- 8 - 501(c)(3). An organization will not be so regarded if more than an insubstantial part of its activities is not in furtherance of an exempt purpose. [Sec. 1.501(c)(3)-1(c)(1), Income Tax Regs.] As already noted, SNI desires recognition of exemption from the date the Form 1023 was received by the IRS, and not retroactively. As also indicated above, SNI responded to a request for a detailed description of its contemplated future activities by reiterating a description of the activities in which Valfer was already engaged. In its brief SNI concedes that “the Petitioner, SNI, and David A. Valfer are one and the same.” However, SNI challenges respondent’s contention that contributions to SNI inure to Valfer’s benefit, because “The plain fact is that no contributions of either money or services have been received by SNI from any source other than Mr. Valfer.” Nevertheless, Valfer, responding on behalf of SNI to the July 19, 1999 IRS letter, stated that he would like to receive “a Tax Exempt letter to apply for a grant to procure a computer, printer, and related software.” Since the affairs of SNI and Valfer are irretrievably intertwined, as Valfer/SNI readily admits, the benefits Valfer plainly hopes to obtain via the “Tax Exempt letter” would obviously inure to Valfer himself. Similarly, SNI has not shown that compensation for Valfer’s serving as a Shomer at a rate of $75 to $90 per 12-hour vigil would not inure to a private individual. Petitioner SNI has not shown that the recipients of Valfer’s services as a Shomer arePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011