Other Developments

• Date: 01 August 2017
• Published date: 01 August 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/npc.30360

Bruce R. Hopkins’ NONPROFIT COUNSEL

August 20178THE LAW OF TAX-EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS MONTHLY

Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel DOI:10.1002/npc

The Senate leadership’s effort to hold a vote on this

legislation in advance of the July 4 holiday failed. ◆

OTHER DEVELOPMENTS

• The New York Times reported, on May 30, that the

federal government has drafted a rule that would

ease a requirement, imposed by the Patient Protec-

tion and Affordable Care Act, that religious organi-

zations must provide birth control coverage in their

health insurance plans. The contraceptive coverage

mandate spawned many lawsuits (summarized in,

for example, the September and November 2015

issues). Efforts were made by the Obama administra-

tion to ameliorate this issue by issuing a somewhat

revised set of rules in mid-2015 (summarized in the

September 2015 issue), but this package of rules was

never finalized.

• The US District Court for the District of Columbia,

on June 7, denied the plaintiffs’ motion for reconsid-

eration of its earlier decision that the plaintiffs, both

original and added, lack standing to bring action

against the Treasury Department for granting rec-

ognition of tax exemption to “pro-Israeli-settlement

organizations” that are using contributions from

Americans to inflict an “array of wrongs against the

Palestinian people” (Abulhawa v. Department of

Treasury). The court found their allegations of causa-

tion to be “unduly attenuated and speculative.”

• The June 8 Daily Tax Report included an article about

a report (not made public) from the Federal Election

Commission’s inspector general stating that, in the

language of the IG’s semiannual report to Congress,

“[n]o evidence was found that FEC staff attempted

to improperly target any tax exempt organization” in

communications with the IRS in connection with the

processing of applications for recognition of exemp-

tion filed by Tea Party and other nonprofit organiza-

tions. [26.1(j)]

• Pending before the US Supreme Court is a case

raising the issue of constitutionality, on free speech

grounds, of the requirement that workers pay “fair

share” fees to public-sector unions for collective

bargaining and like activities (Janus v. American Fed-

eration of State, County and Municipal Employees).

The Court deadlocked (4–4) in a similar case last year

(Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association (refer-

enced in the June 2016 issue)). The New York Times

of June 13 has an article on these cases.

• After August 15, persons requesting private letter

rulings, closing agreements, and certain other rul-

ings from the IRS must make the user fees payments

electronically using the federal government’s Pay.gov

system (IR-2017-102). There will be a two-month

transition period where these payments may also be

made by check or money order.

• The case styled NorCal Tea Party Patriots v. IRS (S.D.

Ohio), concerning the potential for award of dam-

ages to organizations who suffered in the brouhaha

over the processing of their applications for recogni-

tion of exemption was, on June 9, ordered to media-

tion. The mediation conference is scheduled to begin

on July 24. [26.1(j)]

• Another iteration of the Charities Helping Americans

Regularly Throughout the Year (CHARITY) Act was

introduced on June 13 (S. 1343). Its features include

expansion of the individual retirement account chari-

table giving rules to add donor-advised funds as

eligible donees, simplification of the tax on private

foundations’ net investment income, introduction

of a requirement that annual information returns be

filed electronically, and creation of an exception to

the excess business holdings rules for certain phil-

anthropic enterprises. The measure is proposed by

Sens. John Thune (R-SD) and Bob Casey (D-PA), both

members of the Senate Finance Committee.

Quote of the Month: “[B]oth the Ninth and the Tenth

Circuits have held that [a tax regulation] requires a mort-

gage [on the property subject to a gifted easement] to

be subordinated at the time of the gift” (RP Golf, LLC v.

Commissioner, June 26). That, from the Eighth Circuit,

surely makes this the law of the land, as will be discussed

next month. ◆

Each article in the newsletter on a tax-exempt organizations law topic ends with a citation to the appropriate chapter(s) or

subchapter(s) in Hopkins, The Law of Tax-Exempt Organizations, Eleventh Edition (Wiley 2017 cumulative supplement). This is done

to provide ready access to additional and background information concerning these articles. For example, underlying information

concerning the first article in this issue is available in Chapter 12.4(e), and thus the citation is referenced as [12.4(e)]. Likewise,

each article in the newsletter on a charitable giving law topic ends with a citation to the appropriate chapter(s) or subchapter(s) in

Hopkins, The Tax Law of Charitable Giving, Fifth Edition (Wiley 2017 cumulative supplement). For example, underlying information

concerning the fifth article in this issue is available in Chapter 9 § 7(e), and thus the citation is referenced as [9.7(e)].

This newsletter is a stand-alone publication. An inventory of articles in the newsletter since its inception in 1983, and a subject

matter index, as well as an index of the court opinions, IRS revenue rulings and procedures, IRS technical advice memoranda,

and IRS private letter rulings discussed in the newsletter, are available at www.nonprofitlawcenter.com. For those who have the

books, the newsletter also provides monthly updates. Both books are annually supplemented. Questions concerning nonprofit law

developments in general may be sent to brucerhopkins@brucerhopkinslaw.com. Also, a comprehensive summary of nonprofit law

is available in the Bruce R. Hopkins Nonprofit Law Library, an e-book published by Wiley. Follow BRHopkins_NPLaw on Twitter.

The newsletter has a dedicated website. Please visit www.hopkinsnonprofitcounsel.com.