This bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to permit 501(c)(3) organizations to make statements relating to political campaigns if those statements are made in the ordinary course of carrying out the organization’s tax-exempt purpose. It adds a new subsection to define a safe harbor: a statement will not be treated as participating in a political campaign or jeopardizing exemption so long as the organization incurs no more than de minimis incremental expenses.
The amendment applies to taxable years ending after enactment, providing a clear boundary for organizations engaging in policy or campaign-related discourse as part of their exempt work.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill creates a new subsection to 501(c)(3) that allows campaign-related statements if made in the ordinary course of exempt activities and with de minimis incremental expenses.
Who It Affects
Public charities and private foundations described in 501(c)(3), their communications teams, and the donors who support them.
Why It Matters
It defines a safe harbor for nonprofit political speech, reducing ambiguity about when such speech could threaten tax-exempt status while preserving limits on significant campaign spending.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Free Speech Fairness Act would add a new provision to the Internal Revenue Code to let 501(c)(3) organizations speak about political campaigns as part of their regular, mission-driven activities. This is guidance rather than a broad free-for-all: to stay within the safe harbor, the charity’s statements must occur in the ordinary course of its exempt work and must not trigger substantial incremental costs.
The rule is backstopped by a finite financial threshold—“de minimis” incremental expenses—that defines when speech content is still considered part of ordinary activity rather than campaign intervention. The change is prospective, applying to taxable years ending after enactment, and it interacts with existing exemption criteria for 501(c)(3) organizations.
Practically, this means charities can engage in issue advocacy or political messaging tied to their missions without automatically risking loss of tax-exempt status, provided they keep campaign-related costs minimal. Compliance will hinge on how “ordinary course” and “de minimis” are interpreted in practice, and organizations will need governance processes to ensure communications stay within the safe harbor.
Existing lobbying and political activity rules continue to apply separately, so nonprofits must align campaign-related statements with their exempt purposes and other applicable IRS rules.In short, the act offers a clarified boundary for nonprofit political speech tied to mission work, reducing the risk of unintended loss of exemption while preserving guardrails against substantive campaign participation.
The Five Things You Need to Know
New subsection (s) is added to Section 501(c)(3) to create a safe harbor for campaign statements.
Statements must be made in the ordinary course of carrying out the organization's exempt purpose.
Incremental expenses must be de minimis to qualify for the safe harbor.
The amendment applies to taxable years ending after enactment.
It references several IRS provisions (170(c)(2), 2055, 2106, 2522, 4955) as part of the defined framework.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short Title
This Act may be cited as the Free Speech Fairness Act. The short title provides a legal reference point for the material provisions that follow and signals the Act’s focus on clarifying nonprofit political speech within tax-exempt boundaries.
Special Rule for Political Campaign Statements by 501(c)(3) Organizations
Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code is amended to add a new subsection (s). The core mechanism creates a safe harbor: a statement made in the ordinary course of an organization’s regular activities, and that incurs only de minimis incremental expenses, shall not be treated as the organization participating in or intervening in a political campaign or as failing to be organized and operated for an exempt purpose. This provides a concrete limit on when campaign-related communications can occur without jeopardizing exemption, linking the allowance to existing code sections referenced in the bill.
Effective Date
The amendment takes effect for taxable years ending after the date of enactment. This timing establishes when organizations can start applying the new safe harbor to their communications, and it implies a transition period for guidance and internal policy adjustments.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Finance across all five countries.
Explore Finance in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- 501(c)(3) organizations (public charities and private foundations) gain a clear safe harbor to engage in campaign-related messaging as part of their exempt activities.
- Donors and supporters benefit from greater transparency about what kinds of political speech are permissible under the tax rules.
- Nonprofit communications teams and legal counsel gain planning certainty and governance clarity for campaign-related communications.
- Policy researchers and analysts gain a clearer boundary for modeling nonprofit political activity within tax-exemption rules.
Who Bears the Cost
- Nonprofit organizations must implement governance and monitoring to ensure campaign statements stay within the de minimis threshold and ordinary-course standard.
- Compliance staff and legal teams will incur time and resource costs to train personnel and establish procedures for evaluating communications.
- IRS and Treasury will need to issue guidance and monitor compliance with the new safe harbor, creating ongoing regulatory costs.
- Organizations that exceed the de minimis threshold could risk losing tax-exempt status, creating reputational and operational costs.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Is it possible to preserve robust nonprofit political speech without opening the door to substantial campaign activity that could threaten tax-exempt status? The central dilemma is balancing permissible advocacy with safeguards against covert campaign intervention, given the subjective nature of what qualifies as “ordinary course” and “de minimis” in a wide array of nonprofit contexts.
The bill addresses a real policy tension at the intersection of free speech and tax-exemption rules: it clarifies that certain campaign-related statements can be made by charities without jeopardizing their status, but it relies on potentially ambiguous concepts like “ordinary course” and “de minimis incremental expenses.” As a result, there will be questions about how to measure incremental costs, what constitutes ordinary course activity across diverse nonprofits, and how to prevent the new rule from being used to disguise substantial political campaigning as routine activity. The absence of specific enforcement mechanisms beyond the safe harbor means much of the risk rests with internal governance and IRS enforcement in practice.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.