Federal Politics

Published — October 30, 2012 Updated — May 19, 2014 at 12:19 pm ET

Nonprofits, shell corporations help shield identity of ad backers

Names occasionally slip through

Introduction

In the 2012 election, nonprofits have been the preferred vehicle for donors who prefer to keep their identities secret. But with the right lawyers, super PACs, which are supposedly transparent about their donors, can accomplish the same feat.

Social welfare nonprofits, known as 501(c)(4)s by the Internal Revenue Service, file tax returns with the IRS. The names of their top donors are revealed to the IRS — but not to the public.

Super PACs, on the other hand, do report their donors. In some instances, though, those donors are nonprofits. Or the funds might come from shell corporations, which have passed through millions of dollars to the political organizations from unidentified donors in this election.

Aetna’s oops

Occasionally, the veil is lifted on the secrecy of these groups, sometimes inadvertently.

Insurance giant Aetna accidentally disclosed to insurance regulators earlier this year that in 2011, it had contributed $3 million to the American Action Network, a 501(c)(4) group that has spent $11 million targeting mostly Democratic candidates for Congress.

The company later scrubbed the disclosure from its filing and declined to elaborate on it despite demands from institutional shareholders for an explanation.

Last week, the American Energy Opportunity Fund, a 501(c)(4) group led by two executives at an oil and gas company, revealed it had paid for nearly $800,000 in radio ads targeting President Barack Obama on his energy policy and the funds came thanks to a donation from Las Vegas casino titan Sheldon Adelson.

Adelson and his family have given more than $53 million to super PACs this election.

Shell corporations

Not all secret money comes from nonprofits.

On Sept. 26, a corporation was formed in Knoxville, Tenn., with the most mundane of names: Specialty Group, Inc. On its registration paperwork, one name was listed, that of attorney William S. Rose Jr. The address provided was a home owned by Rose.

Specialty sent several checks totaling $5.2 million to FreedomWorks for America, a super PAC affiliated with the tea party network and with former Republican House Majority Leader Dick Armey.

The donations make Specialty Group the fifth-largest organization contributing money to super PACs, and only a handful of individuals have contributed more.

Rose could not be reached for comment and all listed phone numbers have been disconnected.

Specialty Group, Inc., isn’t the first apparent shell corporation — a company with no known physical presence, product or staff — to throw cash into the post-Citizens United campaign finance arena.

In 2011, two other shell companies, one called Eli Publishing and the other called F8 LLC, both incorporated at the same address in an office building in downtown Provo, Utah, contributed $1 million to Restore Our Future, the super PAC backing Mitt Romney.

The suite number given for both corporations doesn’t actually exist, and there is no office, but the registered agents for both companies had connections to Nu Skin, a cosmetic company whose chairman is Utah resident Steve Lund.

No official confirmation has ever been made, however, and Lund and his wife have gone on to contribute a combined $1 million, in their own names, to Restore Our Future.

The extended money trail

Taking money from hard to track shell corporations isn’t the only way for a super PAC to skirt disclosure rules.

Another common tactic is for a nonprofit to give money to a super PAC. This happens frequently when a nonprofit is closely affiliated with the super PAC it is giving money to.

In total, Center for Responsive Politics data shows that 501(c)(4) groups contributed at least $10 million to super PACs.

Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind.’s failed bid for re-election stopped at the primary when he lost to Richard Mourdock, his tea party-affiliated opponent. He was helped by a group called Indiana Values Super PAC, which spent $459,000 opposing Mourdock.

The super PAC received $137,000 of its funds from a 501(c)(4) group also called Indiana Values, based out of the office of a lobbying firm on K Street in Washington, D.C., where the money trail ends.

Sometimes the chain is longer, but with a similar result.

In Pennsylvania, a super PAC called Freedom Fund for America’s Future spent $175,000 attacking Republican Senate candidate Tom Smith during the primary.

At least $165,000 of that money came from another super PAC, called Fight for the Dream, based out of a post office box at a UPS Store in Allentown. Fight for the Dream in turn got all of its money from a nonprofit called Restore the Dream, based out of the very same post office box.

Organizers told the Center for Responsive Politics that the group was designed with the help of their legal counsel, a lawyer named Anthony Ferate. Ferate is also an in-house lobbyist for natural gas company Devon Energy.

He denied there was anything improper about the setup, and said in an interview with CRP that it is a widespread practice.

“This was set up within federal election laws,” he said. “I would disagree that there’s anything to question about transfers between super PACS. In fact, the Democrats are coordinating between their super PACs.”

According to a CRP analysis, the super PAC that is the single largest recipient of cash from a nonprofit is FreedomWorks for America, the same super PAC that received $5.2 million from the Tennessee shell corporation.

CRP data shows the group received $2.3 million from its own nonprofit, FreedomWorks. That means that although the group has disclosed $15.4 million in donations, $7.5 million of it is untraceable.

This story is a collaboration between the Center for Public Integrity and the Center for Responsive Politics. For up-to-date news on outside spending in the 2012 election, follow our Source2012 Tumblr and the hashtag #Source2012 on Twitter.

Read more in Federal Politics

Share this article

Join the conversation

Show Comments

11
Leave a Reply

avatar
9 Comment threads
2 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
SOUTH JERSEYTed SiroisMark SullivanTom LarkinAnonymous Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Mark Sullivan
Guest
Mark Sullivan

Trump needs to conduct these activities because the entire MSM media, excluding Fox, is campaigning against him 24/7/365.

Didn’t Monica’s boyfriend’s wife and various criminal enterprises outspend Trump by almost 2-1?

CapitalistRoader
Guest
CapitalistRoader

Why wouldn’t he get an early start on fund raising? Hillary outspent him two-to-one in 2016. The Dem’s are the party of big money. The President knows this and is attempting to get a jump on it. Of course the Dem candidate will outspend him in 2020 so it’s only rational that he starts fund raising now.

George Young
Guest
George Young

Oh brother. We just 8 years of the Campaigner – in – Chief. Where was this journalistic rectal thermometer then. Just another article about 2000 words too long that merely takes another slap at Trump for something he far from initiated.

j stevenson
Guest
j stevenson

The big difference between Trump and all the rest is his refusing to accept funds from lobbyists, so they don’t have the White House access they are used to. These are the donors who buy the presidency and are as pixxed off that he won the election as are the media and the Dems. Lobbyists have never been shut out of the WH and Trump has told them he is not for sale.

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Trump needs to be impeached and tossed in prison. Then have the key thrown away so he will never be free. Then he can see how it feels not to have freedom.

Mark Sullivan
Guest
Mark Sullivan

Thank you for the usual insightful leftist low IQ Snowflake response.

barney
Guest

hes not imprisoning them hes sending them back to their country chill tf out

SOUTH JERSEY
Guest
SOUTH JERSEY

WHY DONT YOU HAVE FREEDOM?

Tom Larkin
Guest
Tom Larkin

First, something positive. I was happy to learn of empirical information in article. BUT, the article was so slanted against President Trump as to be deemed fake news (“Perhaps Trump just lied.” (Two different issues)). The article mentions that President Trump raised over $67 million, but ended 2018 with $19 million. President Trump spent over $40 million 2016 and 2017. President Trump conducted 57 political rallies. The article notes the hats and T-shirts sold, but NEVER MENTIONS THE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF REPUBLICAN SENATORS during a mid-term election that lost the House and the number of political rallies in… Read more »

Ted Sirois
Guest
Ted Sirois

At least Trump is getting donations from willing donors. Fresh from his first election, Obama used billions of our children’s tax dollars to save thousands of union jobs in the car industry and bailed out the banks and many Wall Street businesses. This secured his source of reelection funds for his reelection four years later.

South Jersey
Guest
South Jersey

TRUMP 2020; IS AN AMAZINGLY SMART MAN! VERY ORIGINAL & CREATIVE. I AM HAPPY TO HAVE HIS AS POTUS.

SOUTH JERSEY
Guest
SOUTH JERSEY

THIS ARTICLE WAS OBVIOUSLY WRITTEN BY, A TRUMP-HATE-GROUP. THAT FEELS; IT IS NOT NORMAL TO BE SUCCESSFUL WITH YOUR OWN BRAND NAME. WHEN, IF FACT, IT IS NORMAL! >>>>> THIS IS >>> FAKE NEWS!!! <<<< ie: A PACK-OF-LIES; SPUN INTO; DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER. FOR A SINISTER-AGENDA OF; FASCIST DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST, COUP D'ETAT