IRS targeted groups critical of government

Quite often when privacy is discussed, some people ask why we need privacy. Some then continues on and say that its already lost and what ever harm is done and are things we need to live with.<p>Well, this is the harm. Selective use of government "scrutiny" against those that are perceive as a threat. The only positive side of this news is that they haven't gone very far. String search of groups names feels very much like how block filters worked before deep-packet inspection. With the social graphs[1] already in existence, this type of targeting could be made very efficient and only requires the sharing of data between different government branches.<p><a href="https://www.softwarefreedom.org/events/2012/freedom-to-connect_moglen-keynote-2012.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.softwarefreedom.org/events/2012/freedom-to-conne...</a>

Not accurate. This was politically self-defeating (for the IRS personnel concerned, in that period in Ohio) but it wasn't Orwellian. These groups are anti-tax, associated with the Sovereign Citizens movement, and also applying for a nonprofit status that legally constrains political activities that these were likely to engage in. And in the end, they all got their nonprofit status anyhow. So the screaming about how they were picked on is really disingenuous.<p>Tax collection is a necessity for every first world country and unfortunately that means not taking every application for a nonprofit status at face value.

One of the aspects of this that is completely unreported is the fact that in 2008, Congress gave the IRS sweeping new investigative powers. <a href="http://money.usnews.com/money/personal-finance/articles/2013/05/09/next-target-of-irs-robo-audits-small-business" rel="nofollow">http://money.usnews.com/money/personal-finance/articles/2013...</a><p>This allows them to do thing like pull all your emails and social activity simply on suspicion of doing anything wrong -- if you are flagged for any reason (as in this article) These processes are being automated.<p>This means that it is possible, but currently unlikely, that whoever flagged these groups could have then automatically pulled down all the email and social networking chatter of the organizers behind the groups. This would have effectively given the government a "God's Eye View" of everything critics were saying and planning.<p>This has been a year full of stories about the loss of freedom, but as far as the U.S. goes, this has the potential to be the biggest story yet.

This is a classic approach used in Russia and other countries against anti-ruling-party organizations, but I had (probably naively) expected USA to be better than this.

Many of these groups would like the IRS to go away entirely. Many of these groups would like to not pay taxes at all.<p>Why would the IRS spend an equal amount of time investigating everyone, when certain groups go out of their way to paint big targets on their backs?

It's worth noting the IRS also targeted various Jewish organizations (eg Z Street) as well, not just those critical of the government and taxation like the Tea Party.<p>Clearly the IRS has a problem with targeting bias.

This should be solved by removing tax-exempt status under 501c4 for all parties of any persuasion.<p>Then remove tax exempt status for all religious organizations which is a huge scam anyway.<p>This would be win-win for both stereotypes of the right wanting to "widen the base" and the left "liking taxes".

Pretty outrageous to hear the IRS is doing this.

Between 2010 and 2012, applications doubled in volume. A large part of that increase was Tea Party groups. Seems like the review was pointed at the right target (when I owned a business, I inspected the work of the new guys more than the people who had been with me for a few years). The real issue should be that 300 groups were reviewed and none were rejected. The 501(c)(4) class is filled with "social welfare" groups that provide no social welfare. The only "social welfare" I see is lobbying and ads filled with half truths (this goes for liberal groups as well, though not as much). If you want to limit abortions or allow more access to guns (just examples, not a description of the groups involved), feel free to do so with donations that get taxed. Just don't tell me it's in the name if social welfare.

As a counterpoint to a lot of the outrage, it's worth noting that the rules around 501c4 organizations are fucked.<p>As Ezra Klein points out "The IRS was wrong to target the tea party. They should’ve gone after all 501(c)4s."<p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/10/the-irs-was-wrong-to-target-the-tea-party-they-shouldve-gone-after-all-501c4s/" rel="nofollow">http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/05/10/t...</a><p>The fact that this has become a political issue is a huge failure of governance, not politics.