IRS Change on Churches Endorsing Political Candidates
Dear Clients and Friends,
On July 7, 2025 an interesting development occurred in the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS. In a lawsuit between the National Religious Broadcasters and the IRS, the IRS stated that churches can endorse political candidates to their congregations without risking the loss of their tax-exempt status.
This is very significant since it reverses the 70-year interpretation of the US tax code and the Johnson Amendment, which barred the churches from endorsing political candidates without putting their tax-exempt status in jeopardy.
Contained within a JOINT MOTION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT, underlined emphasis is mine, JONATHAN BLACKER, ESQ., Senior Litigation Counsel, Tax Division, US Department of Justice, consented to the following:
“When a house of worship in good faith speaks to its congregation, through its
customary channels of communication on matters of faith in connection with religious services, concerning electoral politics viewed through the lens of religious faith, it neither “participates” nor “intervene[s]” in a “political campaign,” within the ordinary meaning of those words. To “participate” in a political campaign is “to take part” in the political campaign, and to “intervene” in a political campaign is “to interfere with the outcome or course” of the political campaign. Bona fide communications internal to a house of worship and its congregation, in connection with religious services, do neither of those things any more than does a family discussion concerning candidates. Thus, communications from a house of worship to its congregation in connection with religious services through its usual channels of communication on matters of faith do not run afoul of the Johnson Amendment as properly interpreted.
This interpretation of the Johnson Amendment is in keeping with the IRS’s
treatment of the Johnson Amendment in practice. As recounted in Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint, the IRS generally has not enforced the Johnson Amendment against houses of worship for speech concerning electoral politics in the context of worship services. The Secretary of Treasury shall ensure, to the extent permitted by law, that the Department of the Treasury does not take any adverse action against any house of worship on the basis that such organization speaks or has spoken about moral or political issues from a religious perspective, where speech of similar character has, consistent with law, not ordinarily been treated as participation of intervention in a political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) a candidate for public office by the Department of the Treasury.”
Observations: Keep in mind this is a consent statement by the IRS and it does not repeal the Johnson Amendment. Further, the settlement is binding only in the Texas jurisdiction where the lawsuit was filed, so its nationwide scope is unclear. Finally, notice the limited scope of the allowed speech (i.e., during religious services, etc.).
However, it is very significant since the following concluding language was agreed upon: “For these reasons, the Johnson Amendment does not reach speech by a house of worship to its congregation, in connection with religious services through its customary channels of communication on matters of faith, concerning electoral politics viewed through the lens of religious faith”
