Can House Republicans defeat the IRS monster?

Written by Allen West on February 26, 2014

Image: VariaZim

Anyone remember Lois Lerner? You know, the IRS official who pleaded the fifth, now chilling out in retirement with a six-figure taxpayer-funded pension — there’s not a “smidgen of corruption” in the IRS – that Lois Lerner? Well, she’s been summoned back to Capitol Hill to provide additional testimony about the IRS Tea Party targeting scandal.

But that’s not the only interesting smidgen surrounding the IRS. The White House is threatening to veto a House bill that would block the IRS from issuing a new rule that would narrow the definition of who qualifies for a 501(c)(4) exemption as a social welfare organization, making it more difficult for conservative organizations to achieve non-profit status. We recently reported on the efforts of attorney Cleta Mitchell and Catherine Engelbrecht of True The Vote to stop this “weaponizing of the IRS.”

As Bridget Johnson at PJ Media reports, Activities that would disqualify an organization seeking 501(c)(4) status include “communications that expressly advocate for a clearly identified political candidate or candidates of a political party,” “any contribution that is recognized under campaign finance law as a reportable contribution,” hosting a candidate at an event within 60 days of a general election, and voter registration or “get-out-the-vote” drives. The OMB called the IRS proposal “the first step in a standard rulemaking process intended to clarify the rules and to provide greater certainty for organizations seeking tax-exempt status.”

What I wonder is how the new rule would constrain the activities of major unions like the AFL-CIO, SEIU, and the NEA/AFT (teachers unions)? Also, what would you classify the progressive socialist group Organizing for Action and ACORN (or whatever they’re calling themselves now)?

The GOP is trying to fight back. This week the House passed Rep. Pete Roskam’s (R-Ill.) Taxpayer Transparency and Efficient Audit Act, which would require the IRS to alert taxpayers when their information is shared with other federal agencies, and the Protecting Taxpayers from Intrusive IRS Requests Act, which bars the IRS from inquiring about a taxpayer’s religious, political or social beliefs. But par for the course, this will probably end up in Harry Reid’s circular file just like the hundreds of other pieces of legislation the House has passed.

We must constrain the power of the IRS which has become a tool of political power, a weapon against the American people.

The best course of action is tax code reform – something Dave Camp, Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee is spearheading –hopefully not with the same results as everything else the House passes and sends to the Senate.

Camp’s plan calls for cutting the top corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent while taxing the two individual tax brackets at rates of 10 percent and 25 percent, and reflects overhaul goals spelled out in the Republican-backed budget.

I fully support moving towards a flat tax system for corporate and personal income taxes. With the corporate rate lowered to 25 percent, there should be no exemptions or loopholes. As well, the two-tiered personal income tax rate is simple and would promote economic growth, especially for small business owners who use their personal income tax rate. I would keep only two exemptions for personal income taxes: mortgage interest and charitable contributions. We need a true stimulus, not some Keynesian government “investment” scheme, but one that stimulates economic growth and gets our GDP going in a positive direction.

Further, I recommend eliminating death, dividends, and capital gains taxes. Incumbent with these tax reforms will be the necessity to streamline the federal government and prioritize its spending. I know some want to move immediately towards a Fair (consumption-based) tax system. I believe that could be a long-range goal after the flat tax initiatives get America to a certain level of economic productivity.

Regardless, we must reduce the invasive monster that the Internal Revenue Service has become. Lastly, always remember one of the tenets of Marx in the Communist Manifesto was a “progressive tax system.” And here we are…

Read a free excerpt of Allen's new book, Guardian of the Republic. Click here.

← Previous Story Obama vacations have cost you $18 million — so far

Next Story → Common core math explains Obamacare results!

Bob Smooper

“making it more difficult for conservative organizations to achieve non-profit status.”

It would make it more difficult for all organizations, Liberal, Conservative or neutral to achieve non-profit status.

Why is the right talking like these new rules would only apply to right-wing groups? Loads of left-wing groups would go out of business too if it passed.
- tcn
  
  The distinction comes about when you realize that the only groups that have these laws enforced against them are conservative. The IRS has yet to target any group that is not. Do you really think the laws will be applied equally?
- BobGuy
  
  Frankly, there should be no exemptions for any group, person, church, business, school, or any other entity that earns a dollar. That would be leveling the playing field. Of course, there should actually be no federal income tax on any of these entities anyway. The tax should be paid to the abode of the entity… that governing body would pay to the next higher level. Basically… eliminate the IRS in its entirety except for a single co missioner and an assistant who would process the returns from the states and territories.
  
  EVERYBODY NEEDS TO PAY. Everybody needs skin in the game… NO Exceptions, NO exemptions, NO credits. Just ten percent paid to a single government body that you earn in. That’s it.
Arthur

why don’t the house either not fund the IRS or abolish it?
- Reba
  
  Yes, why don’t they start cutting funding on all of these issues? Why don’t they make a list of all the wrongs and take it to the Supreme Court?
Arthur

Get rid of the IRS before they get rid of us. Our government is out of control either cast them off start by abolishing the IRS…what is it going to take millions with guns to force march on Washington.
Exodus2011

Attention VA Patriots! - this Candidate is trying to unseat Eric Cantor in November - here are a couple of his tweets:

Peter Greenwald @GreenwaldVA07

The #FairTax eliminates nearly $400B in compliance costs, abolishes the #IRS and grows the economy. #greenwaldforcongress #PJNET #CCOT

When Senator @TedCruz and @SenMIkeLee took a stand against Obamacare Eric Cantor failed to rally to the Conservative banner. #PJNET #CCOT
sweetie

The IRS should not be able to be used by our government as a “police” force. If we had a straight tax bill that would be the same for everyone, the IRS would not be needed, and there would be more money to run our country as “we” see fit.
.
Glenn Koons

If you ever get back in Congress, may this be your first bill: abolish the IRS, put forward a real tort and tax reform perhaps getting Camp to help and John Kasich, guv of Ohio. Both seem to understand taxes better than any Dem. Thanks Allen. Run again and win Sir.
Reba

This year Obama increased the tax deduction to 10% which means few would be able to meet the deductions. Mr. West, what would you do with the Medical Deductions?
BobGuy

Well, if I were king the IRS would consist of one commissioner and an administrative assistant. The tax code would be less than two pages in length. In a nutshell, on a quartely basis all earning entities would pay ten percent of net income to the governing entity in which they reside. Each governing entity would pay ten percent to the next higher entity. So an individual or a corporation would pay ten percent to the town, city, or county (if in an unincorporated area). Then the town or city would pay to the county, and the county would pay to the state. Territories and states would pay to the Feds. The single commissioner would process each return with the help of his single staff member. There would be no exemptions, no credits, no adjustments for any reason whatsoever. You make a dollar, you pay ten percent to the community you live in. They handle the paying to the next higher level. No working person would pay a single cent to the Federal government except by merit of having paid the governing body of their own abode.

In a nutshell, there would be NO INDIVIDUAL FEDERAL INCOME TAX. All laws aligned to that concept would be nullified. If you work in American Samoa, or on Wake Island, you would pay what that community requires of any other individuals who earn there… period.

If you set up a political action “club” and take in money, your club pays ten percent to the community in which it resides or is headquartered. Every earning entity pays ten percent… even churches. No favoritism of any sort is required or desired. No whining! Pay up.

Poverty is one area I am not sure of. At what point is someone unable to contribute a dime from each dollar they take in? Well, from the reports of welfare recipients buying pot and booze and cigarettes with their stipends the threshold should be set pretty low.

Welfare programs and aid for education, highway and bridge repair, and so forth, would be the responsibility of that community or state. If they are too poor to make ends meet, they can petition the next higher entity for help in the form of loans or grants. No programs of such a nature would be funded directly by the Federal government except Interstate highways and national defense projects.

But that’s just me.
Jeffersonian_Libertarian

Flat tax or consumption tax (my favorite) and a 0% corporate income tax, no deductions. Our economy would come roaring back, our coffers full and the fools in Washington could no longer use the tax code as a weapon against their enemies, a gift to their friends or the protection racket that makes even mafia dons wince.
MotherBatherick

I agree with LTC West on having a flat tax for corporate and personal income and lowering the corporate rate. I also agree with Congressman Trey Gowdy; until or unless she answers questions and says exactly what/who it is she should be given immunity from, Lerner should be treated as a defendant and NEVER be given immunity!
- Reba
  
  Hi Mother Batherick. She will not answer questions unless she is protected and I don’t blame her, because I would not do it either. Once she answers, she would be hung out to dry. Give her immunity, so we will have answers.
Bryan Ewbank

How about we simply say 10% to the state you live in, and the fed gets 10% from the states?