In our Liberty Update this week, we highlight the latest illegal leak of thousands of supposedly confidential…
CFIF on Twitter CFIF on YouTube
ProPublica/IRS Leak: There's No Underlying "There" There

In our Liberty Update this week, we highlight the latest illegal leak of thousands of supposedly confidential Internal Revenue Service (IRS) taxpayer returns spanning over 15 years, confirming that the partisan and power-hungry IRS simply cannot be trusted to safeguard our sensitive records, let alone to begin collecting sensitive private information from nonprofit organizations on donors who contribute to them in violation of the First Amendment.

Getting to the substance of the ProPublica/IRS leaked documents themselves, former Senator Phil Gramm and U.S. Policy Metrics partner Mike Solon explain in The Wall Street Journal how there's nothing scandalous in the least in what they reveal:

ProPublica’s 'blockbuster' story showing that the wealthy 'pay income taxes that are only…[more]

June 18, 2021 • 04:40 PM

Liberty Update

CFIFs latest news, commentary and alerts delivered to your inbox.
CFIF Praises Treasury Department/IRS Rule Protecting Donor Privacy Print
By CFIF Staff
Wednesday, May 27 2020

ALEXANDRIA, VA – Yesterday, the U.S. Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) released final regulations relieving certain not-for-profit organizations of the requirement to provide the names and addresses of donors on the Schedule B form as part of their annual tax returns filed with the IRS.

In response, Center for Individual Freedom (CFIF) president Jeffrey Mazzella issued the following statement praising the decision: 

“CFIF enthusiastically applauds the Trump Administration for finally accomplishing this critical measure to protect Americans’ First Amendment rights.  Furthermore, we thank Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R – Kentucky), House Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R - Louisiana) and Congressman Kevin Brady (R – Texas), among other members of Congress, for their leadership and commitment on this important issue.

"As Americans have become all too aware, assaults against our First Amendment freedoms of speech and association by government officials have increased in recent years. For example, rogue IRS officials in the mold of Lois Lerner have collected and leaked private information regarding contributors to 501(c) nonprofit organizations contained in mandatory Schedule B forms that by law were to remain confidential.  Additionally, vindictive state officials have demanded Schedule B forms and confidential donor information. 

"For its part, the IRS acknowledged that Schedule B information is irrelevant to oversight of filings or enforcement of the tax code, thus serving no substantive legal purpose.  Previous IRS Commissioners and others have also questioned the need for Schedule B forms and admitted that the IRS can't guarantee confidentiality of the information contained in them.  That’s simply intolerable in this era of persecution of private citizens for their political beliefs. 

“We at CFIF commend the Treasury Department and IRS for finally eliminating the requirement to disclose the names and addresses of donors on the Schedule B for many nonprofit organizations." 

CFIF has for years spearheaded a broad coalition effort to eliminate the Schedule B requirement, including filing formal comments in support of the rulemaking.

###

Quiz Question   
What is the current U.S. national debt?
More Questions
Notable Quote   
 
"Last month, we warned Republicans about the pitfalls of indulging President Biden's infrastructure fantasies. The bipartisan framework announced Thursday isn't causing us to change our mind.There is much to dislike about the so-called compromise proposal (even putting aside the minor detail that the nation's infrastructure is not, in fact, in dire need of repair). The deal negotiated by a group of…[more]
 
 
—The Editors, National Review
— The Editors, National Review
 
Liberty Poll   

In the first Supreme Court term with Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett all now on the bench, how satisfied are you with decisions in cases you care about?