What's the IRS enforcement process for churches that violate tax exempt rules with political activity?

The rule you're referring to is called the Johnson Amendment, which prohibits 501(c)(3) organizations, including churches, from directly or indirectly participating in political campaigns for or against candidates for public office. Enforcement is primarily complaint-driven. The IRS doesn't have agents attending worship services looking for violations! Citizens can file complaints using Form 13909 (Tax-Exempt Organization Complaint) if they believe a church has violated these restrictions. The IRS then reviews these complaints and decides whether to investigate. If the IRS determines a violation occurred, they typically issue warnings first rather than immediately revoking tax-exempt status. For severe or repeated violations, they can impose excise taxes or ultimately revoke the organization's tax-exempt status, though this is extremely rare for churches.

After dealing with a similar situation in my community, I found an amazing resource that helped me understand the technical aspects of church tax exemption. I was confused about what exactly constitutes prohibited political activity versus permissible issue advocacy. I used this tool called taxr.ai (https://taxr.ai) that actually analyzed the transcript of a sermon I was concerned about. It highlighted the specific statements that crossed the line from general policy discussion into candidate endorsement. The tool references IRS Revenue Ruling 2007-41 which provides all the examples of what churches can and can't do politically while maintaining exemption. What was most helpful was understanding that churches CAN discuss policy issues and even host voter registration drives as long as they don't show bias toward particular candidates. The tool explained everything in plain English without the legal jargon.

I need to follow up about that taxr.ai tool I was skeptical about. I actually tried it because our church recently had a guest speaker who went on a 20-minute rant endorsing a specific candidate. I uploaded the transcript and the analysis was surprisingly detailed - it highlighted exactly which statements crossed the line and explained the relevant tax regulations. I ended up filing Form 13909 with the IRS using the information from the report. Obviously don't know yet if anything will come of it, but at least I feel like I submitted something substantive rather than just my opinion. The tool definitely knew its stuff about the Johnson Amendment and the 2007 Revenue Ruling examples.

If you're trying to report a church for political activity, good luck getting through to anyone at the IRS who will actually do something. I tried calling them for THREE WEEKS after a church in my town literally hosted a campaign rally. Finally I found this service called Claimyr (https://claimyr.com) that got me through to an actual IRS agent in about 20 minutes. They have this system that navigates all the phone menus and holds for you, then calls you when an agent picks up. You can see how it works here: https://youtu.be/_kiP6q8DX5c The agent confirmed they do investigate these complaints but explained they need documented evidence - like video, bulletins, or transcripts that clearly show candidate endorsement. Just reporting that it happened isn't enough. At least I finally got a straight answer about what evidence they need.

Wow, I have to admit I was totally wrong about that Claimyr service. After being frustrated with my Form 13909 submission going into a black hole, I tried it yesterday to follow up with the IRS. Got connected to an agent in about 25 minutes which is INSANE considering I previously waited on hold for 3+ hours before giving up. The agent confirmed they received my complaint and explained they have a special process for church investigations that involves approval from a high-level official. She couldn't tell me specifics about my case but at least confirmed it wasn't lost in the system. Having an actual conversation instead of sending forms into the void was worth it. Would definitely use again during tax season.

I'm a former tax attorney and there's an important detail missing from this discussion. The IRS has special restrictions when investigating churches due to the Church Audit Procedures Act. They can't just launch an investigation based on a complaint - they need a "high-level Treasury official" to reasonably believe a violation occurred before proceeding. This is why enforcement seems so lax - the procedural hurdles are significant by design. Congress created these restrictions to prevent the IRS from being used as a weapon against religious institutions. The Johnson Amendment isn't being enforced much because the process is deliberately difficult.

Has anyone noticed that when election season comes around, churches suddenly start "educating" their congregation about which candidates are "aligned with Christian values"? My church doesn't explicitly say "vote for candidate X" but they distribute these "voter guides" that make it super obvious who they want you to vote for.

The enforcement reality is that the IRS has audited exactly ONE church for political activities in the last decade due to budget cuts and the special church audit rules. Churches know this and that's why you see more blatant political activity. Unless something changes with IRS funding or Congress modifies the law, don't expect much enforcement regardless of what the tax code says. Your best bet is public pressure and media attention if you see violations, not expecting the IRS to step in.

This is really eye-opening. I had no idea about the Church Audit Procedures Act creating those extra barriers for IRS investigations. It explains why I've seen some pretty obvious political endorsements from pulpits in my area with seemingly no consequences. The fact that they've only audited ONE church in the last decade despite hundreds of complaints really shows how toothless this enforcement has become. It's frustrating because the Johnson Amendment seems like it should be straightforward - stay out of candidate endorsements or lose your tax exemption - but the reality is much more complex. @Giovanni Martello makes a good point about public pressure being more effective than expecting IRS action. Maybe that's the real deterrent these days - the potential for bad publicity rather than actual tax consequences.