-Caveat Lector-

>From Roll Call Online


Gingrich Group May Avoid IRS Sanctions

After Decision on Progress & Freedom Foundation, ALOF Also Could Be Cleared


By Damon Chappie

While the Internal Revenue Service has cleared one set of tax-exempt groups
linked to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.), the tax agency has
remained silent on another key part of the Gingrich enterprise.

The Abraham Lincoln Opportunity Foundation, the charity originally set up
to help inner-city youths but which was transformed into a fundraising
vehicle to beam Gingrich speeches across the country, may escape IRS
sanctions, according to its founder and other tax law experts.

A 1996 investigation by the House ethics committee revealed abuses of
tax-exempt rules in the operation of ALOF, which Gingrich allies used to
fund projects that his political committee, GOPAC, could not afford.

ALOF shared the same offices, directors, employees and telephone numbers as
GOPAC. Donors were told that tax-deductible contributions to ALOF would
count as payments for charter membership in GOPAC, and money flowed freely
between the two groups. But the foundation denied any connection to
political or partisan groups on its tax returns.

In the IRS' ruling earlier this month on the Progress & Freedom Foundation,
a successor to ALOF, the agency mentioned ALOF only in passing during a
long recitation of the facts of the case.

And while it cleared PFF along with the Kennesaw State University
Foundation and Reinhardt College for their roles in the production of
Gingrich's "Renewing American Civilization" course, the IRS has been silent
on ALOF.

Howard "Bo" Callaway, the former head of GOPAC and the founder of ALOF,
said in a telephone interview that he has heard nothing about ALOF from the
IRS.

Referring to the IRS ruling on PFF, Callaway said, "It seems to me that the
information in there is extremely parallel to what they allege the ALOF
did, because the person they were talking about in both cases was the same,
Newt Gingrich."

If anything, Callaway said he now expects clearance by the IRS of ALOF's
activities. "I would expect the same thing. I haven't heard from them and I
don't think that at this point I should have heard from them. I wouldn't
expect to hear from them."

And because ALOF went out of business in 1994, tax lawyers said the IRS may
never say anything about it, privately or publicly.

Revocation of tax-exempt status -- the sanction feared most by charitable
groups -- is no longer a serious threat to a dead organization, although
nothing would prevent the IRS from taking that action against ALOF.

"Sure they could I guess. Just like you could stab a dead man in the
heart," said William Lehrfeld, a tax lawyer who advises
conservative-leaning organizations.

But University of Miami tax law professor Frances Hill said, "If the
service has no curiosity about the Abraham Lincoln group and Gingrich's and
Callaway's role, then that goes along with the compartmentalization and the
fluffy kind of approach to fact-finding that we see in the other part of
this case."

The IRS admission that it did not obtain all the facts it needed in the PFF
case has perplexed tax attorneys and former IRS officials.

Several tax lawyers privately questioned whether the IRS caved in to a
series of attacks on different fronts, which included an overhaul of the
agency, lawsuits by conservative political groups and a review of political
audits ordered by GOP lawmakers.

The IRS audit of the Gingrich college course sparked an outcry from other
conservative groups, which claimed they were being targeted by the tax
agency. In turn, GOP lawmakers initiated a review of IRS audits of such
groups by the Joint Committee on Taxation.

The decision on PFF reached to the highest levels of the IRS but not to IRS
Commissioner Charles Rossotti, according to sources familiar with the
decision.

Rossotti was recused because of a potential conflict due to his wife's work
at a law firm that represented PFF.

The Congressional Accountability Project, an ethics watchdog group, has
asked the Treasury Department's inspector general to review the IRS ruling
to determine whether political pressure was applied.

In a Feb. 16 letter to Larry Rogers, the Treasury inspector general for tax
matters, CAP Director Gary Ruskin questioned why the IRS decided such an
important case on an incomplete record. In its ruling, the IRS said the
House ethics committee blocked access to transcripts during its probe.

IRS officials refused to comment on the case at all and also declined
comment on the request for an IG investigation.

Other tax experts said the IRS' reluctance to fully investigate the case of
PFF was unusual.

"It is strange to me that they didn't do an independent review," said
Milton Cerny, a tax attorney with Caplin & Drysdale who headed the IRS
exempt-organization section for 28 years.

The IRS said crucial testimony that may have made the difference was
withheld from the agency, including a transcript of testimony by a close
friend and adviser to Gingrich. But the IRS has not disclosed why it did
not seek the information on its own, as required by its procedures.

According to the IRS handbook for agents conducting such an audit, "You are
expected to pursue the examination to the extent necessary to ensure that
all significant items necessary for a proper determination of exempt status
can be made."

Cerny added that he was "mystified about why the service downplayed
Gingrich's status as a candidate. It seems to me there was a lot of
evidence suggesting that he was using the course to address an electorate
audience."

Other tax lawyers who studied the case also pointed to the IRS' minimizing
of evidence uncovered by the ethics committee and its outside counsel,
James Cole.

In a March 29, 1993, memo, Gingrich stated that one of the goals of getting
Republican activists committed to "Renewing American Civilization" was to
set up workshops built around the course. And that is exactly what PFF did,
which critics challenged as improper political activity by a non-profit.

"They sure ignored a lot of evidence and they were very cute in saying
there was a lot of evidence they couldn't get their hands on," said Gail
Harmon, a tax attorney.

Greg Colvin, a San Francisco tax lawyer and chairman of an American Bar
Association panel on charities and politics, agreed. "I was quite surprised
at the lengths [the] IRS went to downplay, if not outright disregard, the
relevance of Gingrich's statements."

Colvin also questioned the lack of focus on Gingrich's role in fundraising
for the course with the tax-exempt groups. "The IRS speaks of his role as a
teacher but not as an agent of fundraising," he said.

The IRS ruling also marks a major shift in that the agency for decades
focused heavily on a charitable group's intent in engaging in political
activities.

"What is revolutionary about this is that they have always talked about
intent in a very very fuzzy way. I think they have made it clear that there
is very little evidence of intent that they will look at," Harmon said.

For Jeffrey Yablon, the lawyer for PFF who handled the IRS audit, getting
the tax agency out of analyzing intent has been a long-term goal. Yablon
has long argued that intent should not matter.

For example, he points to a tax-exempt group that launches a voter
registration drive in poor, minority areas. If the IRS focused on intent,
it may discover that the reason for the drive was to help the Democratic
Party and it would have to deny tax-exempt status.

Yablon disagrees that the IRS ruling breaks new ground, but more than a
half-dozen tax lawyers said the IRS has shifted significantly.

Lehrfeld, who advised Gingrich during the ethics case, said the IRS ruling
"is interesting because the gist of the memo basically takes all of the
hyperbole and innuendo out of the case that Jim Cole made and treats the
stuff done by [PFF] as having the most importance. And then it gives little
or no credence to some of the stuff done by bystanders, including one Newt
Gingrich."

"This is really a breath of fresh air because what it says is that no one
else can speak for the tax-exempt organization."

Gingrich, even though he taught the course and was the only individual
broadcast across the country by satellite, never tied himself to the
tax-exempt groups in a formal manner. Instead, former aides on his
Congressional and campaign staffs set up and ran the Progress & Freedom
Foundation.

Lehrfeld said, "This means that you actually have to be on the board or be
an officer or have a contract for you to be able to speak with authority
for what the organization is."

So despite Gingrich's overtly political statements in his speech and other
documents, because he wasn't a formal officer, his comments did not impact
how the IRS viewed PFF.

Other tax layers said that will create an opening for politicians to create
stealth tax-exempt groups that do their bidding but have no formal, direct
ties to them.

Lehrfeld also noted the IRS has now narrowly construed its own victory in
the 1989 U.S. Tax Court decision on American Campaign Academy. The case,
which also involved Gingrich, has been one of the principle milestones in
this area of law and has been cited in many other cases involving charities
and politics. Indeed, the ruling in that case persuaded at least one of the
GOP ethics members at the time, the now-deceased Rep. Steve Schiff
(R-N.M.), to go against Gingrich.

<Picture: Back To Top>back to top


news scoops � politics � commentary � policy briefings
roll call files � classifieds

hill directory � let's discuss � about roll call � home

Copyright � 1999 Roll Call Inc. All rights reserved.




~~~~~~~~~~~~
A<>E<>R

The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Every great advance in natural knowledge has involved
the absolute rejection of authority. -Thomas Huxley
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to