527 group
A 527 group is an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) section 527 designated nonprofit organization such as a political party, committee, association, or fund operating primarily for the purpose of influencing an issue, policy, appointment, or election. Many political action committees (PACs) and Super PAC groups are designated 527 groups.[1][2][3]
Purpose
527 groups "can raise unlimited funds from individuals, corporations or labor unions, but they must register with the IRS and disclose their contributions and expenditures."[2] 527 groups may not, however, coordinate their activities with any political campaign. Examples include the Republican Governors Association, Democratic Governors Association, Citizens United, and EMILY's List.[4][5][6]
History
In 1976, 527 groups were established in the wake of the Buckley v. Valeo U.S. Supreme Court decision, in which the court ruled that the First Amendment protected an individual's right to spend unlimited amounts on political speech. The court upheld caps on contributions to campaigns, but stated that restrictions on spending "relative to a clearly identified candidate" were unconstitutional.[7]
In 2010, the Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that the government could not ban political spending by corporations or unions. Because these entities were "associations of citizens," the First Amendment right to free speech also applied to groups.[8]
In Citizens United, the Supreme Court considered federal laws that prohibited "corporations and unions from using their general treasury funds to make independent expenditures for speech defined as an 'electioneering communication' or for speech expressly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate."[9]
In the majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote:
| “ | [W]ealthy individuals and unincorporated associations can spend unlimited amounts on independent expenditures. ... Yet certain disfavored associations of citizens—those that have taken on the corporate form—are penalized for engaging in the same political speech.
When Government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought. This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves.[9][10] |
” |
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ Internal Revenue Service, "Exemption requirements: Political organizations," accessed January 12, 2015
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Open Secrets, "Types of Groups," accessed September 30, 2025
- ↑ Open Secrets, "527 Basics," accessed September 30, 2025
- ↑ The Center for Public Integrity, "527s - Frequently Asked Questions," May 19, 2014
- ↑ National Public Radio, "What's A 527, Anyway? A Primer," August 7, 2008
- ↑ New York Times, "Big Donors Make End Run in New Jersey Campaign," August 3, 2009
- ↑ Cornell Law School, "James L. BUCKLEY et al., Appellants, v. Francis R. VALEO, Secretary of the United States Senate, et al. (two cases).," accessed September 30, 2025
- ↑ New York Times, "Justices, 5-4, Reject Corporate Spending Limit," January 21, 2010
- ↑ 9.0 9.1 Justia, "Citizens United v. FEC, 558 U.S. 310 (2010)," accessed September 30, 2025
- ↑ Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
| |||||||
