Advocacy for Nonprofits
- Ashley Egan
- Oct 16
- 5 min read
A lot more Marylanders have become more active in governmental affairs this year due to the new Federal Administration in Washington, and many are working with faith groups, congregations and other nonprofits. As a result, there appears to be considerable confusion about how nonprofits and their members can be involved in advocacy, electoral work, and/or resistance to objectionable federal actions.
With over twenty (20) years of advocacy experience in Maryland, the UU Legislative Ministry of Maryland can offer some guidance on this subject. We cannot provide legal advice—and nothing we say here should be taken as legal advice—but we can help clarify some of the complicated laws and regulations governing what nonprofits can and cannot do.
Policy Advocacy vs. Political Campaigns
The first important point is that there are two types of activity involved.
Policy Advocacy: Contacting lawmakers to support or oppose adopting a public policy (a proposed law or regulation, etc.) is advocacy and may also be considered lobbying at the state or federal level.
Involvement in Political Campaigns: Endorsing candidates for office or supporting a political party, usually in connection with an election.
Individuals vs. Nonprofit Organizations
We must also distinguish between what people can do as individuals and what they can do when acting on behalf of or in concert with a nonprofit.
Individuals: People can personally advocate with lawmakers and be involved with political campaigns. Individuals are allowed to engage in personal advocacy without limitation, unless they are paid to do so, in which case they must register with the State of Maryland as a lobbyist. As for political campaigns, individuals are only limited by federal law in the amount they can contribute to each candidate.
Nonprofit Organization: The activities of nonprofits are regulated by the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) which has established limitations on both advocacy and political involvement. Nonprofits that want their donations exempt from taxation as charitable must either be churches (or other faith congregations) or be registered under IRC Section 501(c)(3). Although not required, many churches register under this section of the code anyway since it helps clarify their status for the IRS and some organizations (e.g. Facebook) that limit organizations seeking donations through their platforms.
IRS Limitations on Nonprofit Advocacy
A church or other 501(c)(3) organization does not qualify for tax-exempt status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation. This involves contacting, or urging the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization itself advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation.
However, a nonprofit is permitted to advocate for or against public policies as long as this activity is an “unsubstantial” part of its activities. To evaluate what is “substantial,” the IRS considers a variety of factors, including the time devoted (by both compensated and volunteer workers) and the expenditures devoted by the organization to the activity, when determining whether the “lobbying” activity is substantial.
Many nonprofits carefully separate their advocacy activities from those characterized as educational in order to limit what is considered "lobbying" by the IRS. Others (like UULM-MD) are a part of a larger organization, where their advocacy is not a substantial part of the overall activities.
IRS Limitations on Nonprofit Political Activity: The Johnson Amendment
In 1954, then-Senator Lyndon Johnson introduced an amendment to the IRC in response to certain tax-exempt groups that he felt were campaigning against him and other liberal politicians. The law bars tax-exempt organizations (faith groups or otherwise) from endorsing, opposing, or making statements for or against political candidates in any way, including publishing or distributing statements. It specifically prohibits 501(c)(3) organizations from participating in or intervening in political campaigns on behalf of, or in opposition to, any candidate for public office. Organizations that violate this restriction risk losing their tax-exempt status.
The Johnson Amendment does not bar 501(c)(3) organizations from all political activity—provided these activities do not show support or opposition to specific candidates. For example, they may engage in nonpartisan voter education, registration, and get-out-the-vote drives. They can also advocate for or against ballot measures (like referenda).
Recent legal filings and settlements have raised uncertainty about the enforcement of the Johnson Amendment, especially regarding religious organizations. In 2025, the IRS indicated that statements about electoral politics made by ministers/houses of worship to their congregations (not to the public at large), if made within usual religious channels and based in faith, may not constitute a violation of the Johnson Amendment. Regardless of any new interpretations, the Johnson Amendment and its statues in the IRC still govern the activities of nonprofits, so charities should be careful about staying within the law.
The limitations were clearly stated by the Alliance for Justice in its publication The Rules of the Game:
Federal tax and election law impose strict restrictions on donations of money or services to candidates, political parties, political committees and other organizations that engage in partisan activities. Contributions include both money (including loans) and in-kind contributions of an organization’s resources. These laws combine to preclude any 501(c)(3) organization from making a contribution of any kind to a partisan entity.
The IRS considers a 501(c)(3) to be making “in-kind contributions” when it provides anything of value—a mailing list, facilities, equipment, staff time or any other resource—to a candidate, party, or political organization without receiving fair market value in return. [Rules of the Game (2018), p. 49.]
A charity also may not expressly coordinate its activities with a political organization. If a charity conducts its programs in an election year so that its public events, staff work, voter education, or other activities happen to dovetail with a political campaign’s or a party’s work, then the IRS may conclude that the charity either (i) is operating impermissibly for the private benefit of the political organization, or (ii) is supporting a candidate as part of a unified effort to affect the election.
If a charitable organization makes any contribution to a noncharitable entity, such as a Section 501(c)(4), 501(c)(5), or 501(c)(6) organization, which is permitted to engage in a certain level of partisan activity, then the charity must restrict its contribution to charitable purposes. This is usually accomplished through a written grant agreement. Campaign intervention activity should also be explicitly prohibited. To enforce these restrictions, the charity should require regular reporting by the recipient on the use of the charity’s contribution and should require the return of any contributed amount that is used for any other purpose. [Ibid., pp. 49-50.]
Summary
The chart below shows how these limitations play out for individuals as well as nonprofits:
In order to prevent potential violations of the law, UULM-MD interprets these limitations strictly and avoids coordinating in any way with political parties or candidates, especially during election years. This includes other nonprofits that are allowed to be more political, like 501(c)(4) organizations that can endorse candidates (contributions to them are not tax deductible). Where possible, we advise other groups that we can only coordinate activities to the extent the law allows and ask them to respect these boundaries. We suggest that UU congregations in Maryland should do the same. Furthermore, the restrictions on lobbying and political campaign intervention described here apply only to a congregation (or UULM-MD) as a legal entity, or to a person or group speaking in the name of the congregation.
A minister or congregation member may freely engage in these activities as an individual. However, individuals who represent a congregation or are identified by or likely to be associated with a congregation should clearly state that they are speaking or acting as individuals and not on behalf of the congregation.
Thank you,
Stephen C. Buckingham, Attorney at Law
UULM-MD Advocacy Lead
This resource is not intended to be formal legal advice;
nor should it be used in place of legal counsel.
Comments