October 3, 2022 

BY ELECTRONIC MAIL DELIVERY

Office of General Counsel

Attn: Lisa J. Stevenson, Esq. 

Acting General Counsel 

Federal Election Commission

1050 First Street NE 

Washington, DC 20463 

Re: Advisory Opinion Request

Dear Ms. Stevenson: 

Pursuant to 52 U.S.C. § 30108, we seek an advisory opinion on behalf of Allen Blue (“the 

requestor”). The requestor seeks confirmation that a trust established to receive funds from an 

individual as part of an estate plan is a permissible contributor under the Federal Election 

Campaign Act of 1971 (the “Act”) and Federal Election Commission (“FEC” or the 

“Commission”) regulations. The requestor also seeks guidance on how to properly attribute the 

trust’s contributions if the trustee of the trust has some discretion over the trust’s funds in a 

manner similar to previous Commission decisions. 

I. FACTUAL DISCUSSION 

Allen Blue, the requestor, is Chairman of the non-profit Hope Street Group. The requestor

supports numerous philanthropic organizations as well as progressive-aligned causes and 

candidates. The requestor is planning to distribute assets upon his death and is establishing 

entities now to further these causes. The requestor is over eighteen years of age; is a United 

States citizen; is not a federal contractor; and is eligible to make contributions to federal 

candidates and committees. 

As part of his estate planning, the requestor plans to establish an irrevocable trust, which 

prohibits the requestor from amending or terminating the trust after its creation. The trust would 

share the requestor’s Social Security number, although at a future point in time the trust may 

obtain a separate Employer Identification Number. All assets would be personally held by the 

requestor until transferred to the trust. The trust would not solicit nor receive income from any 

AOR001
Office of the General Counsel

October 3, 2022 

Page 2 

source other than the requestor and investment income from the transferred assets. The requestor 

would not be a beneficiary of the trust. 

The purpose of the trust would be to support progressive causes. The majority of the trust’s 

disbursements would be for the general support of nonprofit organizations that are not registered 

as political committees under the Act. The requestor intends that the trust would also contribute 

to federal candidates for public office, to federal and state political party committees, and to 

other federally-registered committees. However, those contributions will never become a 

majority of the trust’s grants in any calendar year, and that restriction would be included in the 

trust’s founding documents. The trust would not earmark any of the funds it distributes to nonprofit organizations to be contributed to candidates or political committees or otherwise direct its 

distributions to non-profits to be used for federal political purposes. The trust would be 

prohibited from engaging in independent expenditures or electioneering communications, and 

that restriction would be included in the trust’s founding documents. If the trust were to make 

contributions to federal candidates or committees in the requestor’s lifetime, the trust would 

share its aggregate contribution limits with the requestor. 

The trust will have a trustee to administer its disbursements, including its disbursements to 

candidates for public office. The founding trust documents would name trustees; trustees would 

also be able to appoint other eligible trustees. Any trustee will be a natural person, who is over 

eighteen years of age; a United States citizen or lawfully admitted to the United States for 

permanent residence; is not a federal contractor; and is eligible to contribute to federal candidates 

and committees. 

The trust will make political contributions to designated recipients based on objective criteria set 

forth in the trust instrument, such as a particular party committee or the Democratic nominee in a 

particular district or state. The requestor also plans for the trust instrument to allow the trustee 

discretion to distribute funds for political purposes, by setting standards to guide the trustee. The 

standards would require the trustees to support only candidates and committees that further Mr. 

Blue’s support for progressive candidates and/or for his support of action to protect the 

environment, ensure the equality of all persons under the law, and protect the least-well-off 

among us. 

II. QUESTIONS POSED

(1) The requestor asks the Commission to confirm that a trust established to receive funds 

from an individual as part of an estate plan may contribute to federal candidates, political 

party committees, and other federally-registered committees under the Act and 

Commission regulations. 

AOR002
Office of the General Counsel

October 3, 2022 

Page 3 

(2) The requestor seeks guidance on how to properly attribute the trust’s funds when the 

trustee has discretion over the trust’s funds in a manner similar to the discretion approved 

by the Commission in prior circumstances. 

(3) The requestor seeks confirmation that the indexed contribution limits applicable at the 

time the contribution is made would apply. 

III. LEGAL ANALYSIS

Under Commission precedent, a trust established to receive funds from an individual as part of 

their estate planning may contribute to candidates for political office because a trust created on 

these terms qualifies as a “person” under the Act. The trust would not be a political committee 

under the Act because its major purpose would not be campaign activity. Under prior 

Commission decisions, the trust can both designate recipients and the trustee could have 

discretion over the funds so long as the trustee is following the intent of the grantor of the trust. 

A. The Trust Is a “Person” Under the Act.

The requestor’s proposed trust would constitute a “person” under the Act. The Act limits 

contributions from any “person.”1

 The Act defines a “person” to include “an individual” or “any 

other organization or group of persons.”2

 Previously, the Commission concluded that the 

testamentary estate of a decedent is the successor legal entity to the individual testator.3 If an 

individual was legally qualified at the time of their death to contribute, the individual’s 

testamentary trust can contribute as long as the aggregate contributions to each recipient do not 

violate the Act.

4

 The Commission has also found that a living trust is a permissible contributor 

under the Act.5

 

In Advisory Opinion 1996-03 (Breeden-Schmidt Foundation) (“Breeden-Schmidt Foundation”), 

a foundation (the “Foundation”) was created to receive a testamentary distribution from a single 

person, with the goal of advancing the testator’s preferred political philosophy.6 The Foundation 

did not solicit nor receive funds from any other source, and the Foundation was not a corporation 

or a labor union.7

 Its declaration of trust allowed for “subsidizing publications, establishing and 

conducting reading rooms, supporting radio, television and the newspaper media and candidates 

for public office.”8

 While the Foundation’s trustees were empowered to make political 

1 52 U.S.C. § 30116(a); 11 C.F.R. § 110.1. 2 52 U.S.C. § 30101(11).

3 Advisory Opinion 2004-02 (NCEC) at 3; Advisory Opinion 2015-05 (Shaber) at 3. 4 Advisory Opinion 2004-02 (NCEC) at 3. 5 Advisory Opinion 1999-19 (Ellis) at 2. 6 Advisory Opinion 1996-03 (Breeden-Schmidt Foundation) at 1. 7 Id.

8 Id. at 2. 

AOR003
Office of the General Counsel

October 3, 2022 

Page 4 

contributions, the Foundation did not make political contributions in a great number in absolute 

terms or in relation to the total distribution of the Foundation.9 The Commission determined that 

the Foundation was not a political committee, since its major purpose was not campaign 

activity.10 Yet the Foundation was still a permissible contributor under the Act.11

Here, the requestor is establishing an irrevocable trust as part of his estate planning. If 

contributions were made to federal candidates or committees during the requestor’s lifetime, the 

trust would consider its contributions aggregated with those the requestor made directly to 

determine applicable contribution limits. 

The proposed trust would be a permissible contributor under the Act. The Act and Commission 

regulations allow for contributions from every source that is not prohibited.12 The proposed trust 

is not a prohibited contributor. The requestor is over eighteen years of age, is not a foreign 

national, government contractor, or otherwise prohibited from making political contributions. 

The trust is neither a labor union nor a corporation. 

Further, the trust would not need to register as a political committee. The trust’s major purpose 

would not be campaign activity. Its major purpose would be supporting nonprofit organizations 

that align with the requestor’s progressive values. 

B. Some of the Trust’s Recipients may be Designated and Other Recipients may be 

Subject to the Trustee’s Discretion. 

Pursuant to prior Committee guidance, the proposed trust may make political contributions to 

both designated recipients and may allow the trustee to exercise significant discretion for further 

contributions. 

In Advisory Opinion 2004-02 (NCEC) (“NCEC”), the trustee of the proposed testamentary trusts 

would exercise no discretion over the trust’s funds.13 Instead, the terms of the trusts dictated 

where the contributions would be disbursed and limited the trusts to the maximum annual 

contributions permitted under the Act.14 In Advisory Opinion 2019-01 (It Starts Today) (“It 

9 Id. at 3. 10 Id. 11 See id. 12 See 11 C.F.R. 110.1(e) (allowing contributions by partnerships); 11 C.F.R. 110.1(g) (allowing contributions by 

limited liability companies); 11 C.F.R. 110.19 (allowing contributions by minors); 11 C.F.R. 114.2 (prohibiting 

contributions by banks, corporations, and labor unions). 13 Advisory Opinion 2004-02 (NCEC) at 2. 14 Id. at 1-2.

AOR004
Office of the General Counsel

October 3, 2022 

Page 5 

Starts Today”), the Commission allowed an entity to earmark contributions for future 

Democratic candidates who are not yet identified.15

In Breeden-Schmidt Foundation, the Commission permitted a foundation where the trustees had

discretion over the ultimate recipient and amount of the contributions.16 The Foundation’s 

purpose was to advance the principles of his preferred political philosophy and causes related to 

that philosophy.17 The Commission implicitly approved the broad discretion of the foundation’s 

trustees when it determined that contributions should be attributed to the testator and the 

foundation, rather than the trustees.18 

Here, the proposed trust would have a trustee administer its disbursements. Pursuant to the 

Commission’s opinions in NCEC, It Starts Today, and Breeden-Schmidt Foundation, the terms 

of the requestor’s trust may include both strict guidelines based on objective criteria as to which 

candidates for public office receive disbursements and broader guidelines to the trustee of how to 

ultimately distribute the trust’s funds. The requestor seeks to confirm that in both instances, the 

contribution should be reported in the name of the trust and not in the name of the trustee. 

C. The Contribution Limit Applicable to the Trust Would Be the Contribution Limit 

at the Time of the Disbursement.

The contribution limit applicable to the proposed trust would be the limit that would apply to the 

requestor if they were alive at the time the trust made the contribution. If the requestor is alive 

while the trust operates, the trust and the requestor would share contribution limits. 

The Commission has previously clarified that the contribution limit applicable to a testamentary 

estate would be the limit that would apply to the testator if they were alive when the estate made 

the contribution.19 In Advisory Opinion 2015-05 (Shaber) (“Shaber”), the Commission wrote, “if 

an individual were to die in 2016 and bequeath to a committee a contribution that his estate were 

to disburse in 2018, the 2018 contribution limit would apply to that contribution.”20

The requestor seeks confirmation that the contribution limits set forth in Shaber would apply to 

the proposed trust, even if the trustees have discretion over the funds. 

15 Advisory Opinion 2019-01 (It Starts Today) at 3. 16 Advisory Opinion 1996-03 (Breeden-Schmidt Foundation) at 1. 17 Id. 18 See id. at 3. 19 Advisory Opinion 2015-05 (Shaber) at 3 n.3. 20 Id. 

AOR005
Office of the General Counsel

October 3, 2022 

Page 6 

IV. CONCLUSION

For those reasons, we ask the Commission to confirm that a trust established as part of estate 

planning is a legally permissible giver under the Act. We further ask the Commission to confirm 

that if the trustee has discretion, whether the contributions are still attributable to the trust. We 

also ask the Commission whether the contribution limits are connected to indexing that would 

apply at the time the contribution is made. 

Very Truly Yours, 

Ezra W. Reese

Emma R. Anspach

Counsel to Allen Blue 

AOR006