Complaints filed by two nonprofits illustrate the potential for abuse inherent in the Internal Revenue Service's (IRS) reliance on referrals from the public for leads in its enforcement programs. On March 14, a complaint filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) against Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) and Americans for Tax Reform Foundation (ATRF), alleged activities that "may violate IRS regulations and require a revocation of their tax-exempt status." The next day ATR filed a counter-complaint with the IRS against CREW, alleging that CREW, a 501(c)(3) organization, engages in prohibited partisan activity because the majority of its ethics complaints have been filed against Republicans. The two complaints raise questions for the IRS's compliance program, particularly its Political Activity Compliance Initiative, a program of increased and expedited enforcement of the prohibition on intervention in elections by 501(c)(3) organizations. Publicity around the program could lead to a flood of retaliatory and harassment complaints this year unless the IRS develops standards to screen out such abuse of its procedures. The CREW complaint does not allege partisan activity by ATR (a 501(c)(4) social welfare organization) or ATRF (a 501(c)(3) organization). Instead, it outlines a series of financial transactions, in which ATR and ATRF President and Treasurer Grover Norquist collaborated with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who represented Indian casinos in Mississippi, in order to engage in activity inconsistent with the organizations' tax-exempt purpose. CREW charges that Norquist allowed "the organizations to be used as a pass-through to funnel money generated by Indian casino gambling to individuals or groups engaged in anti-gambling efforts," in order to conceal the source of funds from the anti-gambling groups that received them. CREW maintains that ATR sent more than $1.15 million to anti-gambling groups, including the Christian Coalition in Alabama and Citizens Against Legalized Lottery. These groups, in turn, hired Century Strategies Inc., conservative Ralph Reed's firm, to conduct an anti-gambling campaign. It is unclear how much control the groups had over the funds. A representative of one recipient, the Faith and Family Alliance, told the Atlanta Journal Constitution that he had instructions to send the funds to Reed, saying, "I was operating as a shell." CREW alleges that this activity was inconsistent with ATR's purpose of reducing the size of government and lowering taxes. By charging a fee to pass through the funds, CREW says ATR engaged in a commercial activity that benefited a private party (the Indian casinos wishing to prevent competition). The complaint asks the IRS to "conduct a full-scale investigation, including a forensic audit of the funds that were funneled through ATR" to determine if these activities are at odds with its tax-exempt status. The IRS would also have to determine whether these activities were incidental or constituted a substantial portion of ATR's activities. The complaint does not address whether the funds were ultimately spent for a lobbying purpose- opposing casino gambling. CREW also asks the IRS to impose unrelated business income taxes on the fees charged for handling the funds and to impose sanctions on ATR for failure to publicly disclose its application for exempt status as required by Section 6104 of the tax code. The ATR complaint against CREW was reported in the press, but is not posted on the ATR website. According to press reports, ATR charges that the vast majority of CREW's ethics complaints have been filed against Republicans. For example, its 2005 list of the 13 Most Corrupt in Congress included 11 Republicans and two Democrats. Melanie Sloan, director of CREW, responded, "Republicans are the ones in power. You're stupid to pay off a Democrat. They can't do a whole lot for you." She also noted other instances where CREW has filed complaints against Democrats. Whether CREW's activity will be treated as partisan intervention in elections is unclear. While ATR points out that Sloan worked for Democratic members of Congress prior to coming to CREW, and other staff members have worked for liberal groups, it would appear more would be needed to prove intervention. Miriam Galston, associate professor at George Washington University School of Law, told The Hill, "Filing those complaints would not constitute, taken by themselves, intervening in a political campaign. If they went further and publicized the list and publicly tried to make some political mileage out of fact of the allegation and tried to sully campaign prospects using their own complaints, they could be said to be intervening in a political campaign."