Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

‘Subversive’ Organizations Must Register in South Carolina; Terrorist Tax to Follow?

Posted on by Caleb Newquist

Do you have a client thinking of starting a subversive organization in South Carolina? Are they looking to expand their network of businesses to include one with the expressed mission of overthrowing the U.S. government? Thought so!

Just so you know, they are required by law to register with Secretary of State and declare their intentions or they will be subject to a $25,000 fine and 10 years in prison. Let’s keep the ship tight people.

The Subversive Activities Registration Act was passed last year by the Palmetto State legislature and is now officially on the books. Oh! And there is a $5 filing fee (we attached for the form below for your convenience).


If you’re not sure if the new entity will qualify, the law defines subversive organization:

(1) “Subversive organization” means every corporation, society, association, camp, group, bund, political party, assembly, body or organization, composed of two or more persons, which directly or indirectly advocates, advises, teaches or practices the duty, necessity or propriety of controlling, conducting, seizing or overthrowing the government of the United States, of this State or of any political subdivision thereof by force or violence or other unlawful means

South Carolina, clearly not satisfied with the job being done at DHS, obviously enacted this little gem of legislation to exploit these organizations’ propensity for full disclosure. What’s the point of organizing a business with such an important purpose if everything isn’t going to be on the up and up?

The Raw Story reports that enacting redundant legislation is the norm for the Palmetto State as “[it] is among those states which require drug dealers to declare their illegal income, or face additional criminal penalties on top of the already established penalties for buying, possessing and selling drugs.”

We can only assume that the SC pols will now get to work on a new “Terrorist Tax” that will be known as the Super-Anti-American Business Sucks Act. It seems like a natural progression of the legislation there.

No joke: South Carolina now requires ’subversives’ to register [The Raw Story]
Terrorists Must Register With SC Secretary Of State [Fits News]
[h/t Joe Kristan and Russ Fox of Taxable Talk]
SubversiveAgentForm

Related Posts

moving boxes

KPMG Might Be the Next Big 4 Firm Ditching Its Downtown Atlanta Office

In March, Atlanta Business Chronicle reported Deloitte did not renew its 260,000 square foot lease […]

(UPDATE) Accounting Firm Merger Monday: Dixon Hughes, Goodman & Co. Combine to Form Dixon Hughes Goodman

~ Update includes Goodman & Co. quote in fourth paragraph.

Late last week we heard some rumbling about a merger between High Point, NC-based DIxon Hughes and Virginia Beach, VA-based Goodman & Co. and lo and behold, this morning the press teams from both firms have dropped us the press release announcing the merger and a link to this page that includes details on the merger, a letter to clients, a list of office locations and FAQs.


The combination, effective March 1, will make Dixon Hughes Goodman the 13th largest firm (by revenue) in the U.S. with a combined revenues of over $280 million. This places them one spot ahead of Baker Tilly Virchow Krause and behind directly behind Plante & Moran (this is going by Accounting Today‘s count). The combined firm of Dixon Hughes Goodman will have 30 offices (with HQ in Charlotte), in 11 states with 1,700 professionals. The firm’s leadership will consist of Thomas H. Wilson, Managing Partner of Goodman & Company, as the Deputy Chairman and Chief Operating Officer, Charles Edgar Sams, Jr., Chairman of Dixon Hughes, will continue to serve as Chairman and Kenneth M. Hughes, Chief Executive Officer of Dixon Hughes, will also remain in that position.

Both firms ranked very high in Vault’s Accounting 50, with Dixon Hughes coming in at #5 and Goodman & Co. landing at #15. Goodman ranked very high in some notable categories including #2 in compensation, #3 in business outlook and #1 in green initiatives.

The press release states that Goodman & Co. “retain all of its existing Virginia, Maryland and Washington, D.C. offices,” which we interpret as “no reductions in headcount” but we’re waiting to confirm and we’ve confirmed this with Goodman’s Gary Thomson who said, “we anticipate an increase in the near term as we take new industry specialties to our new markets.”

On a far more exciting note, Goodman & Co., by virtue of this merger, has broken into the Elvis-impersonation market, of which Dixon enjoys a sterling reputation.

Congrats to both firms on the merger and we wish them many happy years together. Obviously, the honeymoon will have to wait – busy season and all. We’ll keep you updated on any further developments.

If You Never Write Another FASB Comment Letter In Your Life…

… please answer this with your best explanation of your position. I’ll go on record saying I am expecting comment letters stuffed with expletives, paranoia, panic and conjecture and personally can’t wait to read some of them.

“Quirky” representatives of the Profession, you know who you are. I want long rambling anti-IFRS manifestos dammit, don’t disappoint me.

Your mission:

The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB or Board) is issuing this Discussion Paper to solicit information from stakeholders about the time and effort that will be involved in adapting to several anticipated new accounting and reporting standards and when those standards should become effective. The FASB will use that information to develop an implementation plan for those new standards that helps stakeholders manage the pace and cost of change. The FASB requests comments on this Discussion Paper by January 31, 2011.

The question FASB would like answered is “how the fuck are we going to pay for this convergence thing?” and they’re asking the profession to come up with solutions. I imagine some pockets of the profession couldn’t care less how much it will cost as they are only thinking about learning the new rules because, well, someone’s got to do it, right?

Don’t misunderstand it, they would also like to know if they should transition all at once or gradually, if effective dates should be different for various entities and just how many billable hours might be lost to figuring all of this out. So basically they need you guys to get on this ASAP because they’ve had several years to do it and are still lost.

The request is simple:

“Our joint workplan supporting the Memorandum of Understanding with the IASB identifies targeted completion dates for various projects, but does not address when the standards would be effective,” notes Acting FASB Chairman Leslie F. Seidman. “We issued this Discussion Paper to gather the information we need to create a realistic, cost-effective plan for transitioning to the new standards.”

In other words: can you guys ballpark the timeframe and how we’re going to pay for it? I’d rather see the profession spend its quality billable time writing comment letters on its opinion of the transition and/or FASB’s handling of it. I think you fringe accountants know what to do, so I thank you in advance.