Quote:
Originally Posted by Little32
Another thing, while I understand the theoretical threat, I do wonder about the realistic possibility of the IRS pursuing such a course. I guess it is better to be safe than sorry.
|
Trust it is a realistic possibility. A few years ago DST raised funds (a pass the offering basket kind of thing) at our national convention luncheon for one of our own--Alexis Herman. She was ordered to return the funds and we were warned.
The IRS is no joke, and in the last few years there has been a major crack down on nonprofits in general. Why? Because the government wants the taxes it is missing from tax-exempt organization.
But I also don't see what is so complicated about the ruling that we cannot endorse a candidate. Wearing a generic Barack (or anyone else for that matter) indicates that the individual endorses that candidate. Add your orgs symbols indicate that you as a member of XYZ endorse that candidate. That is a big difference, especially since we have all been taught from day one that when we wear our symbols in public we are representing our orgs. Thus the protocol rules on when and where they should be worn.
Prime example: if I go to a bar wearing a DST shirt and get sloppy drunk, folx won't be saying LG got drunk, they will be saying LG the Delta got drunk.
Lastly, there is also the whole issue of buying merchandise from a vendor that has not been sanctioned (licensed) by our org.
Threaded Mode
