Overview
Title
To amend chapters 95 and 96 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reform the system of public financing for Presidential election campaigns, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The "Empower Act of 2024" wants to change how money is given to people running for president to make it fairer, but some people worry it might make things more complicated and make it easier for rich people to win. It also creates a special fund to help pay for campaigns using money from fines and penalties, but there's concern it might not be managed well or have enough money.
Summary AI
The bill, known as the "Empower Act of 2024," aims to reform the public financing system for Presidential election campaigns in the United States. It proposes changes to the Internal Revenue Code, such as revising matching payment systems for primary elections, increasing limits on contributions, and updating coordination rules for party expenditures. Additionally, the bill introduces the "Freedom From Influence Fund," funded by assessments from fines and penalties, as a source of payments for election campaigns. The legislation targets implementation beginning with the 2028 Presidential election cycle.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The proposed legislation seeks to modify chapters 95 and 96 of the Internal Revenue Code, focusing on reforming the public financing system for Presidential election campaigns. Known as the "Empower Act of 2024," the bill introduces a range of changes, including adjustments in the criteria for matching payments, the establishment of new funds, and amendments to expenditure limits. A central feature of the bill is the creation of the Freedom From Influence Fund, which is touted as the sole source of federal campaign financing starting from the 2028 Presidential election.
Summary of Significant Issues
A predominant issue within the bill is the unclear guidelines surrounding the Freedom From Influence Fund. The bill acknowledges this fund as pivotal to future campaign financing but falls short of detailing how it will be managed or sustained, leaving questions about its funding stability and the potential for unequal distribution among candidates.
The legislation seeks to significantly boost the matching payment system, potentially leading to excessive public spending. By increasing matchable contributions to a 600 percent match rate, the conditions required for such contributions are complex and could lead to misunderstandings or administrative burdens for campaign contributors.
The repeal of expenditure limits, designed to curtail excessive campaign spending, raises concerns of financial inequality. Wealthy candidates could potentially wield greater influence in campaigns due to unregulated spending capacity, thereby threatening an even playing field.
Eligibility criteria, as revised in the bill, are portrayed as convoluted and potentially hard to comply with. This could lead to hurdles for candidates, especially those with limited financial means or smaller support bases, reducing overall campaign transparency and accountability.
Impact on the Public
For the public broadly, this bill could lead to more dynamic, albeit financially lopsided, Presidential campaigns. On one hand, increased federal funding for campaigns may enhance engagement efforts, but on the other hand, it could exacerbate the influence of wealth in the election process. The introduction of new financial assessments and minimum thresholds could impose additional costs on organizations, which might indirectly affect consumers or beneficiaries of these companies.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Political Candidates: Candidates navigating these changes could face greater administrative burdens in tracking contributions against new, complex criteria. While larger campaigns may absorb these changes more easily, smaller campaigns could be disproportionately disadvantaged by the financial emphasis implied in the bill.
Political Parties: The increase in coordinated party expenditure limits could benefit larger political parties with greater financial resources, potentially marginalizing smaller parties unable to raise similar funds. This could result in an uneven competitive field in Presidential elections.
Regulatory Bodies: Agencies such as the Federal Election Commission will bear the responsibility of auditing and enforcing these novel financial regulations. Ensuring compliance with these comprehensive changes could require expanded capacity and oversight mechanisms to maintain election integrity.
Organizations and Corporations: Facing a mandated 4.75% special assessment on fines and settlements, organizations may experience additional financial strain, affecting operational budgets and potentially leading to cost-passing measures affecting consumers.
Overall, the bill presents a transformative approach to Presidential campaign financing, with considerable implications for both the financial and political landscapes. However, key elements and their potential impacts remain shrouded in ambiguity, prompting concern over effective implementation and maintenance of electoral fairness.
Financial Assessment
The "Empower Act of 2024" introduces several significant changes in the public financing system for Presidential election campaigns, focusing heavily on financial aspects such as matching payments, contribution limits, and expenditure ceilings. This commentary delves into these financial references and how they may address or create issues in the context of the bill.
Matching Payments and Contributions
The bill proposes substantial changes to how matching payments are structured. It increases matchable contributions to 600 percent of the contribution amount, representing a considerable boost in public financing support for candidates. However, the introduction of complex conditions that define what qualifies as a "matchable contribution" could potentially lead to confusion. There is a clear concern that this complexity might not only foster misunderstanding among candidates but could also lead to excessive public spending due to the elevated matching rate.
Contribution Limits
A notable financial reference is the cap on individual contributions, which is set at $1,000. This is aimed to maintain a level playing field by limiting how much one person can financially influence a campaign. However, the language around these limits and eligibility requirements is notably intricate, which could pose compliance challenges for campaigns. This complexity may unintentionally undermine transparency and accountability if candidates struggle to align with these convoluted criteria.
Expenditure Limits
The repeal of previous expenditure limitations permits candidates to exceed the prior $50,000 cap on personal funds used during campaigns. While this change allows greater flexibility for campaigns, there is concern that it may enable wealthier candidates to dominate the electoral landscape through overwhelming financial influence, creating an uneven playing field. This potential outcome could further entrench financial inequality in election campaigns.
Coordinated Party Expenditures
The increase of coordinated party expenditure limits to $100,000,000 notably benefits major political parties. This substantial allowance could amplify the influence of large political entities, giving them a significant financial edge over smaller parties. It's crucial to consider how this might skew the democratic process by consolidating power within established parties and diminishing the competitive chances of minor parties.
Freedom From Influence Fund
The establishment of the "Freedom From Influence Fund" as the primary source of financing draws attention to its funding model through assessments on fines and penalties. A 4.75% special assessment on fines and settlements raises queries about the reasoning behind such a specific percentage. Without clear justification for this rate, stakeholders express concerns about fairness and the feasibility of consistently generating sufficient funds for its intended purpose.
Further complicating the issue, the Fund lacks thorough financial management guidelines, creating apprehension about its sustainability. The absence of clear procedural outlines fosters doubts about potential favoritism in fund distribution and raises questions regarding the equitable allocation of campaign financing.
Use of Funds for Compliance
The bill's provision allowing funds to be used for "general election legal and accounting compliance" is vaguely defined, posing risks of potential misuse of public funds. The lack of specificity in what constitutes necessary compliance expenses might lead to questionable disbursements justified under this category, compounding apprehension over the transparent and appropriate use of campaign resources.
Complexity and Cross-References
Cross-references throughout the bill contribute to its complexity, potentially obscuring the financial paths and conditions outlined. Navigating these intricacies may bewilder candidates and committees, hindering effective implementation of the new systems and regulations established in the Act. Clearer and more straightforward language could help mitigate misunderstandings and enhance compliance efficiency.
In summary, while the "Empower Act of 2024" strives to modernize and adjust the financing of Presidential campaigns through significant legislative adjustments, it brings forth several financial intricacies that could affect its intended fairness and transparency in political campaigning.
Issues
The 'Freedom From Influence Fund' is to be used as the sole source of payments for presidential campaigns starting in 2028, but lacks clarity on its funding, management, and sustainability, leading to concerns about its sufficiency and potential favoritism. (Section 107, 9043, 208, 301)
The bill increases matchable contributions to 600 percent of the contribution amount and introduces complex conditions for 'matchable contributions', potentially leading to misunderstanding and excessive public spending. (Sections 101, 203)
Repeal of expenditure limits might enable excessive campaign spending by wealthy candidates, possibly giving them an unfair advantage and creating an uneven playing field. (Sections 103, 202)
The language surrounding the new eligibility and contribution limit requirements is convoluted, posing challenges for candidates to comply and manage campaign contributions, which might affect transparency and accountability. (Sections 102, 201)
The amendment allows using funds for 'general election legal and accounting compliance', which is vaguely defined and could lead to potential misuse of public funds justified as compliance expenses. (Section 207)
Increase in coordinated party expenditures to $100,000,000 could significantly favor larger political parties, potentially disadvantaging smaller parties regarding financial power in presidential campaigns. (Section 204)
The bill mandates a 4.75% special assessment on fines and settlements to fund the 'Freedom From Influence Fund', but the rationale for this specific percentage isn't explained, raising fairness and consistency concerns. (Sections 302, 3015, 6761)
Potential ambiguity due to complex cross-references within the bill, which may hinder understanding and implementation of the new systems and regulations by candidates and their committees. (Multiple sections)
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title; table of contents Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Empower Act of 2024 aims to reform the election process by modifying how primary and general election funds are managed, including changes to matching payment processes, eligibility requirements, and expenditure limits. It establishes a “Freedom From Influence Fund” for financial contributions, sets a uniform date for payment release, and specifies effective dates for these changes.
101. Increase in and modifications to matching payments Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines changes to the matching payment system in the Internal Revenue Code related to presidential election campaigns. It increases the matchable contribution percentage to 600%, sets a limit on personal contributions, defines what qualifies as a "direct contribution," and adjusts the maximum payment limit to $250 million, with provisions for future inflation adjustments.
Money References
- — (1) IN GENERAL.—The first sentence of section 9034(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— (A) by striking “an amount equal to the amount of each contribution” and inserting “an amount equal to 600 percent of the amount of each matchable contribution (disregarding any amount of contributions from any person to the extent that the total of the amounts contributed by such person for the election exceeds $200)”; and (B) by striking “authorized committees” and all that follows through “$250” and inserting “authorized committees”. (2) MATCHABLE CONTRIBUTIONS.—Section 9034 of such Code is amended— (A) by striking the last sentence of subsection (a); and (B) by adding at the end the following new subsection: “(c) Matchable contribution defined.—For purposes of this section and section 9033(b)— “(1) MATCHABLE CONTRIBUTION.—The term ‘matchable contribution’ means, with respect to the nomination for election to the office of President of the United States, a contribution by an individual to a candidate or an authorized committee of a candidate with respect to which the candidate has certified in writing that— “(A) the individual making such contribution has not made aggregate contributions (including such matchable contribution) to such candidate and the authorized committees of such candidate in excess of $1,000 for the election; “(B) such candidate and the authorized committees of such candidate will not accept contributions from such individual (including such matchable contribution) aggregating more than the amount described in subparagraph (A); and “(C) such contribution was a direct contribution. “(2) CONTRIBUTION.—For purposes of this subsection, the term ‘contribution’ means a gift of money made by a written instrument which identifies the individual making the contribution by full name and mailing address, but does not include a subscription, loan, advance, or deposit of money, or anything of value or anything described in subparagraph (B), (C), or (D) of section 9032(4). “(3) DIRECT CONTRIBUTION.
- (b) Modification of payment limitation.—Section 9034(b) of such Code is amended— (1) by striking “The total” and inserting the following: “(1) IN GENERAL.—The total”; (2) by striking “shall not exceed” and all that follows and inserting “shall not exceed $250,000,000.”; and (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: “(2) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.
- “(A) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any applicable period beginning after 2029, the dollar amount in paragraph (1) shall be increased by an amount equal to— “(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by “(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year following the year which such applicable period begins, determined by substituting ‘calendar year 2028’ for ‘calendar year 1992’ in subparagraph (B) thereof. “(B) APPLICABLE PERIOD.—For purposes of this paragraph, the term ‘applicable period’ means the 4-year period beginning with the first day following the date of the general election for the office of President and ending on the date of the next such general election.
- “(C) ROUNDING.—If any amount as adjusted under subparagraph (1) is not a multiple of $10,000, such amount shall be rounded to the nearest multiple of $10,000.”. ---
102. Eligibility requirements for matching payments Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines changes to the requirements for candidates seeking matching payments for presidential campaigns. It raises the minimum contribution threshold to $25,000 from 20 states, sets a $1,000 per person contribution limit, requires candidates to participate in general election payment systems, and prohibits joint fundraising committees with political committees unless specific conditions are met.
Money References
- (a) Amount of aggregate contributions per State; disregarding of amounts contributed in excess of $200.—Section 9033(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended— (1) by striking “$5,000” and inserting “$25,000”; and (2) by striking “20 States” and inserting the following: “20 States (disregarding any amount of contributions from any such resident to the extent that the total of the amounts contributed by such resident for the election exceeds $200)”. (b) Contribution limit.
- — (1) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (4) of section 9033(b) of such Code is amended to read as follows: “(4) the candidate and the authorized committees of the candidate will not accept aggregate contributions from any person with respect to the nomination for election to the office of President of the United States in excess of $1,000 for the election.”
103. Repeal of expenditure limitations Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines changes to the Internal Revenue Code regarding campaign spending for presidential candidates. It repeals existing expenditure limits and requires candidates to follow a new rule that limits their personal and family spending on their campaign to $50,000.
Money References
- (a) In general.—Subsection (a) of section 9035 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows: “(a) Personal expenditure limitation.—No candidate shall knowingly make expenditures from his personal funds, or the personal funds of his immediate family, in connection with his campaign for nomination for election to the office of President in excess of, in the aggregate, $50,000.”.
104. Period of availability of matching payments Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section changes the timeframe for when candidates can start receiving matching funds for presidential elections. Instead of starting at the beginning of the election year, candidates can now receive funds starting six months before the earliest state primary election.
105. Examination and audits of matchable contributions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section, an update is made to the Internal Revenue Code to include "matchable contributions" along with "qualified campaign expenses" when examining and auditing campaign finances.
106. Modification to limitation on contributions for Presidential primary candidates Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section changes the Federal Election Campaign Act by modifying the limit on contributions to Presidential primary candidates. Instead of setting the limit for each calendar year, the limit now applies to the entire four-year election cycle.
107. Use of Freedom From Influence Fund as source of payments Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section establishes that, starting with the 2028 Presidential election, all payments to candidates are to be made from the Freedom From Influence Fund. It also mandates audits to ensure sufficient funds are available and allows payments to be reduced if necessary, but prohibits using funds from other sources to make such payments.
9043. Use of Freedom From Influence Fund as source of payments Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section of the bill, starting in the 2028 Presidential election, all campaign payments to candidates must be made from the "Freedom From Influence Fund." If there isn't enough money in this Fund, payments to candidates will be reduced proportionally, and no other money can be used to make up the difference. However, if more funds become available during the election cycle, the reduced payments may be partially or fully restored.
201. Modification of eligibility requirements for public financing Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines changes to the requirements for political party candidates to be eligible for public financing in a Presidential election. It states that candidates must participate in the primary payment system, agree to provide evidence and records of campaign expenses, consent to an audit by the Commission, and prohibits them from creating joint fundraising committees with other political committees unless it's with another authorized committee of the same candidate.
202. Repeal of expenditure limitations and use of qualified campaign contributions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section of the bill eliminates spending limits for presidential campaigns, allowing candidates to use qualified campaign contributions without restriction. It defines "qualified campaign contributions" and sets penalties for accepting unqualified donations, ensuring candidates from all parties face the same rules and penalties for violations.
Money References
- (b) Definition of qualified campaign contribution.—Section 9002 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph: “(13) QUALIFIED CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION.—The term ‘qualified campaign contribution’ means, with respect to any election for the office of President of the United States, a contribution from an individual to a candidate or an authorized committee of a candidate which— “(A) does not exceed $1,000 for the election; and “(B) with respect to which the candidate has certified in writing that— “(i) the individual making such contribution has not made aggregate contributions (including such qualified contribution) to such candidate and the authorized committees of such candidate in excess of the amount described in subparagraph (A), and “(ii) such candidate and the authorized committees of such candidate will not accept contributions from such individual (including such qualified contribution) aggregating more than the amount described in subparagraph (A) with respect to such election.”
- (B) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Paragraph (2) of section 9007(b) of such Code, as redesignated by subparagraph (A), is amended— (i) by striking “a major party” and inserting “a party”; (ii) by striking “contributions (other than” and inserting “contributions (other than qualified contributions”; and (iii) by striking “(other than qualified campaign expenses with respect to which payment is required under paragraph (2))”. (3) CRIMINAL PENALTIES.— (A) REPEAL OF PENALTY FOR EXCESS EXPENSES.—Section 9012 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking subsection (a). (B) PENALTY FOR ACCEPTANCE OF DISALLOWED CONTRIBUTIONS; APPLICATION OF SAME PENALTY FOR CANDIDATES OF MAJOR, MINOR, AND NEW PARTIES.—Subsection (b) of section 9012 of such Code is amended to read as follows: “(b) Contributions.— “(1) ACCEPTANCE OF DISALLOWED CONTRIBUTIONS.—It shall be unlawful for an eligible candidate of a party in a Presidential election or any of his authorized committees knowingly and willfully to accept— “(A) any contribution other than a qualified campaign contribution to defray qualified campaign expenses, except to the extent necessary to make up any deficiency in payments received out of the fund on account of the application of section 9006(c); or “(B) any contribution to defray expenses which would be qualified campaign expenses but for subparagraph (C) of section 9002(11). “(2) PENALTY.—Any person who violates paragraph (1) shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
- In the case of a violation by an authorized committee, any officer or member of such committee who knowingly and willfully consents to such violation shall be fined not more than $5,000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”.
203. Matching payments and other modifications to payment amounts Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines amendments to the Internal Revenue Code regarding presidential campaign funding. It proposes equal payment allocations to major, minor, and new party candidates, caps total eligible funds at $250 million but allows for inflation adjustments after 2029, and further defines “matchable contributions” as individual donations not exceeding $1,000 per election.
Money References
- (1) AMOUNT OF PAYMENTS; APPLICATION OF SAME AMOUNT FOR CANDIDATES OF MAJOR, MINOR, AND NEW PARTIES.—Subsection (a) of section 9004 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows: “(a) In general.—Subject to the provisions of this chapter, the eligible candidates of a party in a Presidential election shall be entitled to equal payment under section 9006 in an amount equal to 600 percent of the amount of each matchable contribution received by such candidate or by the candidate’s authorized committees (disregarding any amount of contributions from any person to the extent that the total of the amounts contributed by such person for the election exceeds $200), except that total amount to which a candidate is entitled under this paragraph shall not exceed $250,000,000.”
- — “(1) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any applicable period beginning after 2029, the $250,000,000 dollar amount in subsection (a) shall be increased by an amount equal to— “(A) such dollar amount; multiplied by “(B) the cost-of-living adjustment determined under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar year following the year which such applicable period begins, determined by substituting ‘calendar year 2028’ for ‘calendar year 1992’ in subparagraph (B) thereof. “
- “(3) ROUNDING.—If any amount as adjusted under paragraph (1) is not a multiple of $10,000, such amount shall be rounded to the nearest multiple of $10,000.”
- (b) Matchable contribution.—Section 9002 of such Code, as amended by section 202(b), is amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph: “(14) MATCHABLE CONTRIBUTION.—The term ‘matchable contribution’ means, with respect to the election to the office of President of the United States, a contribution by an individual to a candidate or an authorized committee of a candidate with respect to which the candidate has certified in writing that— “(A) the individual making such contribution has not made aggregate contributions (including such matchable contribution) to such candidate and the authorized committees of such candidate in excess of $1,000 for the election; “(B) such candidate and the authorized committees of such candidate will not accept contributions from such individual (including such matchable contribution) aggregating more than the amount described in subparagraph (A) with respect to such election; and “(C) such contribution was a direct contribution (as defined in section 9034(c)(3)).”. ---
204. Increase in limit on coordinated party expenditures Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The bill proposes increasing the limit on how much a national political party can spend in support of a presidential candidate during a general election to $100,000,000, and it outlines when and how this amount will be adjusted for inflation starting in 2028. It also specifies that any communication or expenditure by the party related to a presidential candidate's campaign will count towards this spending limit.
Money References
- (a) In general.—Section 315(d)(2) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (52 U.S.C. 30116(d)(2)) is amended to read as follows: “(2)(A) The national committee of a political party may not make any expenditure in connection with the general election campaign of any candidate for President of the United States who is affiliated with such party which exceeds $100,000,000.
- — (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 315(c)(1) of such Act (52 U.S.C. 30116(c)(1)) is amended— (A) in subparagraph (B), by striking “(d)” and inserting “(d)(2)”; and (B) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: “(D) In any calendar year after 2028— “(i) the dollar amount in subsection (d)(2) shall be increased by the percent difference determined under subparagraph (A); “(ii) the amount so increased shall remain in effect for the calendar year; and “(iii) if the amount after adjustment under clause (i) is not a multiple of $100, such amount shall be rounded to the nearest multiple of $100.”
205. Establishment of uniform date for release of payments Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends the Internal Revenue Code to establish a uniform date for the release of payments to eligible political party candidates, specifying the later of either the last Friday before the first Monday in September or 24 hours after certifications for all major political parties are received. It also changes the time frame for certification from 10 days to 24 hours.
206. Amounts in Presidential Election Campaign Fund Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section, the law is changed to include a rule for calculating the balance in the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. The Secretary has to use an estimate of money that will be added to the fund in an election year, but this estimate can't be more than the average of the last three years' deposits.
207. Use of general election payments for general election legal and accounting compliance Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The amended section of the Internal Revenue Code clarifies that expenses related to legal and accounting compliance for the general election by a candidate or their committee are considered expenses aimed at helping that candidate get elected.
208. Use of Freedom From Influence Fund as source of payments Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In this section, the law changes to ensure that, starting from the 2028 Presidential election, all campaign payments must come from the "Freedom From Influence Fund." If the fund doesn't have enough money, payments to candidates will be reduced proportionally, and no other money sources can be used. The law also allows for payment restoration if funds become available later.
9013. Use of Freedom From Influence Fund as source of payments Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
In the 2028 Presidential election and beyond, the "Freedom From Influence Fund" will be the source for election payments. If the fund doesn't have enough money, payments to candidates will be automatically reduced, but could be partially restored if more money becomes available later in the cycle.
301. Freedom From Influence Fund Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Freedom From Influence Fund is a special fund established in the U.S. Treasury to support political candidates financially. The money in this fund comes from specific sections of U.S. law and is used to make payments to political candidates according to the rules in the Internal Revenue Code, starting from when the law is enacted.
302. Assessments against fines and penalties Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines how additional fees, called special assessments, will be added to fines and penalties for certain offenses and settlements. These assessments, which are set at 4.75% of the fine or penalty, are intended to support the Freedom From Influence Fund, but they do not apply to penalties related to tax issues under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
Money References
- “(2) EXEMPT TAXPAYER.—For purposes of this subsection, a taxpayer is an exempt taxpayer for any taxable year if the taxable income of such taxpayer for such taxable year does not exceed the dollar amount at which begins the highest rate bracket in effect under section 1 with respect to such taxpayer for such taxable year.
3015. Special assessments for Freedom From Influence Fund Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section imposes a special assessment of 4.75% on fines for organizations or corporate officers convicted of federal crimes, and on settlements for those alleged to have committed such crimes. This money is collected like fines and transferred from the Treasury's General Fund to the Freedom From Influence Fund.
9706. Special assessments for Freedom From Influence Fund Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines that the federal government will add an extra 4.75% charge on top of any civil or administrative penalties, or settlements, imposed on businesses (excluding individuals who aren't officers or similar authorities) to support the Freedom From Influence Fund. However, this extra charge does not apply to penalties or settlements that fall under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
6761. Special assessments for Freedom From Influence Fund Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
Each person who has to pay a specific penalty will also have to pay an extra 4.75% of that penalty amount, except for individuals whose income is below the highest tax bracket. This extra money will be used to support the Freedom From Influence Fund, rather than being put into any other government fund or account.
Money References
- (2) EXEMPT TAXPAYER.—For purposes of this subsection, a taxpayer is an exempt taxpayer for any taxable year if the taxable income of such taxpayer for such taxable year does not exceed the dollar amount at which begins the highest rate bracket in effect under section 1 with respect to such taxpayer for such taxable year.
401. Effective date Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section states that the law and its changes will start applying to the Presidential election in 2028 and all future Presidential elections. By June 30, 2026, the Federal Election Commission must create any necessary rules to implement this law.