By Milton Kirby | Washington, D.C. | September 5, 2026

More than a decade after the Internal Revenue Service came under fire for subjecting conservative organizations to improper scrutiny, two Democratic senators are asking whether political officials in the Trump administration are attempting to influence IRS enforcement against organizations on the political left.

U.S. Sens. Raphael Warnock of Georgia and Ron Wyden of Oregon have opened an inquiry into reports that senior Treasury officials are considering increased scrutiny of left-leaning tax-exempt organizations and potentially revoking their tax-exempt status.

Warnock is the ranking member of the Senate Finance Subcommittee on Trade, Customs, and Global Competitiveness. Wyden is the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee.

Their inquiry does not establish that the IRS has improperly targeted any organization. Instead, the senators are seeking documents and answers to determine whether political considerations have influenced or are being used to influence federal tax enforcement.

At the center of the inquiry is a question that reaches beyond the organizations or political party involved: Can Americans trust the IRS to enforce the nation’s tax laws without regard to political ideology?

“Americans of every political persuasion must be able to trust that the IRS applies the tax code objectively under one set of rules,” Warnock and Wyden wrote to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Frank Bisignano, acting head of the IRS.

A Reported ‘Blueprint’

The inquiry follows an Aug. 27 report by the New York Post that Treasury officials were reviewing the tax-exempt status of several organizations, including the Open Society Foundations, Southern Poverty Law Center and Council on American-Islamic Relations, as well as other left-leaning and labor-aligned organizations.

According to the report cited by the senators, members of Bessent’s “inner circle” were developing a “blueprint” that could lead to revocation of some organizations’ tax-exempt status. The newspaper also reported that administration officials wanted to complete “a good chunk of the crackdown” before the November midterm elections.

“If accurate, the New York Post report raises serious questions about whether political officials are influencing IRS decisions concerning particular taxpayers in ways prohibited by federal law,” Warnock and Wyden wrote.

“If accurate” is an important qualification.

The senators’ letter raises questions about what administration officials may be considering or doing. It does not establish that the IRS has been ordered to audit the organizations named in the report or that the agency has decided to revoke their tax-exempt status.

Tax-exempt organizations are not beyond federal enforcement. Organizations operating under Section 501(c)(3) must comply with federal requirements governing their tax-exempt status. Among those restrictions is a prohibition against participating or intervening in political campaigns for or against candidates for public office.

At the same time, IRS guidance allows 501(c)(3) organizations to take positions on public-policy issues, including issues that divide political candidates, as long as their communications do not favor or oppose a candidate.

The issue raised by the Senate inquiry, therefore, is not whether nonprofit organizations can be investigated. It is whether organizations are being selected for scrutiny based on evidence of violations or because of their ideological positions.

Federal Law Restricts Political Intervention

Warnock and Wyden point specifically to Section 7217 of the Internal Revenue Code.

The law makes it unlawful for certain executive branch officials to directly or indirectly request that an IRS employee conduct or terminate an audit or other investigation of a particular taxpayer.

IRS employees who receive prohibited requests are required to report them to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. A willful violation can result in a fine, imprisonment of up to five years, or both.

The law also contains limited exceptions, including certain requests by the Treasury secretary resulting from implementation of a change in tax policy.

The senators want to know whether Bessent, Treasury political appointees, White House employees or other covered officials communicated with IRS personnel about audits or investigations involving particular taxpayers.

If such communications occurred, they also want to know whether IRS employees reported them to the inspector general and whether Treasury contends any communication was permitted under the tax-policy exception.

Warnock and Wyden additionally raise questions under Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, which generally protects the confidentiality of taxpayer returns and return information.

They ask whether President Donald Trump or White House personnel requested or received taxpayer information concerning tax-exempt organizations connected with the reported initiative and, if so, whether federal requirements governing access to that information were followed.

The letter does not establish that either law has been violated.

National Security Directives Enter the Inquiry

The senators place the reported nonprofit review within a broader series of administration directives.

Their letter points to National Security Presidential Memorandum 7, issued in September 2025, and an executive order directing federal agencies to target financial networks connected to Antifa and domestic terrorism.

Warnock and Wyden contend that those directives extend beyond violent conduct by incorporating ideological viewpoints.

“Rather than targeting actual violence, these directives explicitly conflate terrorism with subjective political viewpoints such as ‘anti-capitalism,’ ‘anti-Christianity,’ and views on race, migration, and gender,” they wrote.

The senators also cite a December 2025 memorandum from then-Attorney General Pam Bondi directing law enforcement to examine financial support for “Antifa-aligned extremists” and pursue applicable tax crimes.

Whether those national-security efforts resulted in improper IRS enforcement against tax-exempt organizations is among the questions the inquiry is seeking to answer.

Ten Questions for the Administration

Warnock and Wyden’s inquiry seeks considerably more than confirmation or denial of the reported “blueprint.”

The senators want the blueprint itself, along with policies, directives, guidance and criteria concerning the selection of tax-exempt organizations for examination or possible revocation.

They want to identify Treasury, IRS, White House and other executive branch officials who developed those policies or recommended particular organizations for review.

They ask whether Treasury, the White House or another executive branch office identified specific organizations for IRS examination, investigation, compliance review or possible revocation.

One question goes directly to the approaching election.

The senators ask whether any executive branch official requested that IRS personnel “accelerate, prioritize, complete, or take enforcement action” concerning particular tax-exempt organizations before the November 2026 elections.

Another asks whether political affiliation, ideological viewpoint, electoral timing or classifications such as “Antifa-aligned” have been used to identify organizations for IRS scrutiny.

The senators also want the administration to explain the legal and evidentiary standards used to determine when a tax-exempt organization has directly or indirectly financed political violence or domestic terrorism and what safeguards prevent officials outside the IRS from directing examinations over the objections of career IRS personnel.

One of their final questions concerns Bessent himself.

Because of Bessent’s previous senior roles at Soros Fund Management and its relationship with the Open Society Foundations, the senators are requesting information about any ethics review, recusal determination, waiver or other safeguards governing his participation in matters involving the foundation.

Warnock and Wyden also instructed Treasury and the IRS to preserve potentially responsive records, including emails, text and encrypted messages, memoranda, notes, calendar entries, meeting materials and draft documents.

They requested answers and documents by Sept. 15.

Echoes of 2013

The inquiry carries particular significance because Washington has confronted questions about political influence over IRS administration before.

In 2013, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration found that the IRS had used inappropriate criteria to identify applications from Tea Party and other organizations for additional scrutiny.

The controversy led the Senate Finance Committee to conduct a bipartisan investigation lasting more than two years.

Republicans and Democrats did not agree on every conclusion. Republicans argued that conservative organizations had been unfairly targeted and that political bias contributed to their treatment. Democrats emphasized serious management failures and noted that the investigation did not establish criminal wrongdoing. The investigation also examined improper treatment and lengthy delays involving some progressive organizations.

But the episode established a broader principle: federal tax administration should not depend upon an organization’s political viewpoint.

Warnock and Wyden invoke that history directly.

“Republican leaders repeatedly argued that tax administration must never be influenced by political bias or viewpoint,” they wrote. “That principle should apply equally regardless of the political views of the organizations involved.”

The comparison provides a standard that does not depend on which political party controls the White House.

If conservative organizations should not face improper IRS scrutiny because of their political views, organizations on the left should receive the same protection.

Enforcement or Political Retaliation?

None of this means nonprofit organizations are immune from government scrutiny.

Organizations granted tax-exempt status must comply with the laws governing that status. Evidence that an organization violated federal tax law can legitimately trigger examination and enforcement.

Warnock and Wyden acknowledge that distinction.

“Organizations that violate section 501(c)(3) should face appropriate enforcement regardless of their politics,” they wrote, “and organizations should never face IRS scrutiny because political officials disapprove of their views.”

That distinction is at the center of the inquiry.

At this stage, publicly available information does not establish that political officials directed the IRS to investigate particular organizations. The inquiry is intended, in part, to determine whether such direction occurred.

It also gives Treasury and the IRS an opportunity to dispute the senators’ premise, explain the purpose of any review of tax-exempt organizations and describe safeguards intended to keep political considerations from influencing IRS enforcement.

The senators have requested answers by Sept. 15.

Those responses could provide the first opportunity to compare the allegations that prompted the inquiry with the administration’s account of what Treasury and the IRS are actually doing.

Until then, the central question remains unanswered: Are organizations being examined because there is evidence they violated federal law, or because political officials disagree with their views?

The answer could determine whether this remains a dispute over tax policy and political rhetoric or becomes a larger examination of the independence of the Internal Revenue Service.

Truth Seekers Journal thrives because of readers like you. Join us in sustaining independent voices.