amount that appears to account for the anti-Strickland ad buy and provides a minimum estimate of how much was spent on the ads. Combining that minimum ad cost estimate with the amount Freedom Vote acknowledged to the IRS as political activity suggests that political spending constituted <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Freedom-Vote-IRS-complaint-6-8-18.pdf" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">at least 80.1 percent</a> of the group’s total spending that year. As a result, Freedom Vote appears to have operated primarily to influence political campaigns in violation of its tax-exempt status. As a <a href="https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/exempt-organizations-general-issues-complaints-about-activities-of-exempt-organizations" style="box-sizing: border-box; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">rule</a>, the IRS does not disclose information about how it substantively responds to complaints against tax-exempt organizations. But Freedom Vote’s termination in the wake of CREW’s complaints and its disclosure that it paid “tax, penalty, interest” to the IRS suggests that the IRS may have taken some kind of action against the group for its apparent violations. CREW also filed <a href="https://www.citizensforethics.org/wp-content/uploads/legacy/2018/06/Freedom-Vote-FEC-Complaint-6-7-18.pdf" class="hovered" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">a complaint with the FEC</a> regarding Freedom Vote’s failure to report its anti-Strickland ad spending as independent expenditures and its failure to register as a political committee despite exhibiting a major purpose of influencing elections. The FEC, which has <a href="https://thefulcrum.us/what-the-fec-can-but-mostly-cannot-do-with-only-three-regulators-on-the-job" class="hovered" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">lacked a quorum</a> necessary to take many actions since September 2019, keeps its enforcement matters <a href="https://www.fec.gov/legal-resources/enforcement/complaints-process/" class="hovered" style="box-sizing: border-box; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-color: rgb(146, 162, 184); text-underline-position: under; transition: all 0.3s ease 0s;">confidential</a> until they are concluded. CREW has not yet been informed that the complaint against Freedom Vote has been resolved. </div></div>