What charities and churches can and cannot do in the 2026 midterm elections

Ahead of the midterm elections on November 3, federal tax law draws one firm line for charities, churches, private foundations and other organizations exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. They may not support or oppose any candidate for public office. They may encourage people to vote, host candidates on equal terms and keep speaking about issues, as long as they do so without favoring anyone. The IRS describes the ban as absolute, and breaking it can cost an organization its exemption and bring excise taxes.

The rule

To qualify under section 501(c)(3), an organization must be one that "does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office." Congress added the ban in 1954 through an amendment by Sen. Lyndon Johnson, and in 1987 made clear that it also covers statements opposing candidates, according to the IRS. It applies to candidates for national, state and local office.

The IRS says contributions to campaign funds and public statements of position made on behalf of the organization for or against a candidate "clearly violate" the prohibition. Apart from losing its exemption, an organization that spends money on a campaign owes a tax under section 4955 of 10% of the amount, and a manager who knowingly agreed to the spending owes 2.5%. If the spending is not corrected, the organization owes a further 100%, and a manager who refused to agree to the correction owes 50%. The taxes on managers are capped at $5,000 and $10,000 per expenditure.

What is allowed

Most election-year activity is permitted if it is nonpartisan. The IRS's main guidance, Revenue Ruling 2007-41, works through 21 example situations and judges each on all its facts and circumstances. Its main points:

• Voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives are allowed when they are run without favoring or opposing any candidate or party.
• Voter guides and candidate questionnaires are allowed if their content and structure show no bias or preference for a candidate.
• Candidate forums and debates are allowed if candidates for the same office get an equal opportunity to take part and are treated fairly and impartially.
• A candidate may speak at an event as an officeholder, expert or public figure. Factors include whether anyone mentions the candidacy or the election and whether any campaigning takes place.
• Selling or renting mailing lists, space or advertising to candidates is allowed if all candidates in the race can buy on equal terms at the usual rates.

The ban is not meant to silence an organization's leaders when they speak for themselves. But the ruling says that for their organizations to stay exempt, leaders "cannot make partisan comments in official organization publications or at official functions of the organization."

Charities can also keep advocating on issues, including issues that divide the candidates. The ruling warns that issue advocacy can still amount to campaign intervention if it carries any message favoring or opposing a candidate. Among the factors it lists are whether a statement identifies a candidate, whether it is made close to the election, whether it refers to voting, and whether it is part of a series on the same issue that runs regardless of the election calendar. Websites count too: posting material that favors a candidate is treated like distributing it in print, and an organization is responsible for the links it chooses to keep.

Lobbying is a separate limit

The candidate ban is absolute, but lobbying is only limited. A 501(c)(3) organization may not make attempts to influence legislation a substantial part of its activities, and the IRS treats work on referendums, ballot initiatives and constitutional amendments as lobbying, not as campaign intervention. Charities other than churches and private foundations can instead choose the expenditure test under section 501(h), by filing Form 5768, which sets a fixed limit: 20% of exempt-purpose spending for organizations that spend up to $500,000, falling on a sliding scale to a cap of $1 million for the largest. Private foundations face a stricter rule. Under section 4945, the IRS says, they owe excise taxes on spending for lobbying, direct or grassroots, and for political campaign intervention.

Social welfare organizations exempt under section 501(c)(4) have more room. The IRS says they may engage in some political activities as long as that is not their primary activity, although such spending may be taxed under section 527(f).

Churches and the court case

Churches are covered by the same ban. Two churches and two other religious nonprofits challenged it in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, arguing, among other claims, that it violates their rights to free speech and the free exercise of religion. After the change of administration, the IRS joined them in asking the court to enter a consent judgment. On March 31, 2026, Judge J. Campbell Barker instead dismissed the case without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. He held that the Anti-Injunction Act and a related bar in the Declaratory Judgment Act take away the court's jurisdiction, and that the parties' consent could not create it.

The plaintiffs have appealed to the Fifth Circuit (No. 26-40237), which docketed the appeal on April 28, 2026. Friend-of-the-court briefs have been filed on both sides. Five groups, among them the Home School Legal Defense Association, filed one in support of the plaintiffs, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State, which the district court had allowed to file such a brief, has asked the appeals court to uphold the dismissal. Until a court or Congress says otherwise, the wording of section 501(c)(3) is unchanged, and the IRS continues to point charities and churches to Revenue Ruling 2007-41 for how to stay within it.