The Back Office Behind the Movement
Fiscal sponsorship, nonprofit transparency, and the questions Nebraska should be asking
Most people see the protest, the campus encampment, or the ballot initiative. What they rarely see is the financial and administrative infrastructure operating behind the scenes.
That infrastructure often begins with something called fiscal sponsorship.
Fiscal sponsorship allows a project without its own tax-exempt status to operate under an established nonprofit organization. The sponsor can process donations, administer finances, provide payroll services, and handle compliance responsibilities.
It is a legal arrangement used by organizations across the political spectrum. But it also raises an important question: How much can the public learn about the organizations and funding sources behind a particular campaign or cause?
A National Example Worth Examining
The Arizona-based Alliance for Global Justice (AFGJ) openly advertises fiscal sponsorship services for grassroots organizations. It explains that donations to approved projects can be tax-deductible and describes its sponsorship program as a service intended to help progressive organizations expand their influence.
One of those projects was Samidoun, the Palestinian Prisoner Solidarity Network.
In October 2024, the U.S. Treasury Department designated Samidoun under federal counterterrorism sanctions, identifying it as an international fundraising operation for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a designated foreign terrorist organization.
Treasury also sanctioned Samidoun leader Khaled Barakat for acting on behalf of the PFLP.
AFGJ acknowledged its fiscal sponsorship of Samidoun but disputed allegations that either organization funded terrorism. The federal designation applied to Samidoun and Barakat, not automatically to every organization associated with AFGJ.
The case illustrates why understanding fiscal sponsorship arrangements matters. A project's public identity and the organization responsible for receiving and administering its funds may be different.
The Larger Nonprofit Infrastructure
Fiscal sponsorship extends well beyond any single organization.
National nonprofit networks, including Tides and organizations associated with the Arabella network, have supported numerous projects through established charitable and advocacy organizations.
These arrangements can provide administrative efficiency and help smaller organizations operate without creating independent nonprofit entities.
They can also make financial relationships more difficult for the public to trace when individual projects do not file separate federal information returns.
That does not make fiscal sponsorship inherently improper. It does mean transparency and compliance deserve attention, particularly when sponsored projects participate in politically consequential activities.
Why This Matters in Nebraska
Nebraska is already confronting questions about outside funding in its elections.
In November 2025, Attorney General Mike Hilgers filed a lawsuit against Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss and several nonprofit organizations, alleging that foreign-sourced contributions were improperly routed through nonprofit intermediaries to Nebraska ballot-question committees.
The Attorney General identified the New Venture Fund, Sixteen Thirty Fund, and several Nebraska organizations among the entities involved in the alleged funding arrangements.
His office reported that at least $10 million in Wyss-linked funding had reached Nebraska ballot-question committees since the state enacted restrictions on foreign contributions in 2022.
Those are allegations in pending litigation, not established findings of wrongdoing. The legal question includes whether contributions passing through domestic nonprofit organizations constitute prohibited indirect contributions by a foreign national.
The case raises a broader question about the information available to Nebraska voters when nonprofit organizations finance ballot initiatives.
Transparency and Accountability
Nebraska's Attorney General has important responsibilities involving charitable organizations and enforcement of applicable laws.
The Secretary of State has separate responsibilities involving business filings, public records, and election administration.
Those responsibilities are not interchangeable, but they create opportunities for coordination.
Several questions deserve examination:
What information should fiscally sponsored projects operating in Nebraska disclose about their sponsoring organizations?
Can existing public records reliably identify the organizations responsible for receiving and administering project funds?
Are current disclosure requirements sufficient to identify prohibited foreign contributions to ballot-question committees?
How should state agencies coordinate when a nonprofit or sponsored project becomes subject to federal sanctions?
Which changes can be accomplished administratively, and which would require legislative action?
Any additional requirements should be grounded in existing legal authority or enacted through the Legislature. They should also distinguish legitimate charitable and political activity from conduct that violates state or federal law.
The Responsibility Ahead
As a candidate for Nebraska Secretary of State, I believe these questions warrant careful examination.
When elected, I intend to work with Attorney General Hilgers and other appropriate state officials to review how Nebraska's existing filing, disclosure, and enforcement systems address fiscal sponsorship and outside funding.
That review should identify genuine gaps in transparency, clarify agency responsibilities, and determine whether legislative changes are necessary.
The objective should be straightforward: enforce existing law, protect lawful advocacy, and ensure that required disclosures provide meaningful information to the public.
Fiscal sponsorship is not inherently unlawful. Foreign contributions prohibited by Nebraska law are a separate matter. The challenge is ensuring that our disclosure and enforcement systems can distinguish between the two.
Nebraskans should be able to examine the financial relationships behind organizations seeking to influence public policy and ballot questions.
The public sees the campaign.
The financial relationships behind it deserve appropriate scrutiny, too.
Watch Mapping the DSA Machine: The Socialist Underground Network Exposed:
Comments