As federal and state governments grapple with the health and economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic, business leaders are at the center of the discussion. The White House holds frequent roundtables with CEOs and business owners. State governors have formed task forces comprised of business leaders to advise on strategies for reopening businesses in their
Janice M. Ryan
Janice Ryan is an experienced general counsel to tax-exempt organizations, specializing in lobbying and political activities compliance. Janice counsels advocacy groups, charities, associations, political organizations, and businesses on the full spectrum of legal issues related to their efforts to influence public policy and elections. She is adept at delivering creative solutions to complex problems and providing pragmatic day-to-day general counseling tailored to her clients’ specific needs and goals. Janice’s clients appreciate her accessibility and responsiveness, and her ability to bring together and manage the right team of attorneys within the firm to solve the problem at hand, providing her clients with seamless, full-service legal support.
Regulators Continue to Modify Lobbying and Campaign Finance Reporting and Enforcement Practices and Requirements
Federal and state regulators continue to modify their lobbying and campaign finance reporting and enforcement practices and requirements in response to the ongoing upheaval caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
As states postpone primaries to prevent the spread of coronavirus, agencies have revised reporting deadlines for election-sensitive campaign finance reports. The Federal Election Commission (FEC) announced…
Election-Year Tips for Nonprofits: Employee Participation in the Political Process
We may still be a year out from the next general election, but until the polls close on Tuesday, November 3, 2020, politics will be inescapably in the air—and in the workplace. Employees will be talking, sometimes arguing, and sometimes participating in one campaign or another. Prudent nonprofits should take note of what they may be required to do or are prohibited from doing about their employees’ desire to participate in the electoral process.
The Workplace Is Not a “Free Country.” Let’s start with the basics: the First Amendment does not apply to the private workplace. The Constitution does not prevent private employers from restricting their employees’ political speech. Nonprofits generally can restrict employees’ speech during work time and on work equipment, especially if the organization has a legitimate, business-related reason to do so.
Your Tax-Exempt Status. Nonprofits that are tax-exempt under Section 501(c)(3) may not themselves engage in any political campaign activity (i.e., activity to support or oppose candidates for elective office). The IRS has said that individuals who work for 501(c)(3)s generally maintain their right to engage in political campaign activity, but they have to do so in a way that does not implicate their employer. For example, employees—particularly senior employees—must be careful when endorsing candidates or making other political statements so that it does not appear the organization is endorsing the candidate. The IRS has said that communications should include a clear disclaimer that “titles and affiliations of each individual are provided for identification purposes only” when a nonprofit leader’s name and position are included. Employees also should not make endorsements during nonprofit meetings and events.
For 501(c)(4), (5), and (6) organizations, which are allowed to engage in some political campaign activity, what an employee does or says on his or her own time is not likely to threaten your tax-exempt status.Continue Reading Election-Year Tips for Nonprofits: Employee Participation in the Political Process
New Jersey Donor Disclosure Rules for 501(c)(4)s and 527s Enjoined
On October 2, 2019, a federal judge blocked the State of New Jersey from implementing and enforcing new campaign finance reporting and donor disclosure rules for 501(c)(4) and 527 organizations, which were enacted earlier this year as part of a sweeping and controversial campaign finance bill, S. 150. In its ruling, the Court found…
New York Nonprofit Donor Disclosure Rules Struck Down
A federal judge this week struck down on First Amendment grounds two provisions of New York’s lobbying law that would have required nonprofits to disclose their donors.
In 2016, New York state legislators passed legislation changing the state’s lobbying and campaign finance laws. Two important provisions dramatically expanded donor disclosure requirements for 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations engaged in issue advocacy and lobbying in New York:
501(c)(4) Rules: The law required 501(c)(4) organizations to disclose all of their donors in public filings with the state when they spend over $10,000 in a calendar year on communications to at least 500 members of the public concerning the position of any elected official on potential or pending legislation.
501(c)(3) Rules: The law also required 501(c)(3) charitable organizations to disclose donors of $2,500 or more if the charitable organization made an in-kind donation of more than $2,500 to a Section 501(c)(4) organization engaged in lobbying in New York.Continue Reading New York Nonprofit Donor Disclosure Rules Struck Down
Pay-to-Play Laws Remain in the Spotlight: Government Contract Eligibility Hinges on Awareness and Compliance
Companies that do business with state and local governments are subject to a wide array of laws restricting their political contributions, as well as the personal political contributions of their owners, officers, and some employees. These laws are known as pay-to-play laws because they are aimed at severing the relationship — or the appearance of a relationship — between a contribution (the “pay”) and the award of a government contract (the “play”).
Violations of pay-to-play laws — even a single, inadvertent political contribution — can result in costly bid disqualifications, voided contracts, and damaging publicity.
In approaching compliance, government contractors should do a risk assessment that takes into account where the company does business with government agencies, whether its contracts are covered by relevant laws, and where its employees live. For many companies, pre-clearing contributions and political fundraising (which some laws also cover) and training affected personnel are essential elements of an effective compliance plan. Also, companies should adopt protocols for registration and reporting to state election boards, as there are some pay-to-play laws that impose such requirements instead of, or on top of, contribution restrictions.
Pay-to-play laws vary across jurisdictions; we have outlined the broad requirements and highlighted certain relevant updates but encourage consultation with our political law attorneys to customize a compliance plan for your particular needs.Continue Reading Pay-to-Play Laws Remain in the Spotlight: Government Contract Eligibility Hinges on Awareness and Compliance
Federal Election Commission Announces New Contribution Limits for 2019-2020 Cycle
Every two years, after an election, the FEC indexes certain contribution limits to inflation. After returning from the shutdown, the FEC issued the revised limits for this year, a few days later than usual. As has been the case the past few cycles, the individual limit has gone up by $100. For candidates up for election in 2020, individuals may now give $2,800 per election or $5,600 per candidate per election cycle (with the primary and general considered separate elections). This means that individual contributors who had previously maxed out to candidates for 2020 primary and general elections at $2,700 per election can now give those candidates another $100 per election.
The FEC also raised the limits on individual contributions to party committees and non-multicandidate PACs:Continue Reading Federal Election Commission Announces New Contribution Limits for 2019-2020 Cycle
U.S. Supreme Court Allows Expanded Donor Disclosure Rules to Take Effect
The U.S. Supreme Court this week left in place a lower court ruling that expands donor disclosure for advocacy groups that fund independent expenditures. While the full effect of the ruling may not be known for some time, groups in the throes of an election season suddenly have to reconsider their electoral spending plans and fundraising practices, and donors to politically active 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations or 501(c)(6) business leagues have to account for an increased risk that their donations will be publicly disclosed.
What Does the Ruling Do?
Groups that are not registered with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) as campaign committees, party committees, or PACs are nonetheless required to file reports if they make an expenditure of more than $250 that expressly supports or opposes a federal candidate. These “independent expenditure” reports must itemize disbursements to each vendor involved in the creation and distribution of an ad (or other public communication), and identify the election involved and whether the organization supports or opposes the featured candidate.
In addition, a long-standing FEC rule requires that these reports identify donors who gave more than $200 to the organization in the calendar year for the purpose of funding the particular ad that is being reported. As a practical matter, donors seldom know that their funds will be used to pay for a specific ad, and thus donors have rarely been disclosed.
The district court struck down the FEC donor-disclosure rule, concluding that it applied the statutory disclosure requirement too narrowly. The court concluded that independent expenditure reports filed by groups that are not registered political committees must identify all donors who (1) give to the organization for the purpose of influencing a federal election, or (2) give for the purpose of funding the group’s independent expenditures, whether tied to a specific ad or not. The court stressed, however, that contributors to an organization’s “general programs” need not be identified.
The court deferred the effective date of the ruling for 45 days, giving the FEC time to adopt a new donor disclosure rule. That period came and went with no new rule or interpretive guidance. Crossroads GPS, which intervened in the case, has appealed the ruling to the D.C. Circuit.Continue Reading U.S. Supreme Court Allows Expanded Donor Disclosure Rules to Take Effect
Setting Up and Operating a Super PAC
Interested in what it takes to set up a federal Super PAC? Take a look at Venable’s recently released white paper summarizing the key rules of the road, including:
- Steps for creating a federal Super PAC
- Avoiding illegal coordination with candidates
- FEC and IRS reporting obligations
- Advertising disclaimers
For those interested in Maryland elections, please…
PAC and Lobbying Deadlines Loom Large in January—and a Chance to Get Organized
January is always a busy month for filing lobbying and campaign finance reports. It is also a good time to think about changes for the upcoming year that might simplify filing obligations.
• State Lobbying Reports. Most states require year-end reports to be filed at some point in January. Many also require re-registration or renewal of registration for the next year. Pay attention to deadlines, and think about where you are likely to be active in 2016. Perhaps it is time to de-register or let your registration lapse if you will not be active in a particular state. Different states have different thresholds for when registration and reporting are required, so be sure to consider how what you are doing matches what is required.
Continue Reading PAC and Lobbying Deadlines Loom Large in January—and a Chance to Get Organized