Committee backs amended emergency bill limiting charities’ political campaign activity

Senate Bill 4, described to the committee as an emergency measure, would prohibit charitable organizations from participating in or intervening in political campaigns for or against candidates and would align state enforcement with the Internal Revenue Service’s interpretation of 501(c)(3) political‑campaign restrictions.

Committee staff said the original bill allowed civil penalties up to $5,000 and imposed a two‑year revocation of tax‑exempt status for willful violations. "It prohibits a charitable organization from participating or intervening in a political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to a candidate for public office, including publication or distribution of statements," the staff member said during the presentation.

Members considered amendments that narrow and soften enforcement. The approved amendment adds private foundations to the prohibition, exempts organizations already subject to the Johnson Amendment from certain enforcement provisions, removes a proposed attestation requirement from the charitable registration statement, lowers the maximum civil penalty to $1,000 per violation, and requires the secretary of state or attorney general to attempt mediation and settlement before imposing penalties. The amendment also allows a charity that loses its tax‑exempt status to reapply, the staff member said.

Chairman Craig called the question after discussion and the committee recorded a favorable vote on the bill as amended; at least one member was noted as voting against the measure. Committee members framed the bill as maintaining the status quo in the event federal rules governing 501(c)(3) organizations change, with staff saying the state provisions would trigger only if a federal action or change were to alter enforcement of the Johnson Amendment.

The committee’s action advances the bill as an emergency measure with the new, narrower enforcement language. Additional implementation details — including how mediation would be conducted and which enforcement exemptions apply in specific scenarios — were discussed but not finalized during the session.