Ben Smith of Politico reports the following:
A Pennsylvania Jewish group that has claimed the Internal Revenue Service is targeting pro-Israel groups introduced in federal court today a letter from an IRS agent to another, unnamed organization that tax experts said was likely outside the usual or appropriate scope of an IRS inquiry.
“Does your organization support the existence of the land of Israel?” IRS agent Tracy Dornette wrote the organization, according to this week’s court filing, as part of its consideration of the organizations application for tax exempt status. “Describe your organization’s religious belief sytem toward the land of Israel.”
The document emerged in the course of a lawsuit filed in August by Z Street, a hawkish group that casts itself as the Zionist answer to the liberal J Street. Z Street claims that a different IRS agent reviewing its application for tax exempt status said the agency is “carefully scrutinizing organizations that are in any way connected with Israel” and that “a special unit” is determining whether its activities “contradict the Administration’s public policies.'”
The IRS can deny tax exempt status to groups that work against “established public policy,” a precedent established in its denial of a tax exemption to Bob Jones University over racial discrimination, and Z Street is suggesting that the IRS has begun applying some such policy to pro-Israel groups. The State Department has complained of tax exempt contributions to groups that fund weapons and equipment for West Bank settlers, which Z Street co-founder Lori Lowenthal Marcus said Z Street has never come close to doing.
“Given that we have fallen within this net, how big is the net?” she asked.
The agent’s question was contained in correspondence with “a Jewish religious organization” with no stated position on Israel, Z Street says in its court filing. The group’s tax adviser, Z Street says, shared the correspondence with Z Street. Z Street does not know the name of the group and may subpoena the tax adviser, who is no longer cooperating with them, for more information, Marcus said.
Several experts on non-profit tax law said the questions to the organization were unusual, at best, though they were also skeptical of the claim that the IRS is specifically targeting pro-Israel groups.
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
7 Responses
It should be the State of Israel, not the Land of Israel.
Opposing the Land of Israel would be like opposing Africa or Asia – geographic parts of the world with no political meaning.
Daniel Breslauer is correct. I don’t believe this story. It sounds very fishy. After all, all the major leaders are supporters of Zionism, Republican and Democrat, the Federal Reserve Bank (Bernanke after Greenspan), three of nine Supreme Court Justices, the Congress. Why would the IRS care. This is just some dumb anti-Obama propaganda.In any case, the IRS is not even an official government department, but is a collection agency for the International Monetary Fund because American “money” is merely Federal Reserve coupons not issued by the Treasury as required by the Constitution.
To 1and2
It’s true. I have a client who had the question. Describe your …. To the land of israel. They have nothing to do with eretz yisroel besides during davening as we all do. I don’t know the intentions of the IRS, it could be just to make sure that the organization doesn’t have an extremist policy. It’s still wrong just like assuming all jews are flight risks.
“contradict the Administration’s public policies.’”
That’s pretty strong language – in fact similar use of the IRS was one of the grounds for impeaching President Nixon
Perhaps they should give names and dates. If true this would be incredibly extraordinary. The original source should give his name, and the name of the IRS agent, and enough information to prove it (and hope you like Joe Biden as President – use of the IRS for political purposes is clearly a “high crime and misdemeanor”.
Frankly, I’ld be very skeptical of the charge’s veracity.
#3 the story is from Politico do you have any evidence to back up your claim?
The problem may be that Z Street was applying for 501c(3) status, which severely restricts advocacy work. J Street and AIPAC are a 501c(4) organizations.
to #5
As I said, I have a client who had the question. I saw the questionaire which is evidence to back up my claim.