The Daily Omnivore

The 2010 midterm election marked the rise of a new political committee, dubbed ‘super PACs,’ and officially known as ‘independent-expenditure only committees,’ which can raise unlimited sums from corporations, unions and other groups, as well as individuals.

The super PACs were made possible by two judicial decisions. The first was the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission which held that government may not prohibit unions and corporations from making independent expenditures about politics. Soon after, in Speechnow.org v. FEC, the Federal Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit held that contributions to groups that only make independent expenditures could not be limited.

read more »

Political money in the United States is often divided into two categories, ‘hard’ money and ‘soft’ money. ‘Hard’ money is contributed directly to a candidate of a political party. It is regulated by law in both source and amount, and monitored by the Federal Election Commission (maximum $2500). ‘Soft’ money is contributed to the political party as a whole. Historically, ‘soft money’ referred to contributions made to political parties for purposes of party building and other activities not directly related to the election of specific candidates. Because these contributions were not used for specific candidate advocacy, they were not regulated by the Federal Election Campaign Act, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Buckley v. Valeo. The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (also known as McCain-Feingold) prohibited unregulated contributions to national party committees.

‘Soft money’ also refers to unlimited contributions to organizations and committees other than candidate campaigns and political parties (except, where legal, to state and local parties for use solely in state and local races). Organizations which receive ‘Soft money’ contributions are often called ‘527s,’ for the section of the tax code under which they operate. The term is generally used to refer to independent, nonprofit political organizations that are not regulated by the FEC or by a state elections commission, and are not subject to the same contribution limits as PACs. Such organizations can legally engage in political activity, but funds from ‘soft money’ contributions may not be spent on ads promoting the election or defeat of a specific candidate.

The American Preppers Network (APN) is a non-profit corporation and part of a growing international movement of survivalists who call themselves ‘preppers.’ The social network is organized by state and regional blogs and forums. The members are volunteer contributors who are dedicated to providing free information on survival, preparedness, self-sufficiency and sustainability. The individuals involved in the prepper network prefer to be called preppers instead of survivalists because they are regular people with normal lifestyles and jobs who prepare for a variety of reasons whether natural or man-made.

The network of blogs is based on the concept originally created by Riverwalker of the ‘Stealth Survival’ blog, who founded the first Preppers Network. The organization has also formed alliances with independent affiliates such as ‘Pioneer Living Survival Magazine,’ a homesteading and survival skills website for a range of survivalist, from those who just want to store extra food in case of a power cut, to people who want to embrace the ‘off the grid’ lifestyle of America’s western pioneers.

In North America, a tax shelter is generally defined as any method that recovers more than $1 in tax for every $1 spent, within 4 years. Some tax shelters are questionable or even illegal such as offshore companies that exploit differing tax rates and legislation. Others are part of financing arrangements; by paying unreasonably high interest rates to a related party, one may severely reduce the income of an investment (or even create a loss), but create a massive capital gain when one withdraws the investment. The tax benefit derives from the fact that capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than the normal investment income such as interest or dividend.

The offense of these questionable tax shelters are usually that transactions were not reported at fair market value or the interest rate was too high or too low. In general, if the purpose of a transaction is to lower tax liabilities but otherwise have no economic value, and especially when arranged between related parties, such transactions are often viewed as unethical.

read more »