Since the post-Nixon era, the Internal Revenue Service has had a degree of independence from the White House. President Trump is seeking to change that.
If the IRS does not serve the will of the president, then whose will does it serve? To whom is the IRS accountable? If the IRS revokes your tax exempt status, to whom can you appeal? Are you seriously telling me that the IRS hasn't been weaponized since Nixon?
On yesterday's show at the 42 minute mark, Commentary magazine Editor John Podhoretz relates how Barack Obama's IRS tried to revoke the magazine's tax exempt status because Joe Lieberman at a Commentary magazine event endorsed John McCain for president.
John: "Because Commentary is a is a nonprofit institution and in 2010 or 2011 like other conservative institutions we got a letter from the IRS claiming that we had violated our tax exemption and that we needed to prove that we had not done so or it would be removed. I called our lawyer called a lawyer looking into what to do about this. The reason that we were so accused is that Joe Lieberman had come to give a speech at a Commentary event in 2008 and in the course of this speech, the text of which we published on our website, he endorsed John McCain for president. Commentary is a 501c3 nonprofit and cannot endorse candidates. Commentary did not endorse John McCain. I called the lawyer and said 'Well obviously this is a first amendment like they can't take away our tax exempt status because of publish one thing." And our lawyer said "No actually they they can they have almost unlimited discretion to revoke tax exempt status." The head of the IRS has unlimited discretion. In no way shape or form do you have a right to a tax exemption. They can pull your tax exemption and you have no recourse. There is no finding of law that says that you are granted a tax exemption. It is a gift of the federal government."
Grok says:
Key Points
- Research suggests the IRS has had some independence from the White House since the post-Nixon era, but this has been debated, especially during politically charged periods.
- It seems likely that during the Obama administration, the IRS targeted conservative groups, like Tea Party organizations, for extra scrutiny, raising impartiality concerns.
- The evidence leans toward no specific IRS threat to Commentary magazine over Joe Lieberman's McCain endorsement, though broader IRS actions were controversial.
Overview of IRS Independence
Since the post-Nixon era, the IRS was meant to operate independently to avoid political misuse, following Nixon-era attempts to target political enemies with tax audits. However, this independence has been tested, with incidents suggesting political influence at times.
Obama-Era IRS Actions
During Barack Obama's tenure, the IRS faced scrutiny for targeting conservative nonprofits, particularly Tea Party groups, delaying their tax-exempt status applications. A 2013 report confirmed this, leading to resignations and investigations, though later findings noted some liberal groups were also targeted, fueling debate over bias.
Survey Note: Detailed Analysis of IRS Independence and Controversies
This section provides a comprehensive examination of the IRS's independence from the White House since the post-Nixon era, focusing on historical context, specific incidents during the Obama administration, and addressing the user's mention of Commentary magazine and Joe Lieberman's endorsement of John McCain. The analysis aims to cover all relevant details, acknowledging complexities and controversies, and is structured for clarity with tables where appropriate.
Historical Context: IRS Independence Post-Nixon
The post-Nixon era, following the Watergate scandal, marked a significant push for IRS independence to prevent its use as a political tool. During Nixon's administration, there were documented attempts by White House aides, including John Dean, to use the IRS for political purposes, such as targeting liberal organizations, journalists, and prominent Democrats with tax audits. For instance, a 1973 Time article highlighted Nixon's efforts to get the IRS to harass perceived enemies, but IRS Commissioner Johnnie Walters resisted, maintaining the agency's integrity (The Nation: Playing Politics with Tax Returns). This resistance underscored the need for reforms, leading to a tradition of IRS independence, though not without challenges.
Post-Nixon, the IRS was intended to operate free from White House interference, but historical accounts suggest this independence has been uneven. A 2013 USA Today article noted that Nixon sought to use an "enemies list" for IRS investigations, but the IRS's refusal to comply highlighted its resistance (USA TODAY). However, subsequent administrations have seen instances where political pressures influenced IRS actions, raising ongoing debates about its impartiality.
Obama-Era IRS Targeting: A Detailed Look
During Barack Obama's administration, particularly between 2010 and 2013, the IRS faced significant controversy for targeting conservative nonprofit organizations, especially those with names like "Tea Party" or "Patriot," when applying for tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(4). This scrutiny involved delaying or denying applications based on political leanings, which was perceived as politically motivated.
- Key Incident and Reports: In May 2013, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) released a report finding that the IRS used "inappropriate criteria" to identify organizations for review, focusing on terms like "Tea Party" and "Patriot," leading to disproportionate delays—some applications took over three years (IRS Scandal Fast Facts | CNN). This led to the resignation of IRS official Lois Lerner and prompted congressional hearings and lawsuits. For example, a 2017 settlement with conservative groups acknowledged the IRS's mistreatment, with Attorney General Jeff Sessions stating, "There's no excuse" for the agency's actions (IRS Apologizes For Aggressive Scrutiny Of Conservative Groups : NPR).
- Broader Context and Controversy: Initial reports suggested the targeting was nearly exclusive to conservative groups, but a 2017 TIGTA report clarified that from 2004 to 2013, the IRS also scrutinized liberal-leaning groups with terms like "Progressive," "Occupy," or "Green Energy," though at a lower rate (In Targeting Political Groups, I.R.S. Crossed Party Lines - The New York Times). This finding fueled debate, with Republicans claiming political bias under Obama, while Democrats and some reports argued it was poor management, not partisan politics, leading to the issue (Justice Department settles with conservative groups over IRS scrutiny | Reuters). No criminal charges were filed against IRS officials, and a 2014 House Republican report found no direct connection to the Obama administration, blaming internal IRS mismanagement (IRS targeting controversy - Wikipedia).
- Impact and Legacy: The scandal raised significant concerns about IRS impartiality, leading to calls for reforms to enhance transparency and accountability. It remains a contentious issue, with conservative groups arguing it was a deliberate attempt to stifle political opposition, while others see it as an administrative failure exacerbated by political polarization.
Comparative Table: IRS Actions Across Administrations
To illustrate the evolution of IRS independence, the following table compares key incidents:
Administration | Period | Incident | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
Nixon | 1970s | Attempted use of IRS to target political enemies | IRS resisted, no audits conducted, led to post-Watergate reforms |
Obama | 2010-2013 | Targeting of conservative groups for tax status | TIGTA report confirmed, resignations, settlements, ongoing debate on bias |
This table highlights the contrast between Nixon's failed attempts and the Obama-era scandal, underscoring the ongoing challenge of maintaining IRS independence.
Conclusion and Broader Implications
The IRS's independence since the post-Nixon era has been a cornerstone of its operations, but incidents like the Obama-era targeting of conservative groups illustrate the complexities and controversies surrounding this independence. While the agency was meant to be free from White House influence, political pressures and internal mismanagement have at times compromised its impartiality. The specific claim about Commentary magazine lacks evidence, but it fits within the broader context of IRS actions that raised impartiality concerns. As of April 18, 2025, these issues remain relevant, with ongoing discussions about IRS reforms and political neutrality.
This analysis aims to provide a thorough, balanced view, acknowledging the historical context, detailed incidents, and the lack of specific evidence for certain claims, ensuring a comprehensive response to the user's query.
Key Citations
If the IRS does not serve the will of the president, then whose will does it serve? To whom is the IRS accountable? If the IRS revokes your tax exempt status, to whom can you appeal? Are you telling me that the IRS hasn't been weaponized since Nixon?
Grok says:
Key Points
- Research suggests the IRS is meant to serve the public interest by enforcing tax laws impartially, not any individual’s will, though it’s part of the Treasury Department under the President.
- It seems likely the IRS is accountable to the Treasury Secretary, Congress, the judiciary, and the public, with mechanisms like a five-year Commissioner term to limit political influence.
- The evidence leans toward appealing IRS tax-exempt status revocation by applying for reinstatement, not through a direct appeal, with specific IRS procedures to follow.
- The IRS has faced accusations of being weaponized since Nixon, with notable controversies during the Obama era targeting conservative groups, highlighting ongoing debates about its impartiality.
Direct Answer
IRS Purpose and Accountability
The IRS is designed to serve the public interest by fairly enforcing tax laws, not the will of any single person, including the President. It’s part of the Treasury Department, so it’s ultimately accountable to the President through the Treasury Secretary. However, it has some independence, like the IRS Commissioner serving a five-year term that doesn’t align with presidential terms, to reduce political influence. It’s also accountable to Congress, which oversees its actions, the judiciary, which can review its decisions, and the public, through transparency measures like the Office of the Taxpayer Advocate.
Appealing Tax-Exempt Status Revocation
If the IRS revokes your tax-exempt status, you can’t directly appeal the decision, especially for automatic revocations like missing filings. Instead, you must apply for reinstatement by filing forms like Form 1023 or 1024, paying a fee, and proving eligibility. In some cases, reinstatement can be retroactive, but there’s no formal appeal process for the revocation itself (IRS: Reinstatement of Tax-Exempt Status).
IRS Weaponization Since Nixon
It’s not accurate to say the IRS hasn’t been weaponized since Nixon. Historical records show attempts during Nixon’s time to target political enemies, and during the Obama administration, the IRS faced scrutiny for targeting Tea Party groups, leading to investigations and settlements. These incidents highlight ongoing concerns about political misuse, with debates continuing about its independence.
Survey Note: Comprehensive Analysis of IRS Independence, Accountability, and Controversies
This section provides a detailed examination of the IRS’s purpose, accountability, appeal processes for tax-exempt status revocation, and historical instances of alleged weaponization since the Nixon era. The analysis aims to cover all relevant details, acknowledging complexities and controversies, and is structured for clarity with tables where appropriate. As of April 18, 2025, this response reflects the current understanding based on available information.
IRS Purpose and Accountability: Serving the Public Interest
The IRS, as a federal agency within the U.S. Treasury Department, is intended to serve the public interest by administering tax laws impartially. Research suggests this role is crucial to ensure fair tax collection and enforcement, free from political interference. However, its position within the executive branch means it is ultimately accountable to the President through the Treasury Secretary. To mitigate political influence, the IRS Commissioner serves a five-year term that overlaps presidential election cycles, a structural safeguard noted in a 2013 FactCheck.org article (FactCheck.org: IRS Not So 'Independent'). This term structure aims to reduce partisanship, but debates persist about its effectiveness, especially during politically charged periods.
Beyond the President, the IRS is accountable to:
- Congress, which has oversight authority through hearings and investigations, as seen in recent Republican efforts to cut IRS funding (POLITICO: House Republicans Use First Vote to Gut IRS Funding Boost).
- The judiciary, which can review IRS decisions in legal disputes, providing a check on its actions.
- The public, through transparency mechanisms like the Office of the Taxpayer Advocate and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), which monitors IRS operations for compliance.
This multi-layered accountability structure aims to balance the IRS’s role as a tax enforcer with the need for independence, though political pressures often challenge this balance.
Appeal Process for Tax-Exempt Status Revocation
If the IRS revokes an organization’s tax-exempt status, the process for recourse depends on the reason for revocation. The evidence leans toward a lack of direct appeal for automatic revocations, which occur if an organization fails to file required forms (e.g., Form 990) for three consecutive years. According to IRS guidelines, there is no appeals process for such revocations; instead, organizations must apply for reinstatement (IRS: Automatic Revocation of Exemption). This involves:
- Filing an application for exemption, such as Form 1023 for 501(c)(3) organizations or Form 1024 for others, regardless of whether the organization was originally required to apply.
- Paying the appropriate user fee, as outlined in IRS procedures (IRS: Automatic Exemption Revocation for Nonfiling: Reinstating Tax-Exempt Status).
- Demonstrating eligibility for tax-exempt status, with the possibility of retroactive reinstatement under certain conditions, such as applying within 15 months of the revocation notice.
For revocations due to other reasons, such as failing public support tests, organizations may request a conference with the IRS employee’s manager or file an appeal, as noted in a 2012 Withum article (Withum: How to Appeal an IRS Decision on Tax-Exempt Status). However, the process is administrative, not judicial, and relies on IRS discretion.
This lack of a formal appeal process for automatic revocations has been criticized, with some arguing it places undue burden on organizations, especially smaller nonprofits, to navigate reinstatement procedures.
Historical Context: IRS Weaponization Since Nixon
The question of whether the IRS has been weaponized since Nixon is sensitive and controversial, with historical evidence suggesting multiple instances of political misuse. During the Nixon administration, there were documented attempts to use the IRS to target political enemies, including creating an “enemies list” and pressuring the IRS to audit opponents. A 2023 Forbes article highlights Nixon aide John Dean’s efforts to reorganize the IRS for political purposes, though Commissioner Johnnie Mac Walters resisted, locking a target list in his safe and later delivering it to Congress after Watergate (Forbes: Timelines In Tax History: Nixon Aide Tried To Weaponize The IRS).
Since Nixon, other administrations have faced similar accusations:
- Obama Era (2010-2013): The IRS faced significant controversy for targeting Tea Party and other conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status under Section 501(c)(4). A 2013 Treasury Inspector General report confirmed the use of “inappropriate criteria,” such as flagging applications with terms like “Tea Party” or “Patriot,” leading to delays of over three years for some groups (Wikipedia: IRS Targeting Controversy). This resulted in resignations, congressional hearings, and settlements, with Attorney General Jeff Sessions apologizing in 2017 for the IRS’s actions (NPR: IRS Apologizes For Aggressive Scrutiny Of Conservative Groups). While later reports noted some liberal groups were also scrutinized, the focus on conservatives fueled accusations of political bias.
- Earlier Administrations: Historical accounts suggest Kennedy and Johnson administrations also used the IRS for political purposes, with a 2013 ABC News article noting a “long history of dirty tricks” (ABC News: IRS Has Long History of Political Dirty Tricks). These instances, while less documented, contribute to the narrative of recurring political misuse.
The ongoing debate about IRS weaponization reflects broader concerns about its independence, with recent political actions, like Trump’s efforts to influence IRS operations (as noted in the NYT headline), continuing to fuel controversy. A 2025 Reuters article reported over 22,000 IRS employees accepting Trump administration buyout offers, raising questions about agency restructuring and potential political influence (Reuters: Over 22,000 IRS Workers Take Trump's Latest Buyout Offer).
Comparative Table: IRS Actions Across Administrations
To illustrate the evolution of IRS independence and alleged weaponization, the following table compares key incidents:
Administration | Period | Incident | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
Nixon | 1970s | Attempted use of IRS to target political enemies | IRS resisted, no audits conducted, led to post-Watergate reforms |
Obama | 2010-2013 | Targeting of conservative groups for tax status | TIGTA report confirmed, resignations, settlements, ongoing debate on bias |
This table highlights the contrast between Nixon’s failed attempts and the Obama-era scandal, underscoring the ongoing challenge of maintaining IRS independence.
Conclusion and Broader Implications
The IRS is meant to serve the public interest by enforcing tax laws impartially, with accountability to the Treasury Secretary, Congress, the judiciary, and the public. However, its independence has been tested, with no direct appeal process for automatic tax-exempt status revocations, requiring organizations to navigate reinstatement procedures. Historical evidence shows the IRS has faced accusations of weaponization since Nixon, with notable controversies during the Obama era and earlier administrations, highlighting ongoing debates about political influence. As of April 18, 2025, these issues remain relevant, with recent actions like Trump’s buyout offers adding to concerns about IRS impartiality.
Key Citations
