|
![]() |
|
SOP 98-2 is important, because it would require nonprofits to exaggerate the resources actually spent on fundraising activities. Currently, more and more regulatory and quasi-regulatory agencies use fundraising expenditures (as a percentage of total expenditures) as the basis for judging nonprofits. Further, federal and state agencies encourage donors to inquire regarding the percentage of expenditures allocated to fundraising before donating funds. Additionally, SOP 87-2 is cited in the Instructions for the 1997 IRS Form 990 (in the section addressing joint cost allocations involving fundraising). It can be anticipated that SOP 98-2 will replace SOP 87-2 in a future set of IRS instructions SOP 98-2 is controversial, because it was adopted in the face of vehement and nearly universal opposition from the nonprofit community, as well as opposition from an overwhelming majority of the Certified Public Accountants who commented on the prior draft that was publicly distributed (the "exposure draft"). The Free Speech Coalition actively encouraged nonprofits and fundraising agencies to submit comments to the AICPA regarding the exposure draft. FSC's own comments observed that the exposure draft (which is essentially identical to SOP 98-2) would create serious distortions (instead of accurate accounting allocations), was internally inconsistent, and established problematic tests in its effort to establish whether of not a particular activity is a "bona fide" program (or management and general) function. The Free Speech Coalition has contacted
the AICPA, seeking correspondence and memoranda regarding
possible revisions to SOP 87-2, including comments received
regarding the exposure draft, as well as documentation as to
how the SOP was field tested, the actual field testing
results, and any reports and recommendations. Some
information has been received from the AICPA, and efforts to
obtain the remaining information are ongoing. FSC is in the
process of preparing a Request for Reconsideration that FSC
is advised would be circulated to the relevant AICPA
committees and considered. If that approach does not work,
FSC will be examining a possible legal challenge to these
new standards.
FSDEF Files Amicus Brief in 10th Circuit ATA v. Giani
Appeal The following 501(c)(3)s joined FSDEF's brief: American Center for Law & Justice, American Studies Center, Americans Back in Charge Foundation, America's Future Inc., Citizens United Foundation, Claremont Institute, Free Congress Research & Education Foundation, Lincoln Institute for Research and Education, Inc., Local Government Council, National Center for Cardiac Information, Policy Analysis Center, Second Amendment Foundation, United States Equestrian Team, Inc., United States Taxpayers Institute , and Young America's Foundation. The following 501(c)(4)s also joined the brief: American Conservative Union, Christian Coalition, Citizens United, Council for Government Reform, Council of Volunteer Americans, Inc., The Seniors Coalition, 60 Plus Association, TREA Senior Citizens League, and United Seniors Association Inc. Direct Mail agencies joining the brief were: Concepts Direct, Inc., Delta Group USA, Inc., Morgan-Meredith & Associates, Richard Norman Company, Squire & Heartfield Direct, Inc., and Stephen Winchell & Associates. Mark Fitzgibbons, Esquire, attorney for
ATA, believes that the Tenth Circuit's decision in this case
is likely to be reviewed eventually by the U.S. Supreme
Court, because the case will greatly affect future
discussions of public policy issues in America. He
anticipates that the Court will recognize that this case is
one of the most important First Amendment cases in a long
time, as Utah's statute, and similar state statutes, are
having a significant impact on the right of Americans to
receive public policy information &emdash; core political
speech &emdash; from nonprofits. The states have continued
to grow bolder and more aggressive, adding more conditions
every year through their licensing and regulation of
nonprofit communications. Mr. Fitzgibbons observes that one
fearful consequence of a court decision upholding the
existing state charitable solicitation laws (in light of
state officials' propensity to expand their power) would be
the imposition of additional bureaucratic burdens on
nonprofit communications. By contrast, a win by ATA would
certainly inhibit state regulators' aggression against
nonprofits' Constitutionally-protected expression (as well
as American's rights to receive &emdash; and continued
access to &emdash; political speech).
U.S. Supreme Court Rejects Effort to Reduce First
Amendment Protections of Political Speech The appeal of the Sixth Circuit opinion
was openly admitted to be an effort to convince the Court to
overturn its 1976 decision in Buckley v. Valeo, which
recognized that political speech (including expenditures by
political candidates) was protected under the First
Amendment. The Director of the National Voting Rights
Institute, which represented the city of Cincinnati in the
appeal to the Supreme Court, stated that his organization's
effort to reduce the First Amendment protections accorded
political speech in elections "is potentially a decades-long
fight."
New Nonprofit Postage Rates Become Effective January
10, 1999 There are currently three ongoing appeals
(including one brought by the Alliance for Nonprofit
Mailers) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit which are challenging the new postage
rates. However, none of these appeals will delay the
scheduled implementation of new rates.
IRS Drops Proposal to Raise Threshold for Form 990
Reporting The IRS solicited comments on a proposal
to increase the threshold to $40,000 or higher, noting that
the threshold had not increased since 1982. However,
opposition from state attorneys general and other
bureaucrats led the IRS to drop the proposal. For example,
comments from the National Association of State Charities
Officials to the IRS asserted that "[i]t is often
the smaller, less sophisticated charities that have the
greatest need for checks and balances and public scrutiny."
Of course, any action which might reduce state charity
officials' ability to micromanage nonprofits will be fought
tooth and claw by those state bureaucrats. Evidently, it is
more important that the revenues of these small nonprofits
benefit regulators than that the nonprofits accomplish their
intended charitable purposes.
AARP, Federal Trade Commission, and State Attorneys
General Jointly Attack Telephone Solicitations As a first step, the FTC worked with AARP and state officials to develop this program. Later, federal and state officials joined AARP in a press conference where AARP announced its operation of what it called a "reverse boiler-room," using telemarketing to warn seniors against telephone fundraisers. AARP-recruited volunteers have also taped telemarketing calls (the legality of this practice has been questioned). The government officials' hostility towards telephone solicitations is modeled by Connecticut AG Richard Blumenthal, who intoned that, "Consumers should see red, and hear warning bells and whistles, whenever a telephone solicitor calls. The tactics may vary...but the result, invariably, is to deprive truly critical public and worthwhile charities of scarce dollars and credibility." The Director of the FTC's Bureau of
Consumer Protection was somewhat more restained when she
said that, "together, an aggressive law enforcement effort
and an educated consumer can stop fraudulent charitable
fundraising. We encourage consumers to continue their record
of generous giving, and suggest that they investigate, ask
questions, and seek information that will assure them their
contributions are being used as they intended." As part of
the joint program, the FTC has filed five federal lawsuits
alleging deceptive practices by telemarketers, while 10
state attorneys general have filed a total of 34 legal
actions alleging deceptive charity appeals.
|