Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Exam # 257710
LAWS C571.01
Submitted April 15
as individuals during our camping activities; members bore most costs of the
hoc fashion. In addition, some members had little interaction with the rest of
the group with the exception of one annual camping event. However,
members and a desire to socialize more often, the camping group decided to
formally organize.
2
about the benefits and possibility of becoming a recognized organization.
This paper analyses the options that the camping group has in becoming a
recognized organization.
and leadership. Since the camping group will not be operating to generate
because of the financial benefits that can it can bestow. Such benefits can
include exemption from federal, state, and local taxes, special grants,
3
government funding, special postage rates, and tax deductions for
qualifications vary and are specified within the definitions of the many types
The most prevalent type of tax exempt organization is the section 501(c)(3)
desire to organize.
even before the 18th century. Those organizations in the distant past that
first received preferential tax treatment were usually churches or some type
This is the case in organizations that are not very financially distinct from its
individual members. There are more rationales that explain why tax
exemption exists, though not discussed here. Additionally, there are even
4
more philosophical theories underneath the rationales of tax exemption, the
The most popular theory behind tax exemption is the subsidy theory.
The subsidy theory states that tax exemption is justified on the basis of the
though. Critics of the subsidy theory claim that such tax benefits are the
There are four main alternatives to the traditional subsidy theory; they
are the income measurement theory, the capital formation theory, the
altruism theory, and the donative theory. The income measurement theory
net income of the entity.”13 The capital formation theory suggests that
tax subsidies because the founders of nonprofits chose to forgo profits in the
5
theory, states that nonprofits that are capable of attracting substantial
There are more theories and principles of tax exemption that have
been omitted. While these are unimportant for the analysis of the camping
exclusively for one of the aforementioned purposes, may not inure any
6
substantially influence legislation, and may not participate in any political
campaigning activities.19
intent.21
Despite the possible burdens that will be incurred if the camping group
once initial recognition has occurred. There are initial barriers to recognition
the Internal Revenue Service that can be applied to determine tax exempt
7
status, (the organizational test, the operational test, the private inurement
test, and the political activities test), as well as two court created tests, (the
camping group. While failure of any of these tests could result in the denial
increasing significance.
The public policy doctrine originated with the 1958 case of Tank Truck
Rentals, Inc. v. Comm’r.27 Tank Truck Rentals held that fines assessed in
the state.28 Later, in Bob Jones Univ. v. U.S., the Court adopted the view that
public policy.”29,30,31
8
The camping group will not fail if examined under the public policy
doctrine. The camping group abides by all federal laws as well as any local,
The camping group, in its preliminary by-laws, also specifically prohibits drug
The commerciality doctrine also “appears to hold that once a tax exempt
test, discussed infra. In fact, this court created doctrine is so closely related
to the operational test that some scholars believe that the commerciality
9
doctrine poses problems for organizations that have some type of
The camping group will probably not have a problem meeting the
camping, which, other than paying for land rental and purchasing supplies, is
doctrine that could occur would be by holding social functions with members
outside of the camping group. Although our camping group has not done
this before, we have been guests of other camping groups’ social functions,
some of which charged an admission fee to cover the costs of food and
drinks. While the camping group would eventually like to hold social events
10
(a) Contacts, or urges the public to contact, members
of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing,
supporting, or opposing legislation; or
(b) Advocates the adoption or rejection of
legislation...
(iii) An organization is an action organization if it
participates or intervenes, directly or indirectly, in any political
campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate for
public office…
(iv) An organization is an action organization if it has the
following two characteristics:
(a) Its main or primary objective or objectives (as
distinguished from its incidental or secondary objectives)
may be attained only by legislation or a defeat of proposed
legislation; and
(b) it advocates, or campaigns for, the attainment of
such main or primary objective or objectives as
distinguished from engaging in nonpartisan analysis, study,
or research and making the results thereof available to the
public…35,36
The political activities test is the first of the tests used by the Internal
Revenue Service to be discussed. Like all of the tests used by the Internal
Revenue Service, the political activities test is codified in the Code of Federal
campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public
registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one
11
candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have
are not prohibited; exceptions exist for activities that simply encourage
organizations. However, an organization does not qualify for, or will lose, tax
This test has no application to the camping group. The camping group
is an apolitical group; the camping group has not, and will not engage in any
political activity.
The private inurement test is one of the fundamental ideas behind the
12
Courts will look to multiple factors in determining whether there has
been private inurement. Two main situations that could indicate private
amount paid, the reason why it was paid, the type of agreement which
confers the benefit, the persons involved in forming the agreement[,] and
organization and the benefits that it grants. While an overlap of benefit and
control does not always preclude exemption, the potential for abuse is great.
“church” paid for “parsonage expenses” that were, in reality, the president
of the church’s day to day living expenses, such as rent, utilities, clothing,
and food.46
The camping group can possibly pass the private inurement test. No
one of the board of directors of the camping group receives any type of
compensation. All of the expenses that are incurred by the camping group
are for communal use. Nothing purchased is ever owned or used by specific
people. The only issue the camping group would have with the private
13
significant problem; however, I believe that the nature of the group and the
The final two Internal Revenue Service tests are very similar. Both tests
follows:
However, this section of the code has been interpreted as to mean that the
14
exemption hinges on a quasi-arbitrary term, such as “primarily” or
“substantially.”
primary purpose, and then examining the size and extent of the activities
operational test poses a significant problem for the camping group. While
the camping group does not currently engage in any profit making activities
outside of collecting dues and fees from members, its main purpose may not
cruelty to children or animals. The only avenues that the camping group
could pursue are advocating that it: 1) provides enough affiliated physical
15
(b) Organizational test--(1) In general.
(i) An organization is organized exclusively for one or more
exempt purposes only if its articles of organization…:
(a) Limit the purposes of such organization to one or
more exempt purposes; and
(b) Do not expressly empower the organization to
engage, otherwise than as an insubstantial part of its
activities, in activities which in themselves are not in
furtherance of one or more exempt purposes.
(ii) In meeting the organizational test, the organization's
purposes, as stated in its articles, may be as broad as, or more
specific than, the purposes stated in section 501(c)(3)...
(iii) An organization is not organized exclusively for one or
more exempt purposes if its articles expressly empower it to
carry on, otherwise than as an insubstantial part of its activities,
activities which are not in furtherance of one or more exempt
purposes, even though such organization is, by the terms of such
articles, created for a purpose that is no broader than the
purposes specified in section 501(c)(3)...
(iv) In no case shall an organization be considered to be
organized exclusively for one or more exempt purposes, if, by
the terms of its articles, the purposes for which such organization
is created are broader than the purposes specified in section
501(c)(3)...
(v) An organization must, in order to establish its
exemption, submit a detailed statement of its proposed activities
with and as a part of its application for exemption…53,54
the operational test checks for what activities the organization actually
16
An organization is deemed to be organized as an validly exempt
group will make sure that all three of the previously mentioned criteria are
met. However, the camping group has the same problem with the
organizational test that it did with the operational test. It is very likely that
the group’s main purpose of benefiting those that engage in camping will be
17
THE 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(7) ORGANIZATION
organization will probably not be possible for the camping group, there is an
and operated exclusively for one of exempt purposes listed in the Internal
Revenue Code and they may not inure any earnings to a private shareholder
broader and less stringent than the requirement that 501(c)(3) be in the
public interest.64
18
investment sources, provide an opportunity for personal contact among
duties, and assessments, and not have a governing instrument that contains
limited than a 501(c)(3). A special point must be made that section 501(c)
(7) organizations are the least favored of the tax exempt organizations under
501(c).67 Section 512 limits the exemption of income from the federal
income tax to only dues and fees collected by the organization.68,69 All other
business income.70
The tests for tax exemption under 501(c)(7) are less numerous and
less specific than those under 501(c)(3). A significant bright line rule for
Internal Revenue Service was specifically asked what the criteria or tests
The Internal Revenue Service listed only two criteria; it stated that:
19
and other nonprofitable purposes and 2) that no part of its net
earnings inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or
individual.73,74
There is are potential pitfalls and opportunities for abuse with 501(c)(7)
20
neutral transactions are allowable, as long as such interactions are incidental
The camping group will easily pass the tests for exemption under
currently does not engage in any other type of nonexempt activity, and
earns no other profits outside of collecting dues and fees as they are needed.
camping group started as a group of close knit friends with a desire to camp
and include more friends and associates in the activity. Personal contact and
fellowship is one of the main ideas behind the creation of the camping group.
CONCLUSION
After reviewing the two major options that the camping group has in
qualify as a 501(c)(7). The camping group will most probably fail the
the activity for that same group simply to not rise to the level of public
21
benefit. Neither are the physical activities engaged in by the camping group
beneficial for the camping group. Granted, all of the income that the group
dues and fees. However, one of the reasons the camping group was
business income.
At this point, based on the size, attitude, and financial means of the
organizational filings, filing fees, the hassle of annual tax returns, and
possibly filing 990-T forms would be justified if the camping group was able
to obtain 501(c)(3) recognition and its benefits, I cannot say the same for
501(c)(7) recognition.
22
1
Robert W. Hamilton & Jonathan R. Macey, Corporations Including Partnerships and Limited
Liability Companies 1 (2007).
2
Dwight Drake, Business Planning 38 (2008).
3
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 2
(2008).
4
Id at 10.
5
Gary M. Grobman, The Nonprofit Handbook: Everything You Need to Know to Start and Run
Your Nonprofit Organization (2008).
6
Findlaw, What are the benefits and drawbacks of nonprofit, tax-exempt status?,
http://smallbusiness.findlaw.com/business-structures/non-profit/non-profit-tax-exempt-pro-
con.html
7
26 U.S.C. 501 et seq.
8
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 19
(2008).
9
Internal Revenue Service, Internal Revenue Service Data Book 56 (2010)
10
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 27
(2008).
11
Id. at 145.
12
Id. 90.
13
Id. at 91.
14
Id.
15
Id. at 93
16
Id. at 94.
17
26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3)
18
Internal Revenue Service, Publication 557, Tax Exempt Status for Your Organization 20 (2010).
19
Internal Revenue Service, Exemption Requirements - Section 501(c)(3) Organizations
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=96099,00.html
20
Internal Revenue Service, Publication 4220, Applying for 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Status 2 (2009).
21
Internal Revenue Service, Notice 2004-41, Charitable Contributions and Conservation
Easements (2004).
22
Sandy Deja, Form1023Help.com http://www.form1023help.com/id2.html
23
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 146
(2008).
24
Id at 193.
25
Bob Jones Univ. v. United States, 461 U.S. 574 (1983).
26
Bruce R. Hopkins, The Law of Tax-Exempt Organizations 156 (2011).
27
Tank Truck Rentals, Inc. v. Comm’r, 356 U.S. 30 (1958).
28
Id.
29
Bob Jones Univ. v. U.S., 461 U.S. 574, 591 (1983).
30
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 205
(2008).
31
Bruce R. Hopkins, The Law of Tax-Exempt Organizations 156 (2011).
32
Id.
33
Id. at 100.
34
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 202
(2008).
35
26 C.F.R. 1.501(c)(3)-1(c)(3)
36
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 180
(2008).
37
Internal Revenue Service, The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)
(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations
http://www.irs.gov/charities/charitable/article/0,,id=163395,00.html
38
Id.
39
Internal Revenue Service, Lobbying http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=163392,00.html
40
26 C.F.R. 1.501(c)(3)-1(c)(2)
41
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 161
(2008).
42
Id. at 174.
43
Id.
44
Church of Modern Enlightenment v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo 1988-312 (1988).
45
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 162
(2008).
46
Id. at 164.
47
Internal Revenue Service, Internal Revenue Manual 7.25.3.1.3.6
http://www.irs.gov/irm/part7/irm_07-025-003.html
48
26 C.F.R. 1.501(c)(3)-1(c)
49
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 154
(2008).
50
Id. at 161.
51
Id.
52
Jessica Pena & Alexander L.T. Reid, A Call for Reform of the Operational Test for Unrelated
Commercial Activity in Charities, 76 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 1885 (2001).
53
26 C.F.R. 1.501(c)(3)-1(b)
54
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 146
(2008).
55
Elizabeth Ardoin, Organizational Test – IRC 501(c)(3) http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-
tege/eotopicd04.pdf
56
Id.
57
Id.
58
Internal Revenue Service, Publication 557, Tax Exempt Status for Your Organization 20 (2010).
59
Id.
60
Internal Revenue Service, Suggested Language for Corporations and Associations (per
Publication 557) http://www.irs.gov/charities/article/0,,id=96117,00.html
61
Internal Revenue Service, Social Clubs
http://www.irs.gov/charities/nonprofits/article/0,,id=96189,00.html
62
26 U.S.C. 501(c)(7)
63
Internal Revenue Service, Exempt Purposes - Code Section 501(c)(7)
http://www.irs.gov/charities/nonprofits/article/0,,id=226376,00.html
64
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 204
(2008).
65
Id.
66
Internal Revenue Service, Publication 557, Tax Exempt Status for Your Organization 20 (2010).
67
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 781
(2008).
68
Id.
69
26 U.S.C. 512
70
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 781
(2008).
71
Id. at 777.
72
Revenue Ruling 58-589, 1958-2 C.B. 266
73
Id.
74
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 778
(2008).
75
Revenue Ruling 74-30, 1974-1 C.B. 137
76
Revenue Ruling 69-635, 1969-2 C.B. 126
77
Internal Revenue Service, IRC 501(c)(7) Organizations http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-
tege/eotopicg80.pdf
78
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 779
(2008).
79
Jockey Club v. Helvering, 76 F.2d 597 (2nd Cir. 1935)
80
Nicholas P. Cafardi & Jaclyn Fabean Cherry, Tax Exempt Organizations: Cases and Materials 779
(2008).
81
Id.