About Those Pesky FOP Endorsements

[letmetellyou]

Interesting stuff...

You visit the Lodge 7 webpage:

FOP-7 St. Mary's County MD Home Page

Which down at the bottom of the page links you to the "Grand Lodge Fraternal Order of Police."

So you go out to that site:

FOP - Contact Us

And it gives an Address in Nashville, TN.

So you search for their 990 tax return and shazam, it's a 501 C 8, not a 501 C 3 like Lodge 7.

http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2009/311/439/2009-311439914-05b7a3f9-9O.pdf

Ok ken, you win. I won't vote for FOP 7 for States Attorney...lol i'll vote Fritz!

 

[Annoying_Boy]

It's fun watching you clowns laugh and mock the election process and the laws of this country.

I wonder if some of the lurkers to this thread are gonna share your opinions when they start punching buttons at the voting center.

 

[Ken King]

It's fun watching you clowns laugh and mock the election process and the laws of this country.

I wonder if some of the lurkers to this thread are gonna share your opinions when they start punching buttons at the voting center.

It seems even the article you linked in the first post says "may be violating" not that they are. The typical sensationalizing style of a now defunct paper that used to be found in the bottom of a many southern Maryland birdcages.

As to whether they are 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(8) on the tax form you linked it seems to a reasonable mind that it might be nothing more than a typographical error. Otherwise don't you think that some action would have alreaady been taken to remove their exempt status?

 

[Annoying_Boy]

It seems even the article you linked in the first post says "may be violating" not that they are. The typical sensationalizing style of a now defunct paper that used to be found in the bottom of a many southern Maryland birdcages.

As to whether they are 501(c)(3) or 501(c)(8) on the tax form you linked it seems to a reasonable mind that it might be nothing more than a typographical error. Otherwise don't you think that some action would have alreaady been taken to remove their exempt status?

So it's a typo on all of their returns for years?

 

[Ken King]

So it's a typo on all of their returns for years?

You linked one form from Lodge 7, not years of forms. By the way, did you obtain permission from the sites you've linked to distribute the material obtained through them or are you simply above the law when it meets your needs?

 

[Merlin99]

It's fun watching you clowns laugh and mock the election process and the laws of this country.

I wonder if some of the lurkers to this thread are gonna share your opinions when they start punching buttons at the voting center.

You mean all the laws, including the ones about paying your bills?

 

[Annoying_Boy]

You linked one form from Lodge 7, not years of forms. By the way, did you obtain permission from the sites you've linked to distribute the material obtained through them or are you simply above the law when it meets your needs?

Sounds like this thread has hit a sore spot with many.

Here's your years of data. Go complain if you think it can't be linked:

NCCS Organization Profile - Fraternal Order of Police (510177869)

Of you course you do realize that all of these tax returns are "public documents" and that you can even walk into the FOP and request to see these same documents, correct?

 

[Gilligan]

Sounds like this thread has hit a sore spot with many.

:

You are delusional enough to actually believe that?? All I see are a bunch of us that bounce back and forth between boredom and amusement. That can be said for literally every thread you have ever posted.

I would also point out that you have changed nobody's mind..EXCEPT to the extent that you have made a lot of people who would otherwise frankly have cared less about the SA race (like me, for example) now want to vote for Fritz just to see you cry on Nov 3.

 

[Annoying_Boy]

You are delusional enough to actually believe that?? All I see are a bunch of us that bounce back and forth between boredom and amusement. That can be said for literally every thread you have ever posted.

I would also point out that you have changed nobody's mind..EXCEPT to the extent that you have made a lot of people who would otherwise frankly have cared less about the SA race (like me, for example) now want to vote for Fritz just to see you cry on Nov 3.

Keep telling yourself that until you believe it too Gilligan.

The rest of the population is too smart for dumb ploys such as that.

So far you guys haven't successfully refuted any of the documents presented.

 

[BernieP]

Sounds like this thread has hit a sore spot with many.

While you are busy choking down your popcorn, seems you miss posts you don't have an anwer for.
Like how it is only one FOP is in violation?
How come the IRS or the State Revenue Dept haven't hit on this in all those years?

But you in your infinite legal wisdom, along with the brilliant legal minds of your alliance, have finally come across this. Well, if you are so right on this, then I suggest you put your money where you mouth is and file a complaint.

 

[Gilligan]

Keep telling yourself that until you believe it too Gilligan.

The rest of the population is too smart for dumb ploys such as that.

So far you guys haven't successfully refuted any of the documents presented.

It would appear they filed as a C 3. So what? Remind me again what the FOP's tax status has to do with me voting for Fritz just to piss you off.

And you know what else is weird? There are 'Re-elect Frtiz' signs all over the 2nd and 9th...can't say I've seen one for Mattingly. What the heck is with that, I wonder?

 

[Annoying_Boy]

King Ken: that's just one document, a typo

AB: All those years are typos? Here's the rest of the docs.

King Ken: You don't have permission to post those public documents! You thief!

 

[Annoying_Boy]

It would appear they filed as a C 3. So what? Remind me again what the FOP's tax status has to do with me voting for Fritz just to piss you off.

And you know what else is weird? There are 'Re-elect Frtiz' signs all over the 2nd and 9th...can't say I've seen one for Mattingly. What the heck is with that, I wonder?

"Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes."

The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations

That's what.

 

[Gilligan]

"Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes."

The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations

That's what.

But why should I care?? I don't, of course, but why on earth would you think I should?

 

[Ken King]

King Ken: that's just one document, a typo

AB: All those years are typos? Here's the rest of the docs.

King Ken: You don't have permission to post those public documents! You thief!

I should have expected that response from the local chair of Southern Maryland NAMBLA.

 

[donbarzini]

It's fun watching you clowns laugh and mock the election process and the laws of this country.

I wonder if some of the lurkers to this thread are gonna share your opinions when they start punching buttons at the voting center.

I would, but I really don't think that "Annoying_Boy is an Idiot" made it to the ballot in time for the election, so I'll just have to write it in.

 

[foodcritic]

"Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes."

The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations

That's what.

In all fairness AB may have a legitimate point. However if we assume it's true the FOP should file as a 501 c4 which gives them the right to make endorsements. Having said that I have not found one case about an FOP lodge losing any status.

Also This has been going on for some time. Sour grapes from those who did not get the endorsement? You betcha.

 

[hvp05]

I should have expected that response from the local chair of Southern Maryland NAMBLA.

So you know Mr. Rossignol rather well, apparently.

Sour grapes from those who did not get the endorsement? You betcha.

I'm curious how all this confirms Fritz as a marauding, creeping rapist. If Mattingly had received the endorsement, I wonder if we would have heard the first peep about this supposed illegality.

 

[Annoying_Boy]

In all fairness AB may have a legitimate point. However if we assume it's true the FOP should file as a 501 c4 which gives them the right to make endorsements. Having said that I have not found one case about an FOP lodge losing any status.

Also This has been going on for some time. Sour grapes from those who did not get the endorsement? You betcha.

I believe a 501 C 8 is the correct answer:

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/eotopicf04.pdf

"political activity does not, in and of itself, give rise to revocation of exemption. Therefore, a fraternal beneficiary society, so long as it is primarily engaged in fraternal activities and the provision of benefits to its members and their dependents within the meaning of IRC 501(c)(8), may engage in some political activities, including intervention in political campaigns on behalf of, or in opposition to, candidates for public office, without jeopardizing its exempt status. See GCM 34985 (Aug. 10, 1972). Nevertheless, the organization would be subject to tax on its political expenditures under IRC 527(f)."

Sour grapes?

Is that the best you can do?

This is about the law obeying the law and unlawfully influencing an election.

And if we can't trust the law to obey the law, then we need to make some changes around here.

So if someone has been dealing drugs for years, does that make it ok?

Of course we still have the question as to why it is C 3 and not a C 8?

Is the gambling an issue?

"A fraternal organization may provide social and recreational activities to its members. Guests of members may also participate in the organization’s activities or make use of its facilities so long as the guest is being entertained by the member. However, a non-member is not being “entertained” merely because he or she accompanies a member."

"When non-member “guests” spend their own funds to participate in gambling activities operated by fraternal organizations, they are not being entertained by the member. If a non-member incurs a charge to participate in a social or recreational event or to make use of a social or recreational facility, the nonmember is considered to be entertained by a member only if the member pays the charge."

"Thus, when a guest gambles with his own money, the fraternal organization is providing recreational activities directly to a non-member rather than as a service to members. When a fraternal organization provides recreational activities, such as gambling, to non-members directly, those activities do not have a substantial causal relationship to the organization’s exempt purpose of providing social and recreational activities to the member. As a result, the activity may be considered unrelated trade or business. See, e.g., Waco Lodge No. 166, Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks v. Comm’r, T.C. Memo. 1981-546."

"Further, under certain circumstances, gambling activity may essentially be a predominantly public activity and only incidentally a member activity, such as when 80 percent of the receipts of gambling come from non-members who are not even participating as guests of members but simply as members of the public. In that case, the entire activity, including participation by members, would be considered unrelated trade or business because the gambling is not being conducted primarily as a recreation for members. See GCM 39061 (Nov. 21, 1983)."

 

[Gilligan]

Uh oh...local FOP goin down!! News at 11.

I'm voting for Fritz to piss off Clem and AB.