IRS denies exemption to organization advocating for polygamy-related legal change

Plain-English summary

The IRS denied an organization's application for section 501(c)(3) exemption. The organization described its work as educational, charitable, and supportive of a polygamous community, including referrals, family programs, advocacy training, legal conferences, and legislative activities. The IRS concluded that the organization's primary purposes included supporting conduct it considered contrary to public policy and attempting to change laws governing polygamy. It therefore treated the organization as ineligible for exemption and stated that contributions to it would not be deductible under section 170.

Ruling snapshot

• Question: Did the organization's activities and objectives qualify it for section 501(c)(3) exemption?
• Outcome: Denied
• Key authorities: IRC §§ 170, 501(c)(3), 501(h), 6110, and 7428(b)(2); Treas. Reg. §§ 1.501(c)(3)-1(a)(1), 1.501(c)(3)-1(c)(3), and 1.501(c)(3)-1(d)(2); Rev. Proc. 86-43; Rev. Ruls. 58-66, 66-256, 71-447, and 75-384

Full text (IRS public release)

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20224

TAX EXEMPT AND
GOVERNMENT ENTITIES

DIVISION

Release Number: 201323025 Contact Person:
Release Date: 6/7/2013

Date: March 14, 2013 Identification Number:

Contact Number:
Employer Identification Number:
Form Required To Be Filed:

Tax Years:
UIL: 501.03-00; 501.03-08

Dear

This is our final determination that you do not qualify for exemption from Federal income tax as
an organization described in Internal Revenue Code section 501(c)(3). Recently, we sent you a
letter in response to your application that proposed an adverse determination. The letter
explained the facts, law and rationale, and gave you 30 days to file a protest. Since we did not
receive a protest within the requisite 30 days, the proposed adverse determination is now final.

You must file Federal income tax returns on the form and for the years listed above within 30
days of this letter, unless you request an extension of time to file. File the returns in accordance
with their instructions, and do not send them to this office. Failure to file the returns timely may
result in a penalty.

We will make this letter and our proposed adverse determination letter available for public
inspection under Code section 6110, after deleting certain identifying information. Please read
the enclosed Notice 437, Notice of Intention to Disclose, and review the two attached letters that
show our proposed deletions. If you disagree with our proposed deletions, follow the
instructions in Notice 437. If you agree with our deletions, you do not need to take any further
action.

If you have any questions about this letter, please contact the person whose name and
telephone number are shown in the heading of this letter. If you have any questions about your
Federal income tax status and responsibilities, please contact IRS Customer Service at

1-800-829-1040 or the IRS Customer Service number for businesses, 1-800-829-4933. The
IRS Customer Service number for people with hearing impairments is 1-800-829-4059.

Sincerely,

Holly O. Paz
Director, Rulings and Agreements

Enclosure
Notice 437
Redacted Proposed Adverse Determination Letter
Redacted Final Adverse Determination Letter

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20224

TAX EXEMPT AND
GOVERNMENT ENTITIES

DIVISION
Date: September 28, 2010 Contact Person:
Identification Number:
UIL: 501.03-00
501.03-08 Contact Number:
Fax Number:
Employer Identification Number:
LEGEND:

<
(4
fet
im
Hou wt aon ud i now tou to Wg

Dear

We have considered your application for recognition of exemption from Federal income tax under
Internal Revenue Code section 501(a). Based on the information provided, we have concluded
that you do not qualify for exemption under Code section 501(c)(3). The basis for our conclusion is
set forth below.

You applied for exemption under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (“Code”)
as an educational and charitable organization, and you are incorporated in State. Your
website states that your mission is to:

1. Educate others about polygamous families and their culture;

2

2. Encourage empowerment of individuals and families from the polygamous
   culture; and

3. Provide crisis referrals and response to those in the culture.

According to your letter on Date1, you will accomplish these goals by providing programs in family
enrichment, training for political interaction, legal conferences, Association meetings, having an
email listserv for current events, granting aid to the polygamist community, maintaining a website,
performing outreach within the polygamist community and out to other communities and media,
performing research, providing referrals to social services, and by conducting legislative days in
the state and national capitals.

You state in your letter on Date1 that you spend approximately forty-five percent of your time
conducting various forms of outreach to the general public and the polygamous community. These
activities include youth rallies, maintaining your website, speaking with various social services
groups and members of the public on topics affecting the polygamous community, and the
distribution of fliers and other handouts.

Attachments to the letter on Date2 demonstrate that a rally took place in City, “to provide [y]our
children with an opportunity to raise their voices in their own behalf [sic].” The rally included
patriotic music, signs supporting the rights of the polygamous community, and youth speakers
extolling the virtues of polygamy. Your website, which is continuously maintained, contains
general information about you as well as several articles and FAQs aimed at providing a better
understanding of what it means to be a member of the Church, including a book by a co-founder
about her experience and choice to be in a polygamous marriage. The articles include titles such
as, “Article,” “Article2,” and “Article3.” Information found on your website speaks to the belief in
the necessity of plural marriage in order to achieve “exaltation.” Other statements on your website
seek to induce individuals in the polygamist community to openly disobey laws stating that the
women of your community will no longer be silent.

The website also includes your position on and explanations of laws that affect the polygamous
community. The site continues to state that, “[you] do seek decriminalization of polygamy by: (1)
the removal or appropriate alteration of laws specifically targeting polygamists . . . and (2) the
ultimate removal of [State’s] constitutional prohibition against polygamy.” Additionally, the site
contains position papers on current and proposed laws that affect the polygamous community.
Finally, the site contains the message that “[you] oppose legislation or Constitutional amendments
(especially defining marriage) which restrict rather than protect individual freedoms and rights.”

As part of your outreach you also provide confidential referral services during a crisis or for victims
of domestic or child abuse in order to reduce any barriers preventing members of the polygamous
community from receiving such services.

You state in your letter on Date1 that you spend fifteen percent of your time conducting Association
meetings. According to Association’s website, Association “brings together government agencies,
nonprofit organizations and interested individuals who are working to open up communication,
break down barriers and coordinate efforts to give people associated with the practice of polygamy
equal access to justice, safety and services.” Association was started by the State Attorney
General's office and in Year was turned over to the Center by the Attorney General’s office. Your

letter on Date’ states that you provide three meetings every month for the attendants and
organizational committees of Association.

According to your letter on Date1, sponsoring a continuing education conference for attorneys
consumes ten percent of your time. Attachments to your letter on Date2 show that the legal
conference was titled Conference. It featured nine speakers, eight of whom were practicing
attorneys, including the then Attorney General of Utah. All of the speakers were qualified in their
particular areas dealing with the effects of the law on polygamy. The purpose of the course was to
promote greater understanding of the legal implications of polygamy.

According to your letter on Date1, you spend five percent of your time on family enrichment
programs. These programs, as stated in the same letter, provide information about domestic
violence; medical resources, including pediatricians and dentists; child abuse and how to report it;
and understanding the political process. Additionally, fliers provided with your letter on Date2
indicate that these programs bring in trained professionals in the topic of that night’s program.
These fliers also indicate that the family enrichment seminars advise on drafting legal documents
and the effects of the law on the family in general. Multiple fliers demonstrate that during these
seminars you encouraged individuals to get involved in the political process. The fliers state that
you will discuss strategies to decriminalize plural marriage, items passed by State’s legislature
affecting the polygamous community, and how to get involved in the political process. The fliers
also show that these programs are free, but they are restricted to the polygamous community.

As stated in your letter on Date1 you will spend four percent of your time providing training in
advocacy and conflict management. These training sessions will educate individuals about
advocacy, how to be an advocate for their families, how to communicate and participate in
policy/political decisions, and how to communicate in high stress and conflict scenarios. According
to your letter on Date2 this training includes general advocacy training that, “predominantly
focuse[s] on the value of relationship building, collaboration with community partners, and creating
a concise and effective message.” Parts of this training focus specifically on effectively
communicating a pro-polygamy viewpoint to the media. Finally, this training provided a one hour
segment on organizational aspects of lobbying such as creating a phone tree, becoming informed
on the issues, and the importance of being civically involved. Other trainings included a legislative
education day that included a session on “How to Lobby” as well as a tour of the state legislature
and a viewing of a legislative session. This legislative training was directed at members of the
polygamous community.

You state in your letter on Date1 that you spent five percent of your time organizing and granting
aid to mothers and children in Ranch who were impacted by events that occurred in Year. Ranch
is a large polygamous community found or accused of performing bigamy and other illegal
activities. An attachment to your letter on Date2 shows, for Year only, you collected, through
rallies and requests through the media, and distributed care packages for these mothers and
children.

Finally, you state in your letter on Date1 that you spend four percent of your time on direct
legislative efforts. The letter on Date2 states that you attended both a Republican and Democratic
Caucus in State’s legislature to discuss the role and importance of Association. These discussions
with legislators covered the broad topic of help for polygamous families through government social
services. Additionally, the letter on Date2 indicates that your officers visited Washington, D.C. in
their roles as officers to discuss pending legislation and general issues affecting the polygamous
community, but you did not fund these trips.

News articles you submitted state that your chief officers could be called the “mothers of the

4

polygamists-as-lobbyists” movement. Additionally, a principal officer, in her role as such, said, “We
foresee we will need to broaden our lobbying efforts and go national . . . we don’t want our work
ruined by those on the national level who don’t know anything.” Other remarks about you by your
officers state that, “this is an effort to increase the dialogue so people aren't intimidated by
government officials,” and that a desire exists for lawmakers to see that a lot of stereotypes of
polygamists aren't true. Finally, you stated that,

[You] oppose: 1) any ruling that deprives polygamists of the right to organize or manage a trust with
their own assets, 2) any ruling that declares a trust formed by polygamists as ‘promoting illegal
activities,’ invalid, un-Constitutional, or ‘illegal,’ simply because the organizers embrace plural
marriage, 3) any ruling that deprives [Church] . . . of the right to access their own assets or their right
to self-governance .. . 4) any ruling or government action that establishes an inequality in the law
that distinguishes, and diminishes, the rights of polygamists from the rights of other American
citizens.

In light of these beliefs and activities, you have submitted a Form 5768 electing to fall under
section 501(h) of the Code.

Your board, as reported in your Form 1023, consists of six, unrelated members. All of the directors
are polygamists or have experience in the polygamist community.

LAW:

Section 501(c)(3) of the Code provides that organizations may be exempted from tax if they are
organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety,
literary, or educational purposes and “no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of
any private shareholder or individual.”

Title 76, Chapter 7, Part 1 of the State Code states, “A person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing
he has a husband or wife or knowing the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports
to marry another person or cohabits with another person. Bigamy is a felony of the third degree.”

Section 1.501(c)(3)-1(a)(1) of the regulations provides that in order to be exempt under section
501(c)(3) of the Code, an organization must be both organized and operated exclusively for one or
more of the exempt purposes specified in that section.

Section 1.501(c)(3)-1(c)(3) of the regulations states that, “an organization is not operated
exclusively for exempt purposes if it is an ‘action’ organization.” An “action” organization is defined
in one of three ways. First, an “action” organization is such if a substantial part of its activities is
attempting to influence legislation by contacting or urging the public to contact members of a
legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or otherwise
advocating the adoption or rejection of legislation. Second, an “action” organization is one that
participates or intervenes, directly or indirectly, in any political campaign on behalf of or in
opposition to any candidate for public office. Third, an “action” organization is such if its main or
primary objective is only attainable by legislation or a defeat of proposed legislation and if it
advocates for the attainment of such main or primary objective.

Section 1.501(c)(3)-1(d)(2) of the regulations defines charitable as it is used in its generally
accepted legal sense. It continues to describe the generally accepted legal sense as the relief of
the poor and distressed, advancement of religion, advancement of education or science, erection

5

or maintenance of public buildings, lessening the burdens of government, or promoting social
welfare if its an organization designed to accomplish one of the above causes or to lessen
neighborhood tensions, defend human and civil rights, or combat community deterioration and
juvenile delinquency.

Revenue Procedure 86-43, 1986-2 C.B. 729, establishes four factors, which may constitute
propaganda rather than educational activities; (1) the presentation of viewpoints unsupported by
facts is a significant portion of the organization’s communications, (2) the facts purporting to
support the viewpoint are distorted, (3) the presentations make substantial use of inflammatory or
disparaging terms and express conclusions more on the basis of strong emotion than objective
evaluation, and (4) the approach used in the presentations is not aimed at developing an
understanding on the part of the intended audience or readership because it does not consider
their background or training in the subject matter.

Revenue Ruling 58-66, 1958-1 C.B. 66, provides that for the purpose of administering federal tax
law, the marital status of individuals is determined by state law.

Revenue Ruling 66-256, 1966-2 C.B. 210, provides exemption for an organization that presents
public forums and debates on issues that are often political and controversial. The organization
invites speakers with many perspectives on a subject matter for an open discussion of the topic
with no support for either side. Providing such balanced public forums and debates is an
educational activity, notwithstanding the political and controversial content.

Revenue Ruling 71-447, 1971-2 C.B. 230, states that under common law, the term “charity”
encompasses all three major categories of religious, educational, and charitable purposes. All
charitable trusts, educational or otherwise, including religious trusts, are subject to the requirement
that the purpose of the trust may not be illegal or contrary to public policy. Citing Restatement
(Second), Trusts, (1959) Sec. 377, Comment c: “A Trust for a purpose the accomplishment of
which is contrary to public policy, although not forbidden by law, is invalid”.

Revenue Ruling 75-384, 1975-2 C.B. 204, provides that an organization that induces or
encourages the commission of criminal acts by planning and sponsoring such events cannot be
exempt under 501(c)(3) since it violates the common understanding of a charitable trust.

In Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1879), the Supreme Court-held it is a law in the
territories of the United States that plural marriage shall not be allowed and indicated that such law
is within the legislative power of Congress, is constitutional, and is valid.

In Bob Jones University v. United States, 461 U.S. 574 (1982), the Supreme Court upheld the
Service's revocation of the tax exempt status of two schools because of their racially discriminatory
policies, which it found contrary to established public policy. In reaching its decision, the Court
indicated that entitlement to tax exemption depends on meeting certain common law standards of
charity —an institution seeking tax-exempt status must serve a public purpose and not be contrary
to established public policy. If an organization engages in activities in direct contravention of public
policy, it does not provide a public benefit and cannot qualify as charitable, and therefore not
exempt.

In Potter v. Murray City, 585 F. Supp. 1126 (D.C. Utah 1984), the court indicated that the landmark
decision in the area of freedom of religion in connection with polygamy is Reynolds v. United

States, 98 U.S. 145, in which the Supreme Court confirmed a conviction even though the

6

defendant believed that the practice of polygamy was his religious duty and of divine origin and he
had received permission from the authorities of his church to enter into the polygamist marriages.

Also, the court indicated that a long line of decisions beginning with Reynolds, 98 U.S. 145, had
either expressly approved statutes forbidding the practice of plural marriage, or approved them in
other contexts as subsisting authority in the area of the free exercise clause of the First
Amendment. See, e.g., Miles v. United States, 103 U.S. 304 (1881); Cannon v. United States, 116
U.S. 55 (1885); Snow v. United States, 118 U.S. 346 (1886); Davis v. Beason, 133 U.S. 333
(1890); Late Corporation of Latter-Day Saints v. United States, 136 U.S. 1 (1890); State v.
Hendrickson, 245 P. 375 (Utah 1926); Lovell v. City of Griffin, 303 U.S. 444 (1938); Cantwell v.
Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, (1940); State v. Barlow, 153 P.2d 647 (Utah 1944), appeal dismissed
for want of substantial federal question, 324 U.S. 829 (1945); Cleveland v. United States, 146 F.2d
730 (10th Cir.1945); State v. Musser, 110 Utah 534, (1946); Cleveland v. United States, 329 U.S.
14 (1946); In re State in Interest of Black, 3 Utah 2d 315 (1955); Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U.S. 599,
(1961); Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972); Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49
(1973); United States v. Carroll, 567 F.2d 955 (10th Cir. 1977); United States v. Ogle, 613 F.2d 233 (10th Cir. 1979); United States v. Lee, 455 U.S. 252 (1982); Bob Jones University v. United States,
461 U.S. 574 (1983). Id. Further, at no time has Reynolds, 98 U.S. 145, been overturned by the
Supreme Court. Id.

In Fund for Study of Economic Growth and Tax Reform v. I.R.S., 161 F.3d 755, 759-60 (D.C. Cir.
1998), the court determined that an organization established and operated for one year prior to an
election, where tax reform was a major issue, and where evidence showed the organization had
started with a conclusion and looked for research to support such conclusion was an “action”
organization. As part of its activities the organization, "published a final report wherein it extolled
the benefits of the flat tax and ‘recommend[ed] to the Congress and to the President of the United
States that the current Internal Revenue Code be repealed in its entirety.”

Restatement (Second), of Trusts, (1959) Section 377, states that a charitable trust cannot be
created for a purpose which is illegal. The first comment illustrates the rule, indicating that where
the trust estate is to be used for a criminal purpose, the trust is invalid. Thus, “a trust for the
promotion of polygamy...is invalid.”

ANALYSIS:

To be exempt under § 501(c)(3) an organization must be operated for a charitable or educational
purpose as they are defined by statute and regulation and interpreted by the IRS and the courts.
Section 1.501(c)(3)-1(d). While you conduct many educational and charitable activities, we cannot
find that your primary purpose is educational or charitable under §501(c)(3). In the tax code,
charity is interpreted in its generally accepted legal sense. Section 1.501(c)(3)-1(d)(2). This
includes the requirement for all charitable trusts, including religious and educational trusts, that their
purposes may not be illegal or contrary to public policy. Rev. Rul. 71-447, supra (citing Restatement
(Second), Trusts, (1959) Sec. 377, Comment c: “A Trust for a purpose the accomplishment of
which is contrary to public policy, although not forbidden by law, is invalid".) This ruling is further
clarified by Rev. Rul. 75-384, supra, which provides that an organization that induces or
encourages the commission of criminal acts cannot be exempt under 501(c)(3) since it violates the
common understanding of a charitable trust. These principles were later upheld in the Supreme
Court case Bob Jones University, 461 U.S. 574, where in reaching its decision, the Court indicated

that entitlement to tax exemption depends on meeting certain common law standards of charity —
namely, that an institution seeking tax-exempt status must serve a public purpose and not be

contrary to established public policy.

The exercise of polygamy is illegal under State marriage law. State provides in its code, 1953 §
76-7-101, that “a person is guilty of bigamy when, knowing he has a husband or wife or knowing
the other person has a husband or wife, the person purports to marry another person or cohabits
with another person. Bigamy is a felony of the third degree.” Multiple Supreme Court cases have
held that such state bigamy laws do not violate an individual’s freedom to exercise religion,
regardless of any firmly held beliefs. See Potter, 585 F. Supp. 1126. The landmark case on this
point remains Reynolds, 98 U.S. 145. Id.

For purposes of federal tax laws, marital status is determined by state laws. Rev. Rul. 58-66,
supra. Since State law forbids polygamous marriages, it follows that polygamy is against the policy
of the Federal tax code for purposes of a State corporation.

Furthermore, polygamy has been contrary to federal policy for more than one hundred and thirty
years. Reynolds, 98 U.S. 145; Potter, 585 F. Supp. 1126. It is so well established that the
Restatement of Trusts cited in Rev. Rul. 71-447, supra, used it as an example, “Where by the
terms of the trust the trust estate is to be used for a criminal purpose, the trust is invalid. Thus, a
trust to expend the trust estate in the promotion of revolution, or in printing and circulating books or
pamphlets the printing and circulation of which are forbidden by law, is invalid. So also, a trust for
the promotion of polygamy or other sexual offenses is invalid.” Restatement (Second) of Trusts §
377 cmt. a.

Since you are operated to condone and support those engaging in the illegal act of polygamy you
cannot be exempt under section 501(c)(3). You train people to effectively communicate a pro-
polygamy message and to manipulate the law to further a polygamous lifestyle. You provide
confidential referrals and support and train women to elicit more understanding and support from
medical and government personnel from whom they seek help for some of the difficulties arising
from polygamous marriage. The fact that these trainings are restricted to the polygamous
community furthers your support of an illegal activity. Additionally, you provide conferences for
attorneys and others in the legal community seeking to represent those performing polygamous acts. Your website, rallies, and publications try to change general opinion about polygamy. Similar
to Bob Jones University, whose activities created an environment to perpetuate discrimination, see
Bob Jones, 461 U.S. 574, your training courses as well as your website and rallies all seek to
create an environment where people are free to contravene state law and federal policy. Not only
do you seek to create a permissible environment, but you also suggest to people that they must
perform illegal acts by stating, through your website, that polygamy is the only way to achieve
“exaltation.”

You admit in your application and through your material the illegality of polygamy and you actively
fight to alter the status of polygamy. You train individuals in proper techniques for advocacy and
argumentation. These trainings are directed solely at the polygamous community. The trainings
are intended for political advocacy as well as day-to-day advocacy of an illegal lifestyle. You hope
to use the media to broadly disperse a positive view of an illegal activity. Furthermore, you provide
specific training on how to lobby, which is also directed solely at the polygamous community. This
training activity is supported by pro-polygamy rallies, visits to the state capital building, and printed
material on your website espousing a singular pro-polygamy point of view.

In addition to your activities, statements by you and your officers have displayed an over-arching
objective to alter the legal status of polygamy. Your website states that, “[you] do seek

8

decriminalization of polygamy by: (1) the removal or appropriate alteration of laws specifically
targeting polygamists . . . and (2) the ultimate removal of [State’s] constitutional prohibition against
polygamy.” Your chief officer is quoted as saying, “We foresee we will need to broaden our
lobbying efforts and go national.” News articles have even listed your founders as “mothers of the
polygamists-as-lobbyists movement.” You have also stated that as an organization,

[You] oppose: 1) any ruling that deprives polygamists of the right to organize or manage a trust with
their own assets, 2) any ruling that declares a trust formed by polygamists as ‘promoting illegal
activities,’ invalid, un-Constitutional, or ‘illegal,’ simply because the organizers embrace plural
marriage, 3) any ruling that deprives [Church] . . . of the right to access their own assets or their right
to self-governance . . . 4) any ruling or government action that establishes an inequality in the law
that distinguishes, and diminishes, the rights of polygamists from the rights of other American
citizens.

These statements demonstrate that one of your substantial purposes is to support what has
heretofore been and continues to be an illegal activity.

Furthermore, the statements above help demonstrate that your primary objective cannot be
attained without legislation and that you advocate for the change of such law. The regulations
prohibit recognition of action organizations, including those that have a primary objective that is
only attainable by legislation and that advocate for the attainment of such primary objectives.
Section 1.501(c)(3)-1(c)(3)(iv). Much of your outreach and training activities, which together
comprise over half of your activities, provide the tools for legislative activity while espousing a
distinct view point that, by your own admission, cannot be achieved without legislation. Despite the
fact that your listed purposes may be attainable without legislation, incorporating all of the facts
and circumstances of your organization shows that your main objective cannot be achieved without
legislation. Your organization looks substantially like that in Fund for Economic Growth, 161 F.3d
755, in that your public discussions and publications present material in a partisan manner in order
to alter people’s opinions on an issue requiring legislation. The presence of a primary purpose that
cannot be achieved without a change in legislation also prevents your recognition as an exempt
organization.

While you conduct many educational activities, including conflict resolution training, a legal
continuing learning course, and family enrichment activities, they are not your main activities and
do not constitute your primary purpose.

Accordingly, you do not qualify for exemption as an organization described in section 501(c)(3) of
the Code and you must file federal income tax returns.

Contributions to you are not deductible under section 170 of the Code.

You have the right to file a protest if you believe this determination is incorrect. To protest, you
must submit a statement of your views and fully explain your reasoning. You must submit the
statement, signed by one of your officers, within 30 days from the date of this letter. We will
consider your statement and decide if the information affects our determination.

Your protest statement should be accompanied by the following declaration:

Under penalties of perjury, I declare that I have examined this protest statement,
including accompanying documents, and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the

9

statement contains all the relevant facts, and such facts are true, correct, and
complete.

You also have a right to request a conference to discuss your protest. This request should be
made when you file your protest statement. An attorney, certified public accountant, or an
individual enrolled to practice before the Internal Revenue Service may represent you. If you want
representation during the conference procedures, you must file a proper power of attorney, Form
2848, Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative, if you have not already done so. For
more information about representation, see Publication 947, Practice before the IRS and Power of
Attorney. All forms and publications mentioned in this letter can be found at www.irs.gov, Forms
and Publications.

If you do not file a protest within 30 days, you will not be able to file a suit for declaratory judgment
in court because the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will consider the failure to protest as a failure
to exhaust available administrative remedies. Code section 7428(b)(2) provides, in part, that a
declaratory judgment or decree shall not be issued in any proceeding unless the Tax Court, the
United States Court of Federal Claims, or the District Court of the United States for the District of
Columbia determines that the organization involved has exhausted all of the administrative
remedies available to it within the IRS.

If you do not intend to protest this determination, you do not need to take any further action. If we
do not hear from you within 30 days, we will issue a final adverse determination letter. That letter
will provide information about filing tax returns and other matters.

Please send your protest statement, Form 2848 and any supporting documents to this address:

Internal Revenue Service
TEGE SE:T:EO:RA:T

1111 Constitution Ave, N.W.,
Washington, DC 20224

You may also fax your statement using the fax number shown in the heading of this letter. If you
fax your statement, please call the person identified in the heading of this letter to confirm that he
or she received your fax.

If you have any questions, please contact the person whose name and telephone number are
shown in the heading of this letter.

Sincerely,

Lois Lerner
Director, Exempt Organizations