Thread by @alt_fec

Now is perhaps as good a moment as any to brush up on the concept of “in-kind contributions.” Under federal law, these are amounts paid to influence an election that don’t go through campaign's bank account. The key word here is "contributions." That's what they are. /1

Let's take a keg of beer at a campaign event. If the campaign paid for it, it has to be reported as an expense. /2

But if someone who's not the candidate brought it, that’s an in-kind contribution. It doesn’t matter that the campaign never saw the cash. The beer purchase has to be reported by the campaign as a contribution, and then as an expense. /3

That in-kind contribution counts against that individual's $2,700 federal contribution limit. /4

If the campaign doesn't know anything about the in-kind contribution, then it isn't responsible for reporting it. And we don't make contributors report. But the contributor still has to keep track of the amount to avoid going over $2,700. /5

Now, what if the candidate rolled up to the party with the keg herself? Paid for out of her own pocket? No problem. She can do that, and she's not limited to the $2,700 contribution ceiling. /6

But – and this is key – the candidate's keg purchase is *still* an in-kind contribution, and it *still* has to be reported by the campaign as a contribution, and then as an expense. /7

And that is the critically important little #campaignfinance law nuance that some peeps on TV seem to be missing.
@alt_FEC out. /8/F