Anadolu via Getty Images
A bill that would choke off funding for terror-supporting nonprofits has stalled in Congress — amid the lies of its potential targets.
The Stop Terror-Financing and Tax Penalties on American Hostages Act, HR 9495, passed the House last month.
Critics have labeled the legislation a “nonprofit killer,” intentionally misleading both the public and lawmakers about its specifics in an effort to derail it.
One of its loudest opponents is the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which has painted the legislation as “nefarious” and warned it will do catastrophic harm to charities. CAIR claims the bill strips nonprofits of due process.
In reality, the legislation’s due process safeguards, including formal notifications, response periods and judicial reviews, are designed to prevent arbitrary or unjust actions against innocent charities.
HR 9495 would allow the secretary of the treasury to designate organizations as “terrorist-supporting” if they knowingly provide material support to foreign terrorist organizations — and to strip such groups of their valuable tax-exempt status.
But before making any designation, the department must notify the organization in writing, clearly outlining the allegations. The charity then has 90 days to respond, rectify issues or contest the claims.
Only if these conditions are unmet does the designation take effect. The bill also provides avenues for judicial appeals and administrative reviews.
This legislation does not indiscriminately target nonprofits, but safeguards the integrity of a sector that is vital to American civil society. Tax-exempt status is a privilege granted to organizations that serve the public good.
By closing loopholes and holding bad actors accountable, HR 9495 ensures that this privilege is not exploited, enabling legitimate charities to continue their critical work without fear of reputational harm.
The legislation also includes humanitarian provisions aimed at aiding US nationals wrongfully detained abroad by postponing tax deadlines and reimbursing IRS penalties — the outrageous dilemma that Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich and other former hostages faced when they returned home this year.
Those measures reflect the dual purpose of HR 9495: safeguarding national security while promoting integrity within the nonprofit sector.
CAIR’s loud protests and heated rhetoric raise broader questions about its motives, particularly in light of its longstanding support for Hamas, a US-designated FTO.
As far back as 2008, in the federal prosecution of the Holy Land Foundation, CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator due to its suspected ties to Hamas.
These concerns resurfaced after Oct. 7, 2023, when CAIR leaders made multiple statements praising Hamas’ brutal terror attack on Israel.
By framing these atrocities as “resistance” or “decolonization” and openly celebrating Hamas terrorists, CAIR has aligned itself with extremist narratives.
However, Hamas-supporting rhetoric — which CAIR leaders have repeatedly and unapologetically expressed — is surely not enough to demonstrate “material support” for terrorism.
So what exactly is CAIR trying to shield from scrutiny that makes it so vehemently opposed to HR 9495?
Perhaps an answer can be found in the case of Lori Saroya, a former CAIR employee whose charges against the group provide revealing insights into why it might be so alarmed by this legislation.
Saroya and CAIR have been locked in dueling lawsuits after she alleged the group received funding from foreign governments and terror organizations.
Her allegations, and the subsequent legal developments, have exposed CAIR’s reluctance to disclose donor information, particularly regarding foreign funding sources.
That case alone would be enough to put CAIR in HR 9495’s crosshairs, in keeping with its goal of increasing transparency and accountability in nonprofit funding and addressing potential foreign influences.
CAIR in 2021 filed a lawsuit against Saroya but later dropped it — raising the possibility that it does indeed have something to hide.
Saroya then countersued CAIR for defamation, in a case that is still ongoing. The discovery process in Saroya’s suit could substantiate her claims, and HR 9495 could enforce further transparency requirements.
As the Senate considers HR 9495, the stakes are clear: Lawmakers — particularly Democrats — must decide whether to succumb to disinformation and fear-mongering from organizations like CAIR, or to champion transparency, security and fairness.
With its bipartisan origins and strong due-process protections, this legislation represents a balanced and necessary step toward safeguarding the nonprofit sector as well as our national security.
The Senate must act decisively and approve HR 9495 to protect both America’s tax system and the integrity of its nonprofits.
Susan George is the CEO of the nonprofit Intelligent Advocacy Network, which combats misinformation, extreme bias and hate-motivated incidents through community advocacy.