FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20463

MEMORANDUM

TO:

FROM:

DATE:

SUBJECT: 

The Commission 

Office of the Commission Secretary VFV

November 29, 2022

Comment Regarding AOR 2022-24 (Allen Blue) from

Elias Law Group 

Attached is a comment received from Elias Law Group. This 

matter is on the December 1, 2022 Open Meeting Agenda.

Attachment
November 29, 2022

BY ELECTRONIC MAIL DELIVERY

Federal Election Commission

1050 First Street NE

Washington, DC 20463 

Re: Comment Regarding Advisory Opinion Request 2022-24

Dear Commissioners:

On behalf of Allen Blue (the “requestor”) we submit this comment in response to the two drafts

regarding Advisory Opinion 2022-24 (“AO 2022-24”). The requestor encourages the Federal 

Election Commission (the “Commission”) to adopt Draft B because it proposes a straightforward 

approach, which is in accordance with prior Commission opinions, to attributing contributions 

from the requestor’s proposed trust. 

Both drafts rightly conclude that the proposed trust may contribute to federal candidates, political 

party committees, and other federally registered committees under the Federal Election 

Campaign Act, 52 U.S.C. §§ 30101-45 (the “Act”) and Commission regulations because the trust 

would be a “person” under the Act and is not a prohibited source. Both drafts also correctly 

conclude that the indexed contribution limits in effect at the time that the proposed trust 

contributes to a candidate or political committee would apply to contributions from the proposed 

trust’s funds.

The drafts differ on how to properly attribute contributions from the proposed trust. Only Draft B 

applies the precedent set by the Commission in Advisory Opinion 1996-03 (“Breeden-Schmidt 

Foundation”) and Advisory Opinion 1999-19 (“Ellis”). In Breeden-Schmidt Foundation, the 

Commission determined that contributions made by a foundation established by a testamentary 

trust would be attributed the successor in interest of the testator and the foundation, not the 

foundation’s trustees. There, the foundation’s trustees had broad discretion to make contributions 

that would advance the cause of a specific political philosophy. In contrast, in Ellis, the 

Commission determined that a contribution from a living trust for which an individual served as 
Office of the General Counsel

November 29, 2022

Page 2

the sole beneficiary, trustee, and trustor, would be attributed to the individual since the individual 

was the beneficial owner and retained complete control of the contribution.

As Draft B notes, the requestor’s proposed trust is virtually identical to the circumstances in 

Breeden-Schmidt Foundation and Ellis. As such, Draft B correctly concludes that contributions 

from the requestor’s proposed trust should only be attributed to the trust when the contributions

are made at the discretion of the trustees. Contributions should be attributed to both the trustee 

and Mr. Blue when they are made to “designated recipients” from the “objective criteria set forth 

in the trust instrument.” To decide otherwise – and require that contributions be attributed to Mr. 

Blue even when the recipients of contributions are chosen by trustees’ discretion – would be 

misleading the public regarding the nature of those contributions.

We respectfully ask the Commission to approve Draft B. 

Very Truly Yours,

Ezra W. Reese

Emma R. Anspach

Counsel to Allen Blue