Faux cop charity soliciting donations in Las Vegas flouts IRS, Nevada regulators

faux cop charityA highly dubious organization operating in violation of both state and now federal law is soliciting cash donations around Las Vegas in the name of–wait for this–law enforcement. Can it get any richer than that?

In the past month alone I’ve received a number of telephone calls at the New To Las Vegas world headquarters seeking a donation for either Police Officers Support Committee PAC or National Police Officers Alliance PAC. There’s no material legal difference. They both are names used by something called POSC PAC, ostensibly based in Woodbridge, Va., a suburb of Washington, D.C. The callers say donations will be used to benefit law enforcement.

faux cop charityPOSC PAC, the reporting parent, was founded only in January 2023. Since then, it has solicited in Nevada (and presumably nationally) under its “brands.” But in Nevada it has done so without first registering and making filings as mandated by a 2021 Nevada law. Perhaps POSC PAC sensed (correctly, in my view) that the Silver State is not big on consumer protection.

I know about the calls during 2023 because I received some of them, and contemporaneously wrote them up (here and here). I flat out called POSC PAC yet another “faux charity.” That’s a political action committee (the PAC part) that sounds like a charity when making the pitch, but isn’t. Rather, it spends almost all the donations received on fundraising and other overhead and almost nothing on the stated mission of somehow advocating for law enforcement. Organizers often received undisclosed fees. It’s a swarmy racket.

A faux charity is not required to disclose its terrible financial efficiencies when cold-calling someone on the phone, usually using soundboard technology, a human voice controlled by a computer and a supervising operator who responds by choosing pre-recorded answers. When asked by a sucker would-be donor how donations are spent, the answer is often to consult an organizational website or check official periodic filings with government regulators.

Except that POSC PAC has no periodic filings to check!

The organization apparently missed the deadline for publicly reporting to the Internal Revenue Service all of its individual receipts and expenditures during 2023. The report, called a Form 8872 and required to be filed electronically, was due by January 31. “There is no delay in when the form is filed and when it is available” on the IRS website, an agency spokesperson told me.

That more than suggests POSC PAC made no filing for 2023. IRS regulations call for a civil penalty of 21% of the unreported contributions and expenditures. There apparently are no criminal penalties (that is, if you decide what’s going on is not fraud or racketeering).

Why no filing? I suppose incompetence can’t be ruled out, by either POSC PAC or the overworked IRS. Form 8872 filings, which mainly are listings of contributions and expenditures that sometimes run for hundreds of pages, are notoriously hard to decipher and analyze.  That is, unless you’re someone like me who has been writing about exempt organizations and charities for decades. Still, an accurate filing clearly would give away the show.

Also, POSC PAC may have been a little busy. The organization got sued last year in federal court in Houston, Tex., by Christopher L. Laccinole, a Texas man claiming, among other things violations of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act because he was on do-not-call lists and the calls went to his pay-by-the minute cell phone. But Laccinole, who has sued other telephone solicitors, withdrew the lawsuit, which had sought up to $161,500 in damages, while reserving the right to refile.

The only name on POSC PAC’s sole filing with the IRS, a notice dated January 12, 2023, declaring its existence, is one Al Nizick, listed as treasurer and custodian of records and described in court records as living in Oak Forest, Ill. He probably is a front for the professional fundraisers likely behind POSC PAC.

Last month, I emailed Nizick’s organization saying the IRS told me it could not find a copy of his annual Form 8872 filing due by January 31, 2024, and asking to be emailed a copy. POSC PAC, Police Officers Support Committee PAC and National Police Officers Alliance PAC all share the same email address, so I only had to send one message. I’m still waiting for a reply.

Published IRS regulations require POSC PAC to allow me to inspect a copy of the report “during regular business hours at the organization’s principal office.” This is not likely to happen. The POSC PAC’s stated world headquarters in Woodbridge, Va., is 2,400 miles away from the stated New to Las Vegas headquarters in, well, Las Vegas. Moreover,, from what I can tell, the stated address is a mail drop in a Staples store, open daily, according to its website, from 9:00am to 8:00pm. It’s hard to believe a clerk at the store would have the POSC PAC filing handy at any hour should I pop up, even if it exists.

I have no idea whether the IRS is looking into what might be a pretty flagrant violation of federal law governing PACs. But from my back and forth with the IRS flak, the agency is obviously on notice about possible impropriety.

As, I imagine, are regulators in Nevada. A three-year-old law in the Silver State codified as Nevada Revised Statues 82A.025 et seq. prohibits fundraising within the state for, among other causes, “the benefit of law enforcement” without first registering with the Nevada Secretary of State’s Office and making financial filings. POSC PAC, Police Officers Support Committee PAC and National Police Officers Alliance PAC never have been registered in Nevada. Last year, the Secretary of State’s office, which, along with the Nevada Attorney General’s office has jurisdiction here, admitted to me it has not issued a single cease-and-desist order or penalty against any unregistered PAC since the new law took effect.

The m.o. of POSC PAC and its two d/b/a’s couldn’t be more different than that of Las Vegas’s own Injured Police Officers Fund, which I profiled here recently. Run by sworn officers taking no salaries rather than shadowy fundraisers keeping the loot, the highly reputable IPOF is a true charity that funnels aid to families of fallen officers in times of need. It does no cold-calling, relying on no-pressure contributions and has good financial efficiencies. But I have to think IPOF is hurt by the unchallenged presence of operations like that of POSC PAC and its ilk.

POSC PAC and Police Officers Support Committee PAC already are candidates for my long-running list of America’s Stupidest Charities. Definition: exempt organizations that call asking for money despite a previous critical post by me about it or an affiliate. In the world of fundraising it doesn’t get dumber. You can find the list nearby. With this post I get to add National Police Officers Alliance PAC.

In the telephone cold-call pitches by faux charities, truth is often in short supply, by omission but also by commission.

Here’s an example of omission. One of the recent calls to me on behalf of Police Officers Support Committee PAC used a soundboard-technology-generated voice in the name of “Charles Anderson.” (I use quotes because the voice is not sentient.) “Charles” went through his spiel of all the good a donation would do.

“How old is your organization?” I asked, knowing the answer was only a year.

“Charles” hung up without another word. (I’ve gotten the same response to the same question on another recent Police Officers Support Committee PAC call when querying one “Ray Wolfe.”)

Here’s an example of commission.

The caller from National Police Officers Alliance PAC said the name was “Wayne Cameron.” After his pitch, I asked, “Are you registered in Nevada?”

“Yes,” was the reply by “Wayne.”

Flat wrong. But rich.

Follow William P. Barrett’s work on X by clicking here.

Follow William P. Barrett’s work on Threads by clicking here.

Follow William P. Barrett’s work on BlueSky by clicking here.


So what's your take?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.