July 15, 1999 | Read Time: 2 minutes
Some experts in charity tax law are urging the Christian Coalition to make public what they believe to be a confidential letter from the I.R.S. that denied the group’s application for tax-exempt status.
After a 10-year review, the revenue service told the Christian Coalition that it did not qualify as an advocacy group classified under Section 501(c)(4) of the tax code, and cited as a problem the organization’s distribution of voter guides, according to The St. Petersburg Times. The controversial guides had drawn the fire of critics, who called them partisan.
The Christian Coalition declined to confirm that it had received a letter from the I.R.S.. But the organization announced that it had withdrawn its application for tax-exempt status and had embarked on a “sweeping reorganization.” The group renamed itself Christian Coalition International, and will operate as a business with the “freedom to endorse political candidates on a state and local level” and “make financial contributions to candidates,” as well as help organize chapters in other countries.
Meanwhile, the Christian Coalition of Texas, an affiliate that already had obtained tax-exempt status, has been renamed the Christian Coalition of America and will work nationally to “train and recruit pro-family activists who wish to play a role in statewide legislative battles,” as well as to educate and encourage people to vote.
Leslie Lenkowsky, professor of philanthropic studies and public policy at the Indiana University Center on Philanthropy, said he hopes the Christian Coalition will release the I.R.S. ruling so that advocacy groups can see the government’s train of thought.
“In a way, given its political activity, the Christian Coalition kind of set the outer boundary for what others could do,” he said. “If the Christian Coalition could do some of the things it was doing, then other groups presumably felt safer in doing what they were doing. But now that the coalition has been deemed as being too political, if that’s what the ruling said, what does that mean for all sorts of other groups?”
Mr. Lenkowsky added: “We just don’t know; it’s very unclear what the precise basis for this denial was.”
