FYI George Yin has suggested that under Trump v US., 7217 is unconstitutional as applied to the President. What i fear is a new version of 501p8 defining the term and giving the Treasury Sec the authority to designate. Not an IRS investigation so 7217 wouldn't apply. Thoughts?

Hi, Sam. Hope you are healing quickly. ACLU does have an affiliated c-3. Also, I expect a big administration push for Congress to enact 501(p)(8), giving the Treasury Secretary so much authority to declare any tax-exempt organization a terrorist one. Do you think so, too?

Oh. So sorry, Sam. Glad it was a minor injury

Great timing on publication of the piece!

Thanks so much! Missed that post and the 990 on the website. Shouldn't have relied on my phone to follow this. In general and to my dismay I am finding fewer and fewer 990s on organizations' own websites.

Would appreciate knowwhere you got the 2024 990

I see 2023 990 on Pro Publica Nonprofit Explorer.

Agree that the White House does not have authority for this, although it could pressure Congress re its funding. Contrary to the statement, but the Smithsonian has at times been treated as an part of the executive branch. See this piece of mine. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.... executive agency.

All the best!

Thanks, Brian. (Jill is here: jillh.bsky.social.) I think you are referring to this recently posted piece of ours: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

My advice for new law profs - keep a teaching diary. What worked, what didn't, what you wish you had done differently. Useful for next time and helps you to sleep at night without berating yourself.

Sam, don't you do federal tax in your nonprofits class? Mine is half state governance law and half federal tax.

Including, of course, online megachurch services with tens of thousands of attendees - just a gigantic happy family.

My shorthand - nonprofits earn profits in order to pursue their mission; for-profits pursue a mission in order to earn profits. That is, their purposes differ.

I will be surprised if it survies the Byrd Bath - but then, so much suprises me these days.

Per 20 USC sec 75f(a), the Gallery director is not subject to the civil-service laws or certain other provisions in 5 USC re pay. The Smithsonian does distinguish between what it calls "federal employees" and "trust employees," which I discuss on page 580 of this: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

The Portrait Gallery is part of the Smithsonian. In her US Institute of Peace opinion, Judge Howell does a fine job of explaining how and why the Smithsonian is not part of the executive branch. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

This new article of mine digs into IRC sec 7217: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....