Tax Authority grills Physicians for Human Rights over political activity
y Or Kashti
For 10 years, the Israeli branch of Physicians for Human Rights has been recognized as a public institution, entitling donors to an income tax deduction. This status is granted by the Tax Authority in the Finance Ministry and has to be renewed every few years. Physicians for Human Rights officials say that in recent years, the renewal has been delayed without explanation, and then only granted for a few months. The dry bureaucratic language of a letter sent to the organization by the Tax Authority several months ago expresses a clear threat to the veteran human rights organization.
“I have examined your application [for renewal of recognition as a public institution] and have found some apparent flaws that prevent me from complying with the request,” wrote Assaf Lerner of the Tax Authority. “The problems have to do with the incompatibility of the organization’s goals and activity with the public objectives cited in the law.” Lerner goes on to list many examples of this “incompatibility” and requests justifications for the organization’s activity. He cites the organization’s stated mission to “fight against the violation of human rights, especially the right to health, and against the policy at the foundation of these violations. We view the occupation as a violation of human rights, including the right to health... and believe that ending the occupation is the only way to preserve these human rights.”
On behalf of the Tax Authority, Lerner writes that the mission implies that “one goal of the organization is to fight the policy of the government ... and to fight to ‘end the occupation.’” He demands to know “which ‘public objective’ is compatible with this aim, and adds that it appears to contradict a section of the tax code, as this is an objective that is a matter of deep public controversy, of a political nature, that entails a political struggle.”
Lerner is also troubled by Physicians for Human Rights' stated objective of activity in territories under Israel’s control. “What ‘public aim is compatible with this objective, and does it include activity in the Gaza Strip and/or for the benefit of its residents?” Lerner asks. He also seeks clarification of the organization’s declaration that “our cause includes opposition to the use of health and medicine as a means of oppression, control, and individual and collective punishment.”
The legal definition of “public objectives” is very broad, and can include the promotion of matters of religion, culture, education, settlement, science, health, elder care and sports. Among other things, the Tax Authority asked Physicians for Human Rights to supply a computer file with all the information on its aid recipients. Such demands are quite unusual. Typically, when handling applications for recognition of this tax status, the Tax Authority looks at things like the five highest salaries in the organization or its annual financial turnover. “Usually, the renewal is done almost on auto-pilot,” says an official familiar with the process. Approximately 5,200 organizations are currently recognized as public institutions entitled to this kind of tax status.
Physicians for Human Rights-Israel was founded in 1988 by Dr. Ruchama Marton. The organization has several divisions. One deals with the health rights of Israeli citizens; another is concerned with the incarcerated, and another focuses on the health rights of migrant workers, asylum seekers, Russian immigrants who haven’t been recognized as Jewish, Palestinians who are married to Israelis but have no legal status, and others. The organization also runs an open clinic for anyone without access to health services. It has about 3,200 members.
Physicians for Human Rights Chairman Rafi Walden calls the Tax Authority’s demands “a very ugly expression of a trend that has been gaining strength in recent years, in which the government is trying to hem in the human rights organizations ... We admit that we are an organization with political aims, and we’re not ashamed to say that the occupation is hurting the right to health.”
In 2012, the organization reported contributions totalling about NIS 6.3 million, 25 percent of which came from Israeli donors. In a reply sent to the Tax Authority last week, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel director Ran Cohen wrote, “We are proud that we don’t just represent a humanitarian face — as would surely make the state and the Tax Authority more comfortable — but also cast a critical gaze upon government policy and are working to change it.”
The Tax Authority told Haaretz that the tax breaks for public institutions “are given on the basis of a commitment to activity for the sake of a ‘public objective’ as defined by the income tax regulations, on condition that the activity is legal in accordance with the laws of the state of Israel. The Tax Authority handles all applications for [such permits] in accordance with the criteria stipulated in the law and the administration’s guidelines, without bias.” It added that permits are renewed every three years, but “if questionable activity, or any suspicion that donor funds are being improperly used, arises, careful scrutiny is given before a new permit is issued.”
Asked by Haaretz whether other organizations have been asked to respond to similar demands, the Tax Authority declined to comment, citing legally mandated confidentiality rules. It also declined to say whether Physicians for Human Rights' criticism of government policy can be used as a basis for revoking its recognition as a public institution.
Commenti
Posta un commento