Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: Did OWS Blackout Violate 501c3 Tax Status?

Posted 10 years ago on Jan. 19, 2012, 7:35 a.m. EST by aahpat (1407)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

The OWS blackout yesterday was specifically crafted to influence legislation. But, as has been posted elsewhere on these forums the tax laws limit what political activity OWS can engage in.

501c3- http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=96099,00.html

"...To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates..."

I disagree with OWS being in the tax status it has put itself in just so big contributors can evade paying taxes. It could end up really costing OWS both in money and in credibility.



Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by ithink (761) from York, PA 10 years ago

I doubt it. This website is a place for the exchange of information about OWS. As far as I understand it, the volunteers who run this website, do not receive funding from the OWS organization. As stated on the About page:

OccupyWallSt.org is the unofficial de facto online resource for the growing occupation movement happening on Wall Street and around the world. We're an affinity group committed to doing technical support work for resistance movements. We're not a subcommittee of the NYCGA nor affiliated with Adbusters, anonymous or any other organization.

[-] 1 points by aahpat (1407) 10 years ago

That is a very lawyerly and disingenuous job of splitting hairs.

Who buy the IP service?

[-] 1 points by jomojo (562) 10 years ago

Perhaps the persons in charge of the donated money could answer that. That would be who?