[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 17, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7285-7304]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-2838]



 ========================================================================
 Rules and Regulations
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
 having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
 to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
 under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
 
 The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
 Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
 week.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 30 / Tuesday, February 17, 2009 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 7285]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

11 CFR Parts 100, 104 and 110

[Notice 2009-03]


Reporting Contributions Bundled by Lobbyists, Registrants and the 
PACs of Lobbyists and Registrants

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.

ACTION: Final Rules and Transmittal of Regulations to Congress.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Election Commission is promulgating regulations 
implementing new statutory provisions regarding the disclosure of 
information about bundled contributions provided by certain lobbyists, 
registrants, and political committees established or controlled by 
lobbyists and registrants. The final rules require authorized 
committees, leadership PACs, and political committees of political 
parties to disclose certain information about lobbyists, registrants, 
and lobbyists' and registrants' political committees that provide 
bundled contributions. Further information is provided in the 
supplementary information that follows.

DATES: These rules are effective on March 19, 2009. However, compliance 
with paragraphs (b) and (e) of 11 CFR 104.22 is not required until May 
18, 2009. Political committees that are ``lobbyist/registrant PACs'' 
must amend their FEC Form 1 (Statement of Organization) by March 30, 
2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Amy L. Rothstein, Assistant 
General Counsel, Ms. Cheryl A.F. Hemsley, or Ms. Esther Heiden, 
Attorneys, 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 20463, (202) 694-1650 or 
(800) 424-9530.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission is promulgating final rules 
to implement Section 204 of Public Law 110-81, 121 Stat. 735, the 
``Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007,'' signed September 
14, 2007 (``HLOGA''). See 2 U.S.C. 434(i). HLOGA amended the Federal 
Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended (2 U.S.C. 431 et seq.) 
(``FECA'') by requiring certain political committees to disclose 
information about each registered lobbyist \1\ and registrant \2\ 
(``lobbyist/registrant''), and each political committee established or 
controlled by a lobbyist or registrant (``lobbyist/registrant PAC'' 
\3\), that forwards, or is credited with raising, two or more bundled 
contributions aggregating in excess of the reporting threshold during a 
specific period of time. See 2 U.S.C. 434(i). These new disclosure 
requirements apply only to authorized committees of Federal candidates, 
political committees directly or indirectly established, financed, 
maintained or controlled by a candidate or an individual holding 
Federal office (``leadership PACs''), and party committees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The term ``lobbyist'' is defined as any individual ``who is 
employed or retained by a client for financial or other compensation 
for services that include more than one lobbying contact, other than 
an individual whose lobbying activities constitute less than 20 
percent of the time engaged in the services provided by such 
individual to that client over a 3-month period.'' 2 U.S.C. 
1602(10). Any lobbyist who makes more than one lobbying contact or 
who is employed or retained to make lobbying contacts, and exceeds 
the work activity threshold, must register with the Secretary of the 
Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives (``Clerk of the 
House'') if certain income or expense levels are exceeded. See 2 
U.S.C. 1603(a).
    \2\ Any organization that has one or more employees who are 
lobbyists must register on behalf of its lobbyist employees. See 2 
U.S.C. 1603(a); see also http://www.senate.gov/legislative/common/briefing/lobby_disc_briefing.htm#3; http://lobbyingdisclosure.house.gov/lda_guide.html.
    \3\ ``PAC'' is an acronym often used to refer to a political 
action committee other than an authorized committee or a political 
committee of a political party.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HLOGA Section 204 requires that the reporting threshold be indexed 
for inflation annually. HLOGA Section 204 states that the indexing 
requirement ``shall apply'' to the reporting threshold beginning ``[i]n 
any calendar year after 2007.'' See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(3)(B); 2 U.S.C. 
441a(c)(1)(B). Thus, although HLOGA set the initial reporting threshold 
at $15,000 in 2007, the reporting threshold as indexed for inflation is 
$16,000 for 2009. The Commission is publishing elsewhere in this 
Federal Register a notice of the reporting threshold for 2009.
    The Commission is implementing these provisions by adding two new 
paragraphs to 11 CFR 100.5(e), which sets forth examples of ``political 
committees.'' In addition, the Commission is adding new section 104.22 
to 11 CFR Part 104, which governs reports by political committees and 
other persons. Finally, in addition to addressing, in new 11 CFR 
104.22(g), the price indexing of the new bundling reporting threshold, 
the Commission is revising one paragraph and adding another in 11 CFR 
110.17, which provides for the price indexing and publication of 
certain contribution and expenditure limits.
    The Commission published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the 
Federal Register on November 6, 2007. See Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
on Reporting Contributions Bundled by Lobbyists, Registrants and the 
PACs of Lobbyists and Registrants, 72 FR 62600 (November 6, 2007) (the 
``NPRM''). The comment period closed on November 30, 2007. The 
Commission received eight comments from twelve commenters.\4\ The 
comments are available at http://www.fec.gov/law/law_rulemakings.shtml#bundling. Six of the commenters testified at a 
hearing held on September 17, 2008. For the purposes of this document, 
the term ``comment'' applies to both written comments and oral 
testimony at the public hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ One of these comments was from the Internal Revenue Service, 
stating that the Internal Revenue Service did not find any conflict 
between its regulations and the Commission's proposed rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553(d), and the 
Congressional Review of Agency Rulemaking Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1), 
agencies must submit final rules to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives and the President of the Senate, and publish them in 
the Federal Register at least thirty calendar days before they take 
effect. The final rules that follow were transmitted to Congress on 
February 4, 2009.
    These regulations are effective thirty days after publication in 
the Federal Register. Reporting committees, however, must comply with 
the disclosure requirements of Section 204 of HLOGA and with the 
corresponding provisions of new 11 CFR 104.22--that is, with paragraph 
(b) (Reporting Requirement for Reporting Committees) and paragraph (e) 
(When to File)--only with respect to reports filed more than

[[Page 7286]]

three months after these final rules are published in the Federal 
Register.
    This delayed compliance date is required by Section 204(b) of 
HLOGA, which provides that ``the amendment made by [Section 204(a)] 
shall apply with respect to reports filed under [2 U.S.C. 434] after 
the expiration of the 3-month period which begins on the date that the 
regulations required to be promulgated by the [Commission] under [2 
U.S.C. 434(i)(5)] become final.'' Regulations are final upon their 
publication in the Federal Register. See Natural Resources Defense 
Council, Inc. v. EPA, 683 F.2d 752 (3d Cir. 1982).
    Reports required to be filed after these final rules are published 
(and any records corresponding to such reports, as discussed below) 
need not include activity before the effective date of these 
regulations, and activity before the effective date does not count 
toward any aggregate amount for the purposes of the reporting 
threshold. Thus, monthly filers must begin reporting under new 11 CFR 
104.22(b) in May 2009, for bundled contributions that are received in 
April. Quarterly filers must begin reporting under new 11 CFR 104.22(b) 
in July 2009, for bundled contributions that are received in April 
through June 30. Finally, semi-annual filers must begin reporting under 
new 11 CFR 104.22(b) in July 2009, for bundled contributions that are 
received beginning on the effective date of these rules (i.e., thirty 
days after publication in the Federal Register) through June 30. The 
Commission is not requiring the reporting of contributions bundled by 
lobbyists/registrants received as of January 1, 2009 through the 
effective date of these regulations (i.e., 30 days after publication in 
the Federal Register), because such a requirement would be a 
retroactive application of the regulation. Contributions bundled by 
entities that may be lobbyist/registrant PACs and received through 30 
days after the effective date of these regulations (i.e., 60 days after 
publication in the Federal Register) also need not be reported.
    Because the Commission is requiring reporting committees to report 
bundled contributions received as of the effective date of these 
regulations, but is providing an additional ten days for lobbyist/
registrant PACs to amend their FEC Form 1, there will be at least a 
ten-day period during which reporting committees may be unable to 
determine definitively whether an entity is a lobbyist/registrant PAC. 
Moreover, because the Commission is unable to update its Web site 
instantaneously to provide real-time information regarding amended FEC 
Form 1 or to provide a list that is reasonably searchable with respect 
to whether an entity is a lobbyist/registrant PAC, the Commission 
anticipates an additional delay between the deadline by which lobbyist/
registrant PACs are required to amend their FEC Form 1 and when such 
information becomes available to reporting committees. Accordingly, the 
Commission is delaying the implementation of these rules with respect 
to contributions bundled by entities that may be lobbyist/registrant 
PACs for an additional 30 days after the effective date of these 
regulations (i.e., 60 days after publication in the Federal Register), 
during which time reporting committees are not required to report 
contributions bundled by such entities.

Explanation and Justification

I. Background

    Prior to HLOGA, FECA and Commission regulations imposed certain 
reporting and recordkeeping requirements for contributions received and 
forwarded by any person to a political committee. Each person who 
received and forwarded contributions to a political committee was also 
required to forward certain information identifying the original 
contributor. See 2 U.S.C. 432(b); 11 CFR 102.8. Additionally, 2 U.S.C. 
441a(a)(8) and 11 CFR 110.6 imposed certain reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements for contributions received and forwarded by persons known 
as ``conduits'' or ``intermediaries'' to the authorized committees of 
Federal candidates. The Commission did not propose and is not 
implementing any changes to these rules.
    Section 204 of HLOGA requires each authorized committee of a 
Federal candidate, leadership PAC and political committee of a 
political party to disclose certain information about any person 
reasonably known by the committee to be a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC that forwards to the reporting committee, or is 
credited with raising for the reporting committee, two or more bundled 
contributions aggregating in excess of the reporting threshold within a 
``covered period'' of time. See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(1), (2), (3) and (8). 
Accordingly, Section 204 of HLOGA requires reporting committees to 
disclose information about two distinct types of bundled contributions: 
(1) Contributions that are forwarded to a reporting committee by a 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, and (2) contributions 
that, although received by the reporting committee directly from a 
contributor, are credited by the reporting committee to a lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC through records, designations or 
other means of recognizing that a certain amount of money has been 
raised by that lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC. Id. 
Under Section 204 of HLOGA, a reporting committee must disclose the 
name and address of the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, 
the lobbyist/registrant's employer (for individuals), and the aggregate 
amount of bundled contributions within the covered period. See 2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(1).

II. 11 CFR 100.5--Political Committee (2 U.S.C. 431(4), (5), (6))

    Section 100.5(e) of 11 CFR provides examples of types of political 
committees. The Commission is adding two new paragraphs, (e)(6) and 
(e)(7), to section 100.5 regarding ``leadership PAC'' and ``lobbyist/
registrant PAC,'' respectively, as examples of political committees.

A. 11 CFR 100.5(e)(6)--Leadership PAC

    The term ``leadership PAC'' is defined in Section 204(a) of HLOGA 
as ``a political committee that is directly or indirectly established, 
financed, maintained or controlled by [a] candidate [for Federal 
office] or [an] individual [holding Federal office] but which is not an 
authorized committee of the candidate or individual and which is not 
affiliated with an authorized committee of the candidate or individual, 
except that such term does not include a political committee of a 
political party.'' \5\ 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(8)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ This definition is consistent with the Commission's rules 
that treat such committees as unaffiliated with a candidate's 
authorized committee. See 11 CFR 100.5(g).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The new definition of ``leadership PAC'' is relevant to two areas 
of HLOGA that fall within the Commission's purview: (1) The disclosure 
requirements in Section 204 of HLOGA for contributions bundled by 
lobbyists/registrants and lobbyist/registrant PACs; and (2) 
restrictions on candidate travel in section 601 of HLOGA. See Public 
Law No. 110-81, section 601(a) (codified at 2 U.S.C. 439a(c)(2)).
    The Commission announced its plans to initiate rulemakings for 
these two provisions on September 24, 2007.\6\ The candidate travel 
NPRM responsive to section 601 of HLOGA initially proposed a definition 
of ``leadership PAC'' as that term applies to both provisions. See 
Notice of Proposed

[[Page 7287]]

Rulemaking on Candidate Travel, 72 FR 59953 (October 23, 2007) 
(``Candidate Travel NPRM''). The NPRM for this bundling disclosure 
rulemaking cited to the proposed definition in the Candidate Travel 
NPRM as the definition to be used. See NPRM, 72 FR at 62600, fn. 3; see 
also Candidate Travel NPRM, 72 FR at 59954. Because these bundling 
disclosure rules are becoming final before the candidate travel rules, 
the Commission is including the definition of ``leadership PAC'' in 
these final rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See News Release, Federal Election Commission Announces 
Plans to Issue New Regulations to Implement the Honest Leadership 
and Open Government Act of 2007, available at http://www.fec.gov/press/press2007/20070924travel.shtml.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is defining ``leadership PAC'' at 11 CFR 100.5(e)(6) 
as proposed in the Candidate Travel NPRM. The definition follows the 
definition of ``leadership PAC'' in Section 204 of HLOGA.\7\ The 
Commission received one comment on the proposed definition in response 
to the Candidate Travel NPRM that supported the substance and location 
of the new definition, and did not receive any comments opposing it.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The term ``political committee'' applies only to those 
organizations that are for the purpose of influencing Federal 
elections. The definition of ``leadership PAC'' does not cover 
committees that are not included in the definition of ``political 
committee'' (such as State leadership PACs that are established, 
financed, maintained, or controlled by a State official who runs for 
Federal office).
    \8\ Comments filed in the candidate travel rulemaking are 
available at http://www.fec.gov/law/law_rulemakings.shtml#travel07.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. 11 CFR 100.5(e)(7)--Lobbyist/Registrant PAC

    New paragraph (e)(7) refers the reader to the definition in new 11 
CFR 104.22(a)(3) of the term ``lobbyist/registrant PAC,'' which is 
discussed below.

III. New 11 CFR 104.22--Disclosure of Bundling by Lobbyists/Registrants 
and Lobbyist/Registrant PACs (2 U.S.C. 434(i))

    To implement the requirements of HLOGA Section 204, the Commission 
is adopting new 11 CFR 104.22. New paragraph (a) defines key terms; 
paragraphs (b) and (c) set forth the reporting requirements under these 
new rules; paragraphs (d) and (e) govern where to file and when to 
file, respectively; paragraph (f) establishes recordkeeping 
requirements; and paragraph (g) addresses the annual indexing for 
inflation of the threshold amount of bundled contributions that trigger 
the reporting requirement for a covered period.

A. 11 CFR 104.22(a)--Definitions

    The Commission is adding several new definitions in new 11 CFR 
104.22(a).
1. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(1)--Reporting Committee
    HLOGA adds reporting requirements that apply to three types of 
political committees: authorized committees of a candidate, leadership 
PACs, and party committees. See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(6). New 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(1) defines ``reporting committee'' to encompass these three 
types of political committees, as they are defined in 11 CFR 
100.5(e)(4), new (e)(6), and (f)(1). The Commission requested but 
received no comments on the proposed definition, which is the same as 
the final rule.
2. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(2)--Lobbyist/Registrant
    HLOGA Section 204 applies to contributions bundled by ``a current 
registrant under section 4(a) of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 
[the `LDA'] (2 U.S.C. 1603(a)); an individual who is listed on a 
current registration filed under section 4(b)(6) of [the LDA] (2 U.S.C. 
1603(b)(6)) or a current report under section 5(b)(2)(C) of [the LDA] 
(2 U.S.C. 1604(b)(2)(C)); \9\ or a political committee established or 
controlled by such a registrant or individual.'' 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(7). 
The NPRM proposed creating a new term, ``lobbyist/registrant,'' to 
encompass both current registrants and individuals listed on a current 
registration or report filed under the LDA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Under Section (4)(b)(6) of the LDA, each registration filed 
with the Secretary of the Senate or Clerk of the House must include 
the name of each employee of the registrant who has acted or whom 
the registrant expects to act as a lobbyist on behalf of the 
registrant or a client; under Section 5(b)(2)(C), each registrant 
must file quarterly reports with the Secretary of the Senate and the 
Clerk of the House that include a list of the registrant's employees 
who acted as lobbyists on behalf of a client of the registrant 
during the quarter. See 2 U.S.C. 1603(b)(6); 2 U.S.C. 1604(b)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NPRM requested comments on whether the reporting requirements 
of HLOGA Section 204 should also apply to contributions forwarded by or 
received and credited to a registrant's employee, where that employee 
is not listed by the registrant as an in-house lobbyist. Six comments 
addressed this issue. Four comments said that the crux of the matter 
would depend on whether the employee was raising funds on behalf of the 
employee's registrant employer or was acting on the employee's own 
behalf. Three of these comments suggested various standards that the 
Commission might employ to determine on whose behalf the non-lobbyist 
employee is acting. One comment suggested using a standard based on the 
law of agency. A second comment suggested using a standard analogous to 
that used in determining whether corporate facilitation has taken 
place, that is, examining whether the employee was ordered or directed 
by the employee's superior to undertake the activity. See 11 CFR 
114.2(f)(2)(i)(A). A third comment suggested creating a rebuttable 
presumption that certain employees, such as senior officers and 
government relations employees of a registrant, are acting on behalf of 
their registrant employer.
    By contrast, two comments stated that HLOGA covers only activity by 
lobbyists/registrants and lobbyist/registrant PACs. One of these 
comments stated that the Commission has no authority to go beyond the 
plain statutory language by requiring the disclosure of information 
about individuals who are employed by registrants but are not 
themselves lobbyists.
    The Commission agrees with the latter two comments. By its express 
terms, HLOGA requires the disclosure of information only about 
lobbyists and registrants. 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(7). This interpretation is 
further supported by a section-by-section analysis of HLOGA that was 
made a part of the record in the Senate debate on HLOGA by Senator 
Feinstein. In her remarks, Senator Feinstein stated ``I ask unanimous 
consent to have printed in the [Congressional] Record a section-by-
section analysis of the bill [HLOGA] we are about to vote on, including 
legislative history endorsed by the three principal Senate authors of 
the legislation: myself, Chairman [of the Senate Committee on Homeland 
Security and Governmental Affairs] Lieberman and Majority Leader 
Reid.'' 153 Cong. Rec. S10708 (daily ed. August 2, 2007) (``Section-by-
Section Analysis'').
    The Section-by-Section Analysis specifically states that the 
disclosure requirements apply only to lobbyists and registrants:

    This provision covers only contributions credited to registered 
lobbyists, as defined in subsection 204(a)(7). Contributions 
credited to others, including others who may share a common employer 
with, or work for a lobbyist, are not covered by this section so 
long as any credit is genuinely received by the non-lobbyist and not 
the lobbyist.

153 Cong. Rec. S10709 (daily ed. August 2, 2007).
    Thus, the Commission has determined that non-lobbyist employees of 
lobbyists/registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs who forward bundled 
contributions or receive credit from a reporting committee for bundling 
contributions are outside of the scope of HLOGA Section 204. However, 
if the reporting committee knows that the

[[Page 7288]]

person is forwarding the contributions on behalf of a lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, such forwarded contributions are 
within the scope of HLOGA Section 204. The final rule defines ``bundled 
contribution'' accordingly. See 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(i); see also 
discussion below at III.6.a.
3. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(3)--Lobbyist/Registrant PAC
    New 11 CFR 104.22(a)(3) defines ``lobbyist/registrant PAC'' as 
``any political committee that a `lobbyist/registrant' `established or 
controls' '' as that term is defined in 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4). This 
definition tracks the language of HLOGA, which defines ``persons'' who 
raise bundled contributions to include a ``political committee 
established or controlled'' by a lobbyist or registrant. 2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(7)(C). As discussed below, any political committee that meets 
the definition of ``lobbyist/registrant PAC'' under 11 CFR 104.22(a)(3) 
must identify itself as such on any FEC Form 1 (Statement of 
Organization) that it files with the Commission after the effective 
date of this rule. See 11 CFR 104.22(c). Committees that have already 
filed FEC Form 1 with the Commission and that meet the definition of 
``lobbyist/registrant PAC'' under 11 CFR 104.22(a)(3) are required to 
amend their FEC Form 1 to reflect this change in status within ten days 
after the effective date of this rule. Id.; 11 CFR 102.2(a)(2). Thus, 
Form 1 must be amended within forty days after the date this rule is 
published in the Federal Register. Statements of Organization are filed 
pursuant to 2 U.S.C. 433, and therefore are not subject to the 
mandatory three-month waiting period under HLOGA Section 204, which 
applies to reports filed under 2 U.S.C. 434(i).
4. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4)--Established or Controls
    HLOGA Section 204 requires reporting committees to disclose bundled 
contributions that exceed the reporting threshold within a covered 
period, if those bundled contributions were forwarded by, or received 
and credited to, any political committee reasonably known by the 
recipient reporting committee to be ``established or controlled'' by a 
lobbyist or registrant. 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(7)(C). The NPRM asked several 
questions as to when a lobbyist/registrant should be considered to have 
``established or [to] control[ ]'' a political committee. In the NPRM, 
the Commission requested but received no comments on including the 
separate segregated fund (``SSF'') of any corporation, labor 
organization or other connected organization (see 11 CFR 100.6) that is 
a registrant under the LDA, within the ambit of ``lobbyist/registrant 
PACs.''
    The NPRM also requested comments on when a nonconnected committee 
would be considered to be ``controlled'' by a lobbyist/registrant, and 
whether a lobbyist/registrant that is the treasurer of the political 
committee controls the committee per se. One comment on this issue 
suggested that ``controlled'' is a recognized term of art under FECA: 
for example, political committees ``established, financed, maintained 
or controlled'' by the same person or group of persons are 
``affiliated'' and are treated as a single committee for contribution 
purposes. Several comments suggested using factors similar to those 
used by the Commission to determine case-by-case affiliation of 
political committees under 11 CFR 100.5(g). These comments suggested 
using such factors as (1) whether the lobbyist/registrant has the 
authority to direct or participate in the governance of the political 
committee; (2) whether the lobbyist/registrant has the authority to 
hire, appoint, demote or otherwise control the officers of the 
political committee; and (3) whether the lobbyist/registrant provides 
significant funding for the political committee on an ongoing basis. 
One comment stated that having a lobbyist on the board of directors of 
a nonconnected committee or serving as an officer would be an example 
of per se control by the lobbyist. Another comment agreed that having a 
lobbyist acting as treasurer of a nonconnected committee would 
constitute per se control, but cautioned against creating a rule that 
would make any board membership per se control.
    The concept of ``established or controlled'' in Section 204 of 
HLOGA, which is implemented by the Commission in new 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(4), relates to the same entities as does Section 203 of 
HLOGA, which is implemented by the Secretary of the Senate and Clerk of 
the House under the LDA. See 2 U.S.C. 1604(d). Therefore, in addition 
to the comments' proposals, the Commission also considered following 
the description of ``established or controlled'' set out by the 
Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives 
in their guidance on reports filed with them under the LDA, which 
includes the following example:

    Lobbyists ``C'' and ``D'' serve on the board of a non-connected 
PAC as member and treasurer respectively. As board members, they are 
in positions that control direction of the PAC's contributions. 
Since both are controlling to whom the PAC's contributions are 
given, they must d

See Secretary of the Senate Guidance (January 16, 2009), available at 
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/resources/pdf/S1guidance.pdf at page 
24; Clerk of the House Guidance (January 16, 2009), available at http://lobbyingdisclosure.house.gov/amended_lda_guide.html#125update at 
section 7.
    The Commission decided to use a combination of the House and Senate 
guidance and the Commission's own factors to determine whether a 
lobbyist/registrant established or controls a political committee. 
Because of the overlap between Sections 203 and 204 of HLOGA with 
respect to the use of the term ``established or controlled,'' the 
Commission concluded that it was preferable, to the extent practicable, 
to harmonize its rule in new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4) with the Secretary of 
the Senate and the Clerk of the House's implementation of Section 203 
of HLOGA under the LDA.
    Accordingly, a lobbyist/registrant established or controls any 
political committee for the purposes of new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4) if the 
lobbyist/registrant is required to disclose such political committee to 
the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the House as being 
established or controlled by that lobbyist/registrant under Section 203 
of HLOGA. If a political committee is able to obtain definitive 
guidance from the Secretary of the Senate or Clerk of the House that it 
is, or is not, required to be disclosed as being established or 
controlled by a lobbyist/registrant, then such determination is 
conclusive for the purposes of new 11 CFR 104.22, and the political 
committee need not consider the Commission's additional criteria 
described below.
    The Commission is aware, however, that there may be times when a 
political committee will not be able to determine definitively from 
guidance issued by the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the 
House, or after communicating with those offices, whether a political 
committee is established or controlled by a lobbyist/registrant. For 
this reason, the Commission is issuing additional criteria on whether a 
political committee is established or controlled by a lobbyist/
registrant for the purposes of HLOGA Section 204. If, after consulting 
guidance issued by the offices of the Secretary of the Senate and Clerk 
of the House or after communicating with those offices, a political 
committee is unable to ascertain whether it is established or 
controlled by a lobbyist/registrant, the

[[Page 7289]]

political committee must consult the additional criteria set forth in 
new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4)(ii).
    Under these additional criteria, a political committee must first 
consult new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4)(ii)(A), which states that a separate 
segregated fund whose connected organization is a registrant is a 
lobbyist/registrant PAC. If the political committee does not meet the 
criterion under 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4)(ii)(A), then the political 
committee must next look to new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4)(ii)(B), which sets 
out two additional independent criteria for determining whether a 
political committee is ``established or controlled'' by a lobbyist/
registrant. The Commission has decided not to incorporate the broad 
affiliation analysis at 11 CFR 100.5(g). That analysis would have 
required the weighing of several factors in order to determine whether 
a lobbyist/registrant established or controls a political committee. 
Instead, to give firm guidance to political committees, the 
``established or controls'' analysis in new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4)(ii)(B) 
states that a political committee is established or controlled by a 
lobbyist/registrant if it meets either of the criteria in paragraph (1) 
or (2). The Commission notes that HLOGA Section 204 uses the words 
``established or controlled.'' The use of the disjunctive ``or'' 
(rather than the conjunctive ``and'') means that only one of those 
criteria need be present to trigger application of the law.
    Webster's Dictionary defines ``establish'' as ``to found, 
institute, build, or bring into being on a firm or stable basis.'' 
Random House Webster's Unabridged Dictionary, 2nd ed. 663 (Random House 
2001). The Commission recognizes that several individuals may 
participate in the establishment of a political committee. Therefore, 
the first criterion, as set out in new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4)(ii)(B)(1), 
provides that a political committee is ``established'' by a lobbyist/
registrant if a lobbyist/registrant had a primary role in the 
establishment of the political committee, excluding the provision of 
legal or compliance services or advice.
    The second criterion, set forth in new 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(4)(ii)(B)(2), provides that a political committee is 
``controlled'' by a lobbyist/registrant if the lobbyist/registrant 
directs the governance or operations of the political committee, 
excluding the provision of legal or compliance services or advice. This 
standard derives from the dictionary definition of ``control:'' ``to 
exercise restraint or direction over; dominate; command.'' Id. at 442. 
The lobbyist/registrant's authority to direct, which need not be 
exclusive to any one person, may derive from the political committee's 
controlling documents, such as the articles of incorporation or bylaws. 
However, a political committee's informal procedures or actual 
practices may also demonstrate that a lobbyist/registrant directs the 
governance or operations of the committee. For example, even a 
lobbyist/registrant who is a non-voting member of a political 
committee's board of directors may control the political committee as 
long as that lobbyist/registrant in fact directs the governance or 
operations of the political committee.
    Both criteria, as discussed above, exclude the provision of legal 
or compliance services or advice from the criteria for determining when 
a political committee is established or controlled by a lobbyist/
registrant. This exclusion reflects the Commission's recognition that, 
during and after formation, political committees often consult experts 
who may be lobbyists/registrants or whose firms are registrants. The 
new rule is designed to reach those situations in which the lobbyist/
registrant is more actively involved in the formation or operation of a 
political committee than merely providing legal or compliance services 
or advice. Thus, a political committee's use for compliance purposes of 
an attorney or other expert from a firm that itself is a registrant (or 
even if the attorney or expert is a lobbyist/registrant) will not by 
itself result in the political committee being established or 
controlled by a lobbyist/registrant.
5. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)--Covered Period
    Section 204 of HLOGA requires that reporting committees disclose 
information about any lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC 
that forwards, or is credited with raising for the reporting committee, 
two or more bundled contributions aggregating in excess of the 
reporting threshold during any ``covered period.'' See 2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(1), (2), (3) and (8). HLOGA defines ``covered period'' as 
January 1 through June 30, July 1 through December 31 ``and * * * any 
reporting period applicable to the committee under [2 U.S.C. 434] 
during which any [lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC] 
provided two or more bundled contributions to the committee in an 
aggregate amount greater than [the reporting threshold].'' 2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(2). HLOGA grants the Commission the discretion to provide for 
quarterly reporting by political committees that file their campaign 
finance reports more frequently than on a quarterly basis.\10\ See 2 
U.S.C. 434(i)(5)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Under FECA, political committees are subject to the 
following campaign finance reporting requirements: national 
committees of political parties (including the national 
congressional campaign committees) must report monthly in all 
calendar years, see 2 U.S.C. 434(a)(4)(B); 11 CFR 104.5(c)(4); 
state, district and local committees of political parties are 
required to file monthly if they exceed certain levels of Federal 
election activity, see 2 U.S.C. 434(e)(4); 11 CFR 300.36(c); most 
authorized committees of presidential candidates are required to 
file monthly during presidential election years, see 2 U.S.C. 
434(a)(3); 11 CFR 104.5(b); authorized committees of House and 
Senate candidates are required to file quarterly, see 2 U.S.C. 
434(a)(2); 11 CFR 104.5(a); other political committees may choose to 
file on either a monthly or a quarterly basis, see 2 U.S.C. 
434(a)(4); 11 CFR 104.5(c)(1)-(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. The Proposed Definition
    The NPRM presented both a proposed and an alternative definition of 
``covered period.'' Under the proposed definition, a ``covered period'' 
would be the semi-annual periods of January 1 through June 30 and July 
1 through December 31. Additionally, in any calendar year in which a 
reporting committee is required to file or files monthly or quarterly 
campaign finance reports, ``covered period'' would also include the 
quarterly periods of January 1 through March 31 and July 1 through 
September 30, if during those periods, a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC provided two or more bundled contributions to 
the reporting committee that aggregate in excess of the reporting 
threshold.
    The Commission received four comments favoring the proposed 
definition. All four comments stated that the proposed definition was 
consistent with HLOGA's requirement that the Commission's regulations 
provide for the broadest possible disclosure of lobbyist/registrant 
bundling activity.
    The NPRM also asked whether the statute would support the 
elimination of duplicative reporting that would result from the 
proposed definition of ``covered period.'' The NPRM asked, for example, 
whether there is a statutory basis for the Commission to consider 
exempting reporting committees from having to disclose semi-annually 
information about lobbyists/registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs 
providing bundled contributions if the information was already fully 
disclosed in a prior report filed with the Commission. All four 
comments were in favor of the elimination of duplicative reporting. As 
such, they suggested that the Commission design the new reporting 
schedule to allow for both quarterly and semi-annual reporting once the

[[Page 7290]]

reporting threshold has been exceeded. One comment stated that such a 
reporting form would assist the public's understanding of the data.
b. The Alternative Definition
    The alternative definition in the NPRM would provide that, in any 
calendar year in which a reporting committee is required to file or 
files reports on a quarterly or monthly basis under 11 CFR 104.5, the 
covered period would be defined as the quarterly periods of January 1 
through March 31, April 1 through June 30, July 1 through September 30, 
and October 1 through December 31. Additionally, in any calendar year 
in which a reporting committee files semi-annual reports, the covered 
period would also include the semi-annual periods of January 1 through 
June 30 and July 1 through December 30. The Commission received one 
comment in favor of this alternative definition, noting that the 
alternative definition would result in more persons meeting the 
reporting threshold, and thus lead to greater disclosure.
c. Quarterly Covered Periods for Reporting Committees Which File More 
Frequently Than on a Quarterly Basis
    Under both the proposed and the alternative definition of ``covered 
period'' in the NPRM, the Commission would have exercised its authority 
under HLOGA to require reporting committees that file monthly campaign 
finance reports to file their bundling disclosure reports quarterly, 
rather than monthly. See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(5)(A).
    The Commission asked whether it should, instead, require monthly 
filers to disclose information about bundled contributions on a monthly 
and semi-annual basis. See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(5)(A) (``[T]he Commission 
may * * * provide for quarterly filing * * * by a committee which files 
reports * * * more frequently than on a quarterly basis.'').
    The Commission received five comments on this question. All 
supported quarterly filing schedules for political committees that file 
their campaign finance reports on a monthly basis. One comment noted 
that quarterly filing will result in more persons meeting the reporting 
threshold, and thus provide greater disclosure by reporting committees. 
The comment further noted that requiring reporting committees to 
determine on a monthly basis which entities have forwarded or been 
credited with raising contributions in excess of the reporting 
threshold, and then to determine for that same period which of those 
entities are lobbyists/registrants or their PACs, would impose an undue 
compliance burden on many reporting committees.
d. Definition of ``Covered Period'' in Final Rule
    The Commission's final rule follows HLOGA Section 204. The final 
rule provides for different ``covered periods'' as follows:
    Semi-Annual Covered Periods--``Covered period'' for each reporting 
committee is the semi-annual periods of January 1 through June 30, and 
July 1 through December 31. See 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)(i).
    Quarterly Covered Periods--For reporting committees that file 
campaign finance reports under 11 CFR 104.5 on a quarterly basis, the 
covered periods also include the quarters beginning on January 1, April 
1, July 1, and October 1, and the applicable pre- and post-election 
reporting periods in election years. See 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)(ii). In 
non-election years, reporting committees other than those authorized by 
a candidate may file lobbyist bundling disclosure reports only for the 
semi-annual covered periods. Id.
    Monthly Covered Periods--For reporting committees that file 
campaign finance reports under 11 CFR 104.5 on a monthly basis, the 
covered periods also include each month in the calendar year, except 
that in election years, the pre- and post-general election reporting 
periods are covered periods in lieu of the monthly November and 
December reporting periods. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)(iii); see also 11 CFR 
104.5(c)(3)(ii). This reporting schedule follows the campaign finance 
reporting schedule for political committees other than authorized 
committees in 2 U.S.C. 434(a)(4)(B).
    HLOGA requires reporting committees to file lobbyist bundling 
disclosure reports both semi-annually and for ``any reporting period 
applicable'' to the reporting committee under 2 U.S.C. 434 during which 
any lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC provided two or more 
bundled contributions to the committee in an aggregate amount exceeding 
the reporting threshold. 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(2)(C). Conforming the 
definition of ``covered period'' in 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5) with the 
reporting committee's campaign finance reporting periods under 2 U.S.C. 
434 thus more closely tracks the language of HLOGA than did either the 
proposed rule or its alternative in the NPRM.
    Furthermore, requiring reporting committees to file lobbyist 
bundling disclosure reports according to their usual campaign finance 
reporting schedule, including pre- and post-election reports, means 
that quarterly filers will disclose information about lobbyist bundling 
activity during the crucial period immediately before an election, as 
will monthly filers in the period immediately before a general 
election. The proposed rule and the alternative in the NPRM would have 
resulted in the disclosure of lobbyist/registrant and lobbyist/
registrant PAC bundling information by quarterly and monthly filers 
only after the close of each calendar quarter which, in some cases, 
would have been after the relevant election. The Commission's decision 
to require pre-election disclosure is consistent with the requirement 
in HLOGA that the Commission promulgate rules that ``provide for the 
broadest possible disclosure.'' 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(5)(D).
    The Commission's decision to conform the definition of ``covered 
period'' to a reporting committee's campaign finance reporting schedule 
alleviates the concern expressed in several comments that reporting 
committees might find it difficult to try to implement two different 
reporting schedules--one for campaign finance reports under 11 CFR 
104.5 and one for lobbyist bundling disclosure reports under 11 CFR 
104.22. Requiring the filing of bundling disclosure reports and 
campaign finance reports on the same timeline reduces or alleviates any 
possible confusion, while at the same time reducing the burden of the 
reporting requirement. In addition, placing both types of reports on 
the same timeline will facilitate the public's ability to compare the 
two types of reports accurately, thereby further helping to achieve the 
public disclosure objectives of HLOGA. See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(5)(D). 
Accordingly, 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)(ii) and (iii) define ``covered 
period'' to correspond to a reporting committee's regular campaign 
finance reporting schedule under 11 CFR 104.5.
    The Commission recognizes, however, that some comments conveyed a 
preference for allowing reporting committees that file their campaign 
finance reports on a monthly basis to file their lobbyist bundling 
disclosure reports quarterly, instead. As one comment noted, requiring 
reporting committees to make a monthly determination as to who is a 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, and whether or not the 
reporting threshold for bundled contributions has been exceeded, would 
impose a substantial compliance burden. Recognizing that concern, the 
regulations adopted by the Commission permit quarterly filing of the 
information required by this regulation

[[Page 7291]]

for reporting committees that file their campaign finance reports under 
2 U.S.C. 434 more frequently than on a quarterly basis. See 2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(5)(A). Under new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)(iv), reporting committees 
that file their campaign finance reports on a monthly basis may elect 
to file their lobbyist bundling disclosure reports on a quarterly, 
rather than monthly, basis. Any such reporting committee that chooses 
to file its lobbyist bundling disclosure reports on a quarterly basis 
must follow the same schedule as quarterly filers: semi-annually; for 
each calendar quarter; and pre- and post-election, as discussed above. 
A reporting committee that wishes to change its reporting schedule 
under new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5) must notify the Commission in writing, 
just as non-authorized committees must do for campaign finance reports. 
11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)(iv); see also 11 CFR 104.5(c). Reporting committees 
may not change their filing frequency more than once per calendar year. 
11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)(iv); see also 11 CFR 104.5(c).
    Finally, new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5)(v) establishes a covered period 
for reporting committees with respect to special elections and runoff 
elections. Any such reporting committee that receives two or more 
contributions forwarded by or raised by and credited to a lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC that exceed the reporting 
threshold during the covered period must file FEC Form 3L (Report of 
Contributions Bundled by Lobbyists/Registrants and Lobbyist/Registrant 
PACs) at the same time that the reporting committee files its campaign 
finance reports for the special or run-off election. Special and run-
off elections are called under State law, and the Commission sets 
deadlines for filing campaign finance reports for the elections under 2 
U.S.C. 434(a)(9). See also 11 CFR 104.5(h). The new definition of 
``covered period'' for reporting committees active in special and run-
off elections thus is consistent with HLOGA's definition of ``covered 
period,'' which includes ``any reporting period applicable to the 
committee under [2 U.S.C. 434].'' 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(2).
6. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)--Bundled Contribution
    HLOGA Section 204 defines the term ``bundled contribution'' as 
``with respect to a [reporting committee] and a [lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC], a contribution (subject to the applicable 
threshold) which is (i) forwarded from the contributor or any 
contributors to the [reporting] committee by the [lobbyist/registrant 
or lobbyist/registrant PAC]; or (ii) received by the [reporting] 
committee from a contributor or contributors, but credited by the 
[reporting] committee or the candidate involved (or, in the case of a 
leadership PAC, by the [officeholder] involved) to the [lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC] through records, designations, 
or other means of recognizing that a certain amount of money has been 
raised by the [lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC].'' 2 
U.S.C. 434(i)(8)(A).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ As discussed in section III.H below, because the term 
``contributions'' in FECA includes in-kind contributions, the rules 
for ``bundled contributions'' apply to both monetary and in-kind 
contributions. See 2 U.S.C. 431(8)(A)(i) and 11 CFR 100.51(a), 
100.54, 100.56, 109.21(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    HLOGA thus recognizes two distinct types of bundled contributions--
(1) contributions that are forwarded to the reporting committee by a 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, and (2) contributions 
received by the reporting committee from the contributors that are 
credited by the reporting committee to a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC through records, designations or other means of 
recognizing that a certain amount of money has been raised by that 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC. Each type of bundled 
contribution is discussed separately below.
a. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(i)--Contributions Forwarded to a Reporting 
Committee by a Lobbyist/Registrant or Lobbyist/Registrant PAC
    The first type of ``bundled contribution'' defined in 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(6) is a contribution that is forwarded to the reporting 
committee by a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC. New 11 
CFR 104.22(a)(6)(i) states that a forwarded contribution is any 
contribution delivered or transmitted, by physical or electronic means, 
to the reporting committee by the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC, or by any person that the reporting committee knows to 
be forwarding such contribution on behalf of a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC.
    This type of bundled contribution does not result from the 
reporting committee's crediting the lobbyist/registrant or the 
lobbyist/registrant PAC with having raised the contributions in order 
for the contributions to be included in the aggregate amount of bundled 
contributions disclosed. Rather, this type of bundled contribution 
turns solely on the fact that the contributions were forwarded by the 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC to the reporting 
committee. Bundled contributions that are forwarded to a reporting 
committee by a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC must be 
reported regardless of whether the committee awards any ``credit'' to 
the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC.
    The NPRM sought comment as to whether it might be helpful and 
facilitate compliance if the Commission were to define the term 
``forwarded'' in the rule as, for instance, ``arranging or causing the 
physical or electronic delivery or transmission of a contribution.'' 
NPRM, 72 FR at 62602.
    Three comments addressed this question. One comment stated that 
such a definition would be useful to clarify, for example, that if a 
lobbyist collects a batch of checks for a candidate but arranges for an 
employee or third party to give them to the candidate, rather than 
personally delivering them, those checks have been ``forwarded'' and 
the reporting committee must report the information about the bundler 
if the contributions exceed the reporting threshold.
    A second comment stated that the definition of the term 
``forwarded'' should simply restate the Commission's current 
``intermediary/conduit'' concept at 11 CFR 110.6. This comment 
suggested that for simplicity, the Commission should apply the existing 
standards in 11 CFR 110.6, but exclude the exception in 11 CFR 
110.6(b)(2)(i)(E) for any person who is expressly authorized by the 
candidate or the candidate's political committee to engage in 
fundraising, and who occupies a significant position in the candidate's 
campaign organization.
    The third comment stated that such a definition would be helpful, 
but argued that HLOGA Section 204 covers only contributions that are 
physically forwarded by a lobbyist to a reporting committee, rather 
than contributions forwarded electronically. In the absence of 
statutory language to the contrary, the comment argued, the Commission 
must adopt the approach set forth in the Section-by-Section Analysis, 
which refers to ``situation[s] where a lobbyist physically forwards 
contributions to the campaign.'' 153 Cong. Rec. S10709 (daily ed. 
August 2, 2007).
    The Commission concludes that a new definition of ``forwarded 
contribution'' would be helpful and that the new definition should 
appropriately encompass both the physical and the electronic forwarding 
of contributions.
    The Section-by-Section Analysis explains that the first type of 
bundled contribution ``covers the situation where a lobbyist physically 
forwards

[[Page 7292]]

contributions to the campaign.'' This type of bundled contribution is 
distinguished from situations in which contributions are made directly 
by a contributor to a reporting committee, but are raised by and 
credited to a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC.
    The Commission has long recognized that contributions may be made 
electronically. The Commission has also recognized that earmarked 
contributions may be forwarded electronically to the recipient 
candidate committee. See generally Advisory Opinion 1995-09 
(NewtWatch). Accordingly, the Commission has concluded that certain 
contributions should not fall outside the scope of HLOGA's reporting 
requirements simply because they were forwarded electronically. New 11 
CFR 104.22 thus requires disclosure of information about lobbyists/
registrants and lobbyist/registrant PACs that forward contributions 
either physically or electronically to a reporting committee if the 
amount of bundled contributions exceeds the reporting threshold in the 
covered period.
    Examples of contributions forwarded ``electronically'' include 
contributions received by a lobbyist/registrant in the form of checks 
and then deposited by the lobbyist/registrant in its account and 
transmitted by the lobbyist/registrant electronically to the reporting 
committee, and contributions received by a lobbyist/registrant PAC via 
credit card, debit card, or electronic check, including authorization 
to access credit or debit card funds or banking funds, and then 
transmitted by the lobbyist/registrant PAC in the form of a check or 
via credit card to the reporting committee.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The Commission notes that, in these examples, the lobbyist/
registrant also might have to file a conduit report pursuant to 11 
CFR 110.6. Conduits, intermediaries, and lobbyist/registrants and 
lobbyist/registrant PACs that forward bundled contributions are also 
subject to the rules in 11 CFR 102.8. Conduit or intermediary 
activities are additionally subject to disclosure by reporting 
committees under these final rules if the conduits or intermediaries 
are lobbyist/registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs and provide 
bundled contributions exceeding the reporting threshold within the 
covered period. Furthermore, these final rules do not make 
permissible any activity otherwise prohibited by the FECA and 
Commission regulations (e.g., making or facilitating contributions 
by prohibited sources). See, e.g., 2 U.S.C. 441b(a) and 11 CFR 
114.2(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(i) specifies that a bundled 
contribution means a contribution that is forwarded to the reporting 
committee by a person that the reporting committee ``knows to be 
forwarding such contribution on behalf of a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist registrant PAC.'' This provision covers such situations as 
when an employee or officer of a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC forwards a contribution to a reporting committee, and 
the reporting committee knows that the employee or officer forwarded 
the contributions on behalf of the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC.
    As noted below, the Commission believes that both the reporting 
committee and the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC have a 
convergent interest in knowing and having it made known that a 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC has raised certain 
contributions for the committee. If the reporting committee knows that 
the non-lobbyist intermediary is forwarding the checks on behalf of the 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, the reporting committee 
must report information about the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC on whose behalf the checks are forwarded, if the 
reporting threshold is met. The reporting requirement may not be 
avoided simply because the intermediary who forwarded the contribution 
was not a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC.
    For example, a lobbyist may ask a friend, colleague, employee, or 
courier service to deliver checks collected by the lobbyist to a 
reporting committee. If the reporting committee knows of that fact, for 
example, if told orally or by means of a transmittal letter, disclosure 
of the lobbyist-forwarded contributions cannot be avoided in this case 
simply because the lobbyist forwarded such contributions through a non-
lobbyist intermediary.
b. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii)--Crediting Contributions to Lobbyists/
Registrants and Their PACs
    The second type of ``bundled contribution'' in new 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(6) covers contributions received by the reporting committee 
from the contributors (rather than from a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC, as discussed in section III.A.6.a, above) that 
are credited by the reporting committee to a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC through records, designations or other means of 
recognizing that a certain amount of money has been raised by that 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC. 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(6)(ii).
i. Received and Credited
    The NPRM requested comments on whether the amount of contributions 
received or the amount of contributions credited should be included in 
the aggregation toward the reporting threshold.
    Two comments addressed this issue. One comment indicated a 
preference that the reporting committees be required to disclose the 
amount received, rather than the amount credited, to eliminate any 
discrepancies in the amounts that lobbyists/registrants and their PACs 
report they have raised for reporting committees and the amounts that 
the reporting committees know have or have not been raised. The other 
comment stated that both the amounts received and credited should 
determine the amount disclosed. This latter comment stated a belief 
that the reporting committee is in the best position to determine what 
credit to give and to whom. The comment noted that what matters under 
HLOGA is the amount of contributions that the reporting committee 
credits the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC for having 
raised.
    The Commission agrees with the latter comment. Bundled 
contributions that are forwarded to a reporting committee by a 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC must be reported 
regardless of whether the reporting committee provides any ``credit'' 
for them. In contrast, the focus of HLOGA's reporting requirement for 
contributions received directly from contributors is based upon the 
credit that a reporting committee gives to a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC for having raised the contribution. The 
Commission so concludes for the following reasons:
    (A) HLOGA defines ``bundled contribution'' as a contribution 
``received by the committee from a contributor or contributors, but 
credited by the committee or candidate involved * * * to the [lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC] through records, designations, 
or other means of recognizing that a certain amount of money has been 
raised by the [lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC].'' 2 
U.S.C. 434(i)(8)(A)(ii) (emphasis added). Thus, the statutory 
definition has two components: receipt from the contributor and credit 
given to the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC.
    (B) HLOGA's disclosure requirement is intended to make transparent 
the influence that lobbyists/registrants and lobbyist/registrant PACs 
might gain by raising contributions for reporting committees. Any such 
influence may be affected by the reporting committee's perception of 
the value of the lobbyist/registrant's or lobbyist/registrant PAC's 
fundraising efforts. Accordingly, the purpose behind HLOGA's disclosure

[[Page 7293]]

requirement is best served by requiring reporting committees to 
disclose the amount of credit that they give to lobbyist/registrants or 
lobbyist/registrant PACs for having raised contributions.
    (C) The Section-by-Section Analysis supports this interpretation. 
It states that the disclosure requirement would apply only if the 
reporting committee credits a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC with proceeds of a fundraising event that the lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC hosts. See 153 Cong. Rec. S10709 
(daily ed. August 2, 2007) (``An event hosted by a registered lobbyist 
may trigger the disclosure requirement if the committee credits the 
lobbyist with the proceeds of the fundraiser. * * *'') (emphasis 
added). The Section-by-Section Analysis also emphasizes that the 
reporting requirement depends on whether the committee gave credit to 
the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, as opposed to 
requiring a committee to report automatically the proceeds of any 
fundraising event held on the premises of a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC. Id. (``The disclosure requirement is not 
triggered by general solicitation of contributions where a registered 
lobbyist attends an event or an event is held on the premises of a 
registrant.'') Therefore, the Commission believes that the focus of 
HLOGA Section 204 is the credit provided by the reporting committee to 
the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC for having raised 
contributions.
    (D) Further, the Commission notes that Congress may have 
anticipated the possible discrepancy between the amount that a 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC may claim to have raised 
for a reporting committee, and the amount that the reporting committee 
reports as actually credited to a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC. Earlier versions of the Senate bill that eventually 
became HLOGA Section 204 would have placed the reporting obligation for 
contributions ``collected or arranged'' by a lobbyist or registrant 
solely on the lobbyist or registrant. S.1, 110th Cong. Sec.  212 (as 
passed by the Senate, Jan. 18, 2007). Because of concerns about the 
accuracy of the information that would be reported, however, a 
subsequent House bill, H.R. 2317, also would have required registered 
lobbyists to give notice to the recipients of these contributions 
before the lobbyists filed their reports. H.R. 2317, 110th Cong. Sec.  
2(a) (as passed by the House, July 31, 2007). The Committee Report for 
this bill explained the provision: ``[t]his notice enables the covered 
recipient to raise any questions with the lobbyist about the 
information, and to take any appropriate action, prior to the public 
filing of the information.'' H.R. Rep. 110-162, at 4 (May 21, 2007). As 
enacted, HLOGA addressed this concern by requiring the reporting 
committees themselves to disclose contributions forwarded by, or raised 
by and credited to, lobbyists. See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(1). In short, this 
evolution reflects the reality that simply because a lobbyist or 
registrant claims to have raised a specific amount for a reporting 
committee does not make it so. Instead, Congress anticipated that the 
reporting committees themselves would be in the best position to 
determine whether they had received contributions and credited the 
contributions to a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC.
    Accordingly, new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii) follows HLOGA, as 
explained in the Section-by-Section Analysis, in requiring that a 
contribution be both received by the reporting committee and credited 
to a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC to satisfy the 
definition of ``bundled contribution.'' See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(8)(A)(ii). 
Thus, for example, if a lobbyist merely tells a candidate that the 
lobbyist has raised $20,000 for the candidate's campaign, those 
contributions are not considered ``bundled contributions'' under 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(6)(ii) unless they have been both received and credited by 
the candidate or the reporting committee.
    The Commission emphasizes that any intentional misrepresentation or 
misreporting of the reporting committee's actual crediting of bundled 
contributions is a violation of this rule.
ii. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii)(A)--Records, Designations, or Other Means 
of Recognizing
    HLOGA Section 204 requires the disclosure of information about 
lobbyists/registrants and lobbyist/registrant PACs that are credited by 
a reporting committee, ``through records, designations or other means 
of recognizing,'' with having raised contributions in excess of the 
threshold amount for the reporting committee. 2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(8)(A)(ii).

A. Records

    HLOGA states that reporting committees may credit lobbyists/
registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs ``through records, 
designations, or other means of recognizing.'' 2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(8)(A)(ii). The NPRM requested commenters to submit examples of 
``records, designations or other means of recognizing'' that a 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC had raised contributions 
for a reporting committee. NPRM, 72 FR at 62603.
    The Commission received one comment addressing the ``records'' 
aspect of crediting. The comment observed that the proposed rule did 
not define the type of ``record'' that would trigger the reporting 
requirement and asked that the final rule indicate the level of 
specificity or certainty required for a ``record'' to constitute 
credit.
    The Commission has decided to draw from the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure to define ``records'' in new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii)(A). 
``Records'' means written evidence, which includes writings, charts, 
computer files, tables, spreadsheets, databases, or other data or data 
compilations stored in any medium from which information can be 
obtained. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii)(A); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 34. In 
sum, a ``record'' is any method that the reporting committee uses to 
retain information pertaining to the committee's crediting, and 
includes not just paper, but electronic, digital, audio, video, or any 
other format. The Commission notes that records include informal items 
such as hand-written notations on a business card.

B. Designations or Other Means of Recognizing

    The proposed rules in the NPRM would have defined ``designations or 
other means of recognizing'' to include ``titles [bestowed upon 
lobbyists/registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs] based on levels of 
fundraising, access to events reserved exclusively for those who 
generate a certain level of contributions, or similar benefits provided 
as a reward for successful fundraising.'' NPRM, 72 FR at 62603. The 
NPRM asked whether ``designations or other means of recognizing'' must 
be written and sought other examples of crediting through 
``designations or other means of recognizing.''
    Several comments addressed this issue. All of them asserted that 
the ``designation or other means of recognizing'' bundled contributions 
need not be written. Some comments argued that the standard should be 
one of knowledge by the candidate involved or by the reporting 
committee that the committee has received a certain amount of bundled 
contributions raised by a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant 
PAC, but others disagreed.
    One comment indicated that additional examples of ``designations 
and other means of recognizing'' bundled contributions could include 
(1) being the host or co-host of a

[[Page 7294]]

fundraising event; (2) using a lobbyist/registrant's or lobbyist/
registrant PAC's office or residence for a fundraising event; or (3) 
being on a steering committee in exchange for raising a certain amount 
of money. With respect to the first two suggested examples, the 
Commission notes that the Section-by-Section Analysis specifically 
states, ``[t]he disclosure requirement is not triggered * * * where * * 
* an event is held on the premises of a registrant. An event hosted by 
a registered lobbyist may trigger the disclosure requirement if the 
reporting committee credits the lobbyist with the proceeds of the 
fundraiser through record, designation, or other form of recognition. * 
* *'' 153 Cong. Rec. S10709 (daily ed. August 2, 2007) (emphasis 
added). Thus, the Section-by-Section Analysis indicated that the simple 
fact that a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC hosts a 
fundraiser or holds a fundraiser on its premises would not, by itself, 
trigger the reporting requirement.
    Two comments cited the Bush ``Pioneer/Ranger model,'' in which 
bundlers were given titles corresponding with the amounts of money 
raised, as an example of crediting. One comment also referred to the 
earmarking standard of ``implied or expressed, oral or written'' 
designation as analogous to the standard that the Commission should set 
for what type of designation would constitute crediting. See 11 CFR 
110.6(b)(1). One comment noted that crediting is not necessarily the 
same thing as keeping records.
    Consistent with the statutory imperative to provide for the 
broadest possible disclosure consistent with the law (2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(5)(D)), the Commission has determined that the phrase 
``designations, or other means of recognizing that a certain amount of 
money has been raised'' is to be construed broadly as encompassing 
benefits given by the reporting committee to a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC for raising a certain amount of contributions.
    The Section-by-Section Analysis provides ``honorary titles within 
the committee'' as an example of ``designations.'' 153 Cong. Rec. at 
S10709 (daily ed. August 2, 2007). The Commission has incorporated this 
concept in its regulations. Thus, designations include titles that the 
reporting committee gives to persons who have raised a certain amount 
of contributions. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii)(A)(1). The titles that 
various presidential campaigns have given to their fundraisers are 
examples of such designations. Titles, however, are only one example of 
a ``designation.''
    Similarly, the Commission interprets ``other means of recognizing 
that a certain amount of money has been raised'' as benefits that 
reporting committees use to credit lobbyist/registrants or lobbyist/
registrant PACs for having raised a certain amount of contributions, 
and not to include benefits given to such individuals or entities 
solely for any other reason. The example in the Section-by-Section 
Analysis is instructive: ``examples of such recognition include access 
to certain events reserved exclusively for those who generate a certain 
level of contributions or similar benefits provided by the committee as 
a reward for successful fundraising.'' 153 Cong. Rec. at S10709 (daily 
ed. August 2, 2007). Thus, if a reporting committee holds an event in 
recognition of its fundraisers, to which it invites only persons who 
raised at least $20,000, invitations to the event would be a means of 
recognizing that a ``certain amount of money has been raised'' (i.e., 
at least $20,000). 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii).
    Additionally, a candidate may credit a lobbyist by inviting the 
lobbyist to an event that is not exclusive to those who generate a 
certain level of contributions, so long as that particular invitation 
was extended in recognition of the lobbyist having raised a certain 
amount of contributions. In contrast, if, for example, an individual 
who happens to be a lobbyist, but who has not actually raised any money 
for the reporting committee, is invited to the event, then the 
invitation to that individual would not constitute crediting with 
respect to that individual (i.e., a means of recognizing that a certain 
amount of money has been raised by that individual). On the other hand, 
if a lobbyist who has raised contributions in excess of the reporting 
threshold is invited to an event in recognition of the reporting 
committee's fundraisers, the committee cannot avoid disclosing that 
lobbyist by claiming that the lobbyist was invited for some other 
reason.
    The Commission agrees with those comments that urged that neither 
designations nor ``other means of recognizing'' need be in writing. 2 
U.S.C. 434(i)(8)(A)(ii). While the inherent nature of ``records'' is 
that they be in writing, or ``recorded'' in some form, ``designations 
or other means of recognizing'' need not be. The example in the 
Section-by-Section Analysis of ``access to certain events reserved 
exclusively for those who generate a certain level of contributions or 
similar benefits provided by the committee as a reward for successful 
fundraising,'' is again instructive. 153 Cong. Rec. at S10709 (daily 
ed. August 2, 2007). Access to events may be memorialized in records 
(such as guest lists) but they will not necessarily be so.
    New 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii)(A) expands on the examples suggested in 
the Section-by-Section Analysis. Thus, ``other means of recognizing'' 
include tracking identifiers that the reporting committee assigns and 
that are included on contributions or contribution-related materials 
(for example, contributor response devices, cover letters, or Internet 
website solicitation pages) that may be used to maintain information 
about the amounts of contributions that a person raises. 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(6)(ii)(A)(2). Other ``means of recognizing'' also include 
access, including offers of attendance (invitations) and/or actual 
attendance, at events given to a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC by the reporting committee as a result of the lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC having raised a certain amount of 
contributions. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii)(A)(3). Another common means of 
recognizing those who bundle contributions are mementos, such as 
photographs with the candidate or autographed copies of books authored 
by the candidate, given by the reporting committee to persons who have 
raised a certain amount of contributions. 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(6)(ii)(A)(4).
    The fact that a reporting committee knows that a contribution was 
raised by a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC and credits 
the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC through some means 
of recognition is sufficient to satisfy this final type of credit. The 
examples listed in the new rule are illustrative, and are designed to 
give guidance, but do not constitute an exhaustive list. Committees may 
be creative in how they recognize their fundraisers, and the Commission 
has no interest in limiting or discouraging creative incentives that 
are consistent with the law.
    The Commission notes that some comments suggested that mere 
knowledge by a reporting committee that a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC has raised funds of a certain amount is enough 
to constitute credit. Although Congress could have enacted a provision 
in HLOGA to require reporting if a reporting committee simply ``knows 
or has reason to know'' that a contribution was raised by a lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, without requiring that the 
reporting committee credit a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant 
PAC for the contribution, neither

[[Page 7295]]

HLOGA as enacted, nor the Section-by-Section Analysis, suggested any 
intent to require reporting in that situation. In several instances 
similar to this, Congress has used a ``knows or has reason to know'' 
standard in sections of FECA, but did not do so here. See, e.g., 2 
U.S.C. 434(f)(2)(D) (requiring the reporting of names of candidates to 
be identified in an electioneering communication ``if known''); 2 
U.S.C. 434(i)(1) (requiring the reporting of information on each person 
``reasonably known'' to be a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant 
PAC); 2 U.S.C. 441a(f) (prohibiting candidates or political committees 
from ``knowingly'' accepting contributions in violation of FECA); and 2 
U.S.C. 441b(a) (prohibiting candidates or political committees from 
``knowingly'' accepting or receiving contributions from national banks, 
corporations, or labor organizations).
    Instead, HLOGA as enacted, and as confirmed by the Section-by-
Section Analysis, requires credit to be given by the reporting 
committee to a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC before a 
contribution received from a contributor is considered a ``bundled 
contribution.'' 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(8)(A)(ii); see also 153 Cong. Rec. 
S10709 (daily ed. August 2, 2007). Therefore, mere knowledge, in and of 
itself, is not enough. Rather, it is necessary for a reporting 
committee to credit through ``records, designations, or other means of 
recognizing that a certain amount of money has been raised'' before 
reporting is required.
iii. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii)(B)--The Candidate Involved
    HLOGA requires the disclosure of information about lobbyists/
registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs that are credited by a 
reporting committee or the ``candidate involved'' with the reporting 
committee as having raised a ``certain amount'' of contributions for 
the reporting committee. 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(8)(A)(ii). HLOGA does not 
define ``candidate involved.''
    The Section-by-Section Analysis defines the ``candidate involved'' 
for each of the three types of reporting committee (i.e., authorized 
committees of Federal candidates, leadership PACs and political party 
committees). First, the Section-by-Section Analysis defines the 
``candidate involved'' in an authorized committee as ``the candidate 
for whom the committee is the principal campaign committee.'' 153 Cong. 
Rec. S10709 (daily ed. August 2, 2007). This definition follows the 
definition of ``authorized committee'' in FECA, which states that an 
authorized committee is a political committee authorized by a candidate 
to receive contributions or make expenditures on behalf of the 
candidate. 2 U.S.C. 431(6); see also 11 CFR 100.5(f)(1). Second, the 
Section-by-Section Analysis indicates that the ``candidate involved'' 
in a leadership PAC is ``the candidate who directly or indirectly 
establishes, finances, maintains or controls the Leadership PAC,'' 
which tracks the definition of leadership PAC in HLOGA. See 2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(8)(B); 153 Cong. Rec. S10709 (daily ed. August 2, 2007). Last, 
the Section-by-Section Analysis also indicates that the ``candidate 
involved'' in a party committee is the chairman of the party committee. 
See 153 Cong. Rec. S10709 (daily ed. August 2, 2007).
    The proposed rules followed the definitions in the Section-by-
Section Analysis for authorized committees and leadership PACs, but did 
not include a definition of ``candidate involved'' in the context of a 
political party committee.
    The only comment that addressed this topic referred to the Section-
by-Section Analysis and suggested that the final rules include a 
definition of ``candidate involved'' with party committees, in addition 
to those proposed for authorized committees of Federal candidates and 
for leadership PACs.
    The Commission agrees with the comment that a definition of 
``candidate involved'' for all three types of reporting committees 
would provide useful additional guidance to the regulated community. 
Accordingly, new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii)(B) defines ``candidate 
involved'' in accordance with the Section-by-Section Analysis.
iv. Co-Hosting Fundraisers
    Another issue in the NPRM that several comments addressed was how a 
reporting committee should give credit to multiple lobbyists/
registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs that co-host fundraisers or 
raise funds for a candidate as a result of any coordinated effort.
    Although HLOGA Section 204 did not explicitly address co-hosted 
fundraisers, in a colloquy on the Senate floor, two Senators stated 
that there was concern that reporting committees would attempt to avoid 
the reporting requirements by dividing the total receipts of a 
fundraising event among many co-hosts on a prorated basis or another 
allocation method potentially designed to avoid disclosure. 153 Cong. 
Rec. S10699 (daily ed. August 2, 2007). To prevent this, one Senator 
stated that where two or more lobbyists/registrants or lobbyist/
registrant PACs are co-hosts of a fundraiser, then each lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC ``should be treated as providing 
the total amount raised at the event'' for the purposes of reaching the 
reporting threshold, and for the purposes of reporting ``bundled 
contributions'' under HLOGA Section 204. Id.
    The Commission has considered this colloquy in light of the text of 
HLOGA and the Section-by-Section Analysis, which describes bundled 
contributions as those where a ``committee or candidate credits a 
registered lobbyist for generating the contributions and where such 
credit is reflected in some form of record, designation or 
recognition.'' 153 Cong. Rec. S10709 (daily ed. August 2, 2007) 
(emphasis added). The Section-by-Section Analysis states that ``[a]n 
event hosted by a registered lobbyist may trigger the disclosure 
requirement if the committee credits the lobbyist with the proceeds of 
the fundraiser. * * *'' Id. (emphasis added).
    Three comments urged the Commission to promulgate regulations 
requiring the reporting committee in all instances to credit each of 
the hosts for the entire amount raised for purposes of bundling 
disclosure.
    By contrast, a fourth comment argued that crediting each host with 
the total amount raised would result in inaccurate and misleading 
reporting of the actual amount raised. This comment indicated a 
preference for an approach under which credit for the amount raised 
should be prorated among the fundraiser's co-hosting lobbyists/
registrants and lobbyist/registrant PACs. Other comments, however, 
disagreed, arguing that proration among a fundraiser's co-hosts would 
enable reporting committees to avoid reporting bundled contributions by 
increasing the number of co-hosts, such that when the total amount of 
contributions raised is divided among them, none of the co-hosts would 
be credited with raising more than the reporting threshold.
    Other comments supported the Section-by-Section Analysis. They 
asserted that the amount of funds a reporting committee actually 
credits of the funds raised at a fundraiser hosted by multiple 
lobbyists/registrants and/or lobbyist/registrant PACs is the amount 
that should be disclosed. One comment noted that the reporting 
committees know best who they credited for raising bundled 
contributions at a co-hosted fundraiser, and how much, and that there 
should not be a regulatory mandate requiring committees to give and 
report credit in a contrary manner. Moreover, the comment pointed out 
that an individual may be listed as a ``co-host'' of a fundraiser for 
many different

[[Page 7296]]

reasons unrelated to actual amounts raised from a particular event. 
Another comment noted that in many cases, to be on a hosting committee, 
a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC is required to raise a 
certain amount of contributions. The comment stated that if a co-host 
fails to raise the requisite amount, the reporting committee would not 
credit that co-host with having raised more than the co-host actually 
raised. The comment also pointed out that in other situations, where, 
for example, 25 members of a host committee each raise $3,000, the 
reporting committee would not credit each co-host with having raised 
the full $75,000.
    After considering the colloquy on the Senate floor, the Section-by-
Section Analysis, and the comments received, the Commission concludes 
that any determination of whether the reporting threshold is met, and 
how much must be reported, is controlled by (a) whether a reporting 
committee credits a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC for 
having raised contributions, and (b) how much the reporting committee 
credits the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC with having 
raised. Both the reporting committee and the fundraiser have 
independent incentives to ensure that credit for funds raised is 
properly attributed--on the one hand, the reporting committee is 
motivated to provide appropriate credit in an effort to encourage the 
fundraiser to continue raising funds and, on the other hand, the 
fundraiser is motivated to ensure that the fundraiser is receiving the 
proper credit for any funds raised. As noted above, the Commission 
received testimony that committees, in order to have effective 
fundraising programs, need to know and do know who is raising funds for 
them and how much those persons are raising. The Commission believes 
that this dual motivation will result in the accurate reporting of 
actual credit given.
    Requiring a reporting committee to credit the entire amount raised 
at a fundraiser to each lobbyist/registrant and lobbyist/registrant PAC 
co-host could be confusing and could lead to the compelled disclosure 
of potentially misleading information. The requirement could be 
confusing, because it would involve the creation of two separate and 
potentially inconsistent definitions of crediting: One to apply in 
every situation other than co-hosted fundraising events, and the other 
to apply only in situations involving co-hosted fundraising events. 
Under the non-co-host definition, a reporting committee would disclose 
information about a lobbyist/registrant only if the reporting committee 
actually credits the lobbyist/registrant with having raised 
contributions exceeding the threshold amount during the covered period. 
Under the co-host definition, by contrast, a reporting committee would 
disclose information about a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant 
PAC co-host regardless of whether or how much the reporting committee 
actually credits the co-host for having raised. Such a result could 
lead to further confusion as to who is raising contributions, and how 
much, for reporting committees.
    As noted above, the Section-by-Section Analysis provides that 
``[a]n event hosted by a registered lobbyist may trigger the disclosure 
requirement if the [reporting] committee credits the lobbyist with the 
proceeds of the fundraiser * * * '' 153 Cong. Rec. S10709 (daily ed. 
August 2, 2007) (emphasis added). The Commission reads this statement 
as an expression of legislative intent to apply not only to lobbyists 
hosting fundraising events or functions, but also to lobbyists that co-
hosts the events or functions, regardless of whether such events or 
functions are formal or informal.
    Finally, as discussed below, requiring a reporting committee to 
credit the entire amount raised at a fundraiser to each lobbyist/
registrant and lobbyist/registrant PAC co-host could be potentially 
misleading. It would require reporting committees to report not only 
that they credited lobbyist/registrant and lobbyist/registrant PAC co-
hosts for raising more money than the co-hosts might actually have 
raised, but also that they gave the co-hosts credit when, in fact, 
credit was not given. For example, if a group of individuals consisting 
of lobbyists and non-lobbyists co-host a fundraiser for a candidate, 
the candidate's committee would have to report that each of the 
lobbyists raised the entire amount, without regard to how much the 
reporting committee credited them for having raised, without regard to 
how much they might actually have raised, and without regard to the 
non-lobbyist co-hosts. This could result in committees reporting 
information that they know to be untrue. One comment stated that 
treasurers would be reluctant to sign such reports.
    The Commission similarly rejected the suggestion that it require 
credit for the entire amount of contributions raised at a co-hosted 
fundraising event to be pro-rated among all of the co-hosting 
lobbyists/registrants and lobbyist/registrant PACs. Not only would such 
a requirement enable reporting committees to avoid the reporting 
threshold by increasing the number of co-hosts, as noted by several 
comments, but it would also raise the same potential for confusion and 
inaccuracy as would requiring the full amount raised to be credited to 
each co-host.
    Thus, the Commission has decided not to adopt either the suggestion 
that the total proceeds of a fundraising event be required to be 
prorated among all the co-hosts, or the suggestion that the total 
proceeds of any event be required to be credited to each of the co-
hosts. Instead, co-hosted events will be treated like any other 
fundraising activity: Committees must report the actual amounts raised 
by and credited to lobbyist/registrants and lobbyist/registrant PACs.
    Accordingly, the Commission concludes that reporting committees are 
in the best position to determine the amount of contributions raised by 
lobbyists/registrants and their PACs from co-hosted fundraisers, based 
on the reporting committees' recognition of the amount each person 
actually raised. This conclusion is consistent with both the language 
of the statute and the Section-by-Section Analysis.
    Contributions raised as the result of a fundraising event hosted by 
one or more lobbyist/registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs will 
follow the general rule in new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(ii), which requires 
that a contribution be both received by the reporting committee and 
credited to a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC to satisfy 
the definition of ``bundled contribution.'' The reporting committee 
must disclose any and all bundled contributions received as the result 
of a fundraiser that are credited to a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC so long as the reporting threshold has been exceeded for 
that lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC during the relevant 
covered period. The following are examples that assume a $16,000 
reporting threshold: \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ For 2009, the applicable reporting threshold is $16,000. 
Although HLOGA Section 204 set the initial reporting threshold at 
$15,000, 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(3)(A), this number will be indexed for 
inflation annually. 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(3)(B); 11 CFR 104.22(g).

    Example 1. A fundraising event is co-hosted by Lobbyists A, B 
and C. The event generates $20,000 in contributions. The reporting 
committee believes that Lobbyist A raised the entire $20,000 and 
thus credits Lobbyist A with the entire $20,000 raised at the event, 
and does not credit Lobbyists B or C. The reporting committee must 
disclose the $20,000 that has been credited to Lobbyist A. The 
reporting committee need not disclose any information regarding 
Lobbyists B and C, because neither Lobbyist B nor C has been 
credited with any bundled contributions.

[[Page 7297]]

    Example 2. A fundraising event is co-hosted by Lobbyist A and 
Lobbyist B, as well as three non-lobbyist hosts. The event generates 
$20,000 in contributions. The reporting committee gives each host 
credit for raising $20,000. The reporting committee must disclose 
the $20,000 of bundled contributions that has been credited to 
Lobbyist A and also report the $20,000 of bundled contributions that 
has been credited to Lobbyist B because the reporting committee has 
credited the full amount to each lobbyist.\14\ The reporting 
committee may, if it chooses, include a memo entry in the space 
provided on FEC Form 3L to indicate that, although only a total of 
$20,000 was raised at the event, that full $20,000 was credited to 
each of the co-hosts, or any other information that the reporting 
committee wishes to include.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ The reporting committee would report having received only 
$20,000 on FEC Form 3 and would provide itemized information on 
Schedule A related to the $20,000 of received contributions. It is 
only the credit that is reported twice on FEC Form 3L (see section 
III-B below) and this would be a direct result of the reporting 
committee having given the full $20,000 credit to two different 
lobbyists. A reporting committee may give credit to all co-hosts for 
the full amount raised, but is not required to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Example 3. A fundraising dinner is co-hosted by Lobbyist A and 
Lobbyist B, as well as three non-lobbyist hosts. Each host takes 
responsibility for filling eight seats at $500 a seat. The 
fundraiser generates $20,000 in contributions from non-hosts, and 
the reporting committee credits each host with generating $4,000 in 
contributions. The reporting committee must disclose the $4,000 of 
bundled contributions that has been credited to Lobbyist A, if the 
reporting committee also has credited Lobbyist A with more than 
$12,000 of other bundled contributions during the relevant covered 
period, thereby causing Lobbyist A to surpass the $16,000 reporting 
threshold. This same analysis would apply for Lobbyist B.
    Example 4. A fundraising event is co-hosted by Lobbyist A and 
Lobbyist B, as well as three non-lobbyist hosts. The fundraiser 
generates $21,000 in contributions and the reporting committee knows 
that Lobbyist A raised $17,000 of the total. The committee credits 
Lobbyist A with generating $17,000 of the contributions and credits 
Lobbyist B, as well as the three non-lobbyist hosts as having 
generated $1,000 each. The reporting committee must disclose the 
$17,000 of bundled contributions that has been credited to Lobbyist 
A because this amount is in excess of the $16,000 reporting 
threshold. The reporting committee must also disclose the $1,000 in 
bundled contributions that has been credited to Lobbyist B if the 
reporting committee also has credited Lobbyist B with more than 
$15,000 of other bundled contributions during the relevant covered 
period, thereby causing Lobbyist B to surpass the $16,000 reporting 
threshold.
    Example 5. A fundraising event is co-hosted by Lobbyist A and 
Lobbyist B, as well as three non-lobbyist hosts. The fundraiser 
generates $20,000 in contributions and the reporting committee knows 
that Lobbyist A raised $17,000 of the total and that one of the non-
lobbyist hosts raised the remaining $3,000. The Committee credits 
Lobbyist A with generating $17,000 of the contributions. The 
reporting committee must disclose the $17,000 of bundled 
contributions that has been credited to Lobbyist A because $17,000 
is in excess of the $16,000 reporting threshold. The reporting 
committee need not disclose any information regarding Lobbyist B 
because Lobbyist B is not responsible for raising any of the $20,000 
raised at the fundraiser and Lobbyist B has not been credited with 
any bundled contributions.

    The Commission notes that the examples and above discussion do not 
apply to bundled contributions that are forwarded by lobbyists/
registrants or lobbyist/registrant PACs at co-hosted fundraisers. 
Credit is not a consideration in the case of forwarded contributions. 
Accordingly, contributions forwarded by a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC at a co-hosted fundraiser count as 
contributions bundled by the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant 
PAC that forwarded the contributions, regardless of whether the 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC is a co-host of the 
fundraiser or an attendee.
    For example, at a fundraiser co-hosted by Lobbyist A and several 
non-lobbyist hosts, Lobbyist B (who is not a co-host of the fundraiser) 
approaches the candidate for whom funds are being raised and hands the 
candidate $20,000 in contributions from other individuals. Because 
these are contributions that have been ``forwarded'' by Lobbyist B, the 
reporting committee must disclose the $20,000 of bundled contributions 
that were forwarded by Lobbyist B irrespective of any amount of credit 
given to Lobbyist B.
    If the reporting committee also credits Lobbyist A, a co-host of 
the fundraiser, $20,000 for having raised the contributions forwarded 
by Lobbyist B (because the contributions were received during the 
fundraising event), the reporting committee must then also disclose 
that $20,000 of bundled contributions has been credited to Lobbyist A. 
Similar to ``Example 2'' above, even though the reporting committee 
must disclose the entire $20,000 as having been forwarded by Lobbyist 
B, the reporting committee must also report that same $20,000 of 
bundled contributions has been credited to Lobbyist A (again, assuming 
it has credited Lobbyist A for that amount).
v. Crediting a Prohibited Source
    Finally, the NPRM requested comments on whether a lobbyist/
registrant that is otherwise prohibited from making or facilitating 
contributions can be credited by a reporting committee with having 
raised contributions. Such prohibitions apply to national banks, 
corporations, labor organizations, foreign nationals, and Federal 
government contractors. See 2 U.S.C. 441b, 441(c), 441(e); 11 CFR 
110.6(b)(2)(ii), 110.20, 114.2, 115.2.
    Three comments argued that registrants that are prohibited sources 
of contributions should not be allowed to be credited with having 
raised contributions. In contrast to these three comments, other 
comments stated that, while certain entities are prohibited from making 
contributions, these entities must be reported if, through their 
agents, they forward contributions to a reporting committee or are 
credited with raising contributions for a reporting committee above the 
reporting threshold. This comment further stated that Congress was well 
aware that many entities that register under the LDA are, in fact, 
prohibited sources of contributions under FECA, and that these entities 
may nonetheless be credited with having raised contributions.
    The Commission recognizes that under the LDA, registrants include 
lobbying organizations that would be prohibited sources of 
contributions under FECA. Congress is presumed to be aware of existing 
law when it passes legislation. See Miles v. Apex Marine Corp., 498 
U.S. 19, 32 (1990). Thus, Congress's failure to exempt disclosure about 
registrants who would be prohibited sources under FECA if they are 
credited with raising contributions suggests that Congress intended 
information about them to be reported.
    Accordingly, these final rules operate independently of the 
prohibitions in FECA and Commission regulations on certain entities 
making and facilitating contributions and acting as conduits or 
intermediaries. See, e.g., 2 U.S.C. 441b(a); 11 CFR 114.2(f); 11 CFR 
110.6(b)(2)(ii). The concept of ``credit'' is distinct from making, 
facilitating, or serving as a conduit or intermediary for, 
contributions. A registrant that is a corporation, for example, would 
be prohibited from facilitating the making of contributions by persons 
outside of the corporation's restricted class. But if a reporting 
committee nonetheless credits the corporation for having raised 
contributions received by that reporting committee, and the amount of 
contributions exceeds the reporting threshold in a covered period, 
information about the corporate registrant must be reported.
    The Commission emphasizes that the prohibitions in FECA and 
Commission regulations are not affected by this

[[Page 7298]]

rulemaking and continue to apply. The Commission cautions reporting 
committees against confusing the giving of credit to a registrant that 
is a prohibited source, which is permissible and may be reportable, 
with actually accepting contributions from, or that have been forwarded 
by, a prohibited source, which is not permissible.
c. 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(iii)--Bundled Contributions Do Not Include 
Contributions From Personal Funds of Lobbyists/Registrants or Their 
Spouses
    New 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(iii) provides that bundled contributions do 
not include contributions made by a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC from three sources: (1) The personal funds of the 
lobbyist/registrant who forwards or is credited with raising 
contributions; (2) the personal funds of that person's spouse; and (3) 
contributions made by lobbyist/registrant PACs. This provision is 
consistent with HLOGA, which excludes contributions made to the 
reporting committee by the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant's 
spouse from counting towards the reporting threshold. See 2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(3)(A).
    The final rule at new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)(iii) is nearly identical 
to the proposed rule, on which the Commission received no comments. The 
only change from the proposed rule is the application of the rule to 
contributions made by lobbyist/registrant PACs. New 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(6)(iii) extends this exclusion to contributions made by 
lobbyist/registrant PACs to reflect the fact that lobbyist/registrant 
PACs, like individuals, may make contributions under FECA in their own 
right, and the contributions count against the lobbyist/registrant 
PACs' contribution limits. Contributions made by lobbyist/registrant 
PACs from committee funds are not bundled contributions, just as 
contributions made by individual lobbyists from their personal funds 
are not bundled contributions. Therefore, including contributions by 
lobbyist/registrant PACs in the exception in new 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(6)(iii) is consistent with HLOGA Section 204.
    Unlike contributions made by a lobbyist/registrant PAC, or from the 
personal funds of a lobbyist/registrant or spouse, bundled 
contributions forwarded by a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant 
PAC will not affect the lobbyist/registrant's or lobbyist/registrant 
PAC's contribution limits, so long as the lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC does not exercise any direction or control over 
the bundled contributions. This result is consistent with the 
Commission's rule governing earmarked contributions to candidate 
committees through conduits and intermediaries. See 11 CFR 110.6(d).

B. 11 CFR 104.22(b)--Reporting Requirement for Reporting Committees

    New 11 CFR 104.22(b) implements HLOGA's reporting provisions by 
requiring reporting committees to disclose certain information on a new 
form, FEC Form 3L.
1. 11 CFR 104.22(b)(1)--FEC Form 3L
    HLOGA Section 204 requires reporting committees to disclose certain 
information about each person reasonably known by the reporting 
committee to be a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC that 
``provided 2 or more bundled contributions'' aggregating in excess of 
the reporting threshold to the reporting committee during the covered 
period. See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(1). New 11 CFR 104.22(b)(1) implements this 
requirement by requiring reporting committees to file FEC Form 3L, on 
which reporting committees must disclose the name and address of the 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, the employer of the 
lobbyist/registrant (for individual lobbyists/registrants), and the 
aggregate amount of bundled contributions provided by the lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC during the covered period. Cf. 2 
U.S.C. 434(i)(1).
    Accordingly, for each covered period, a reporting committee must 
disclose information about each lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC that provided the committee with ``[two] or more bundled 
contributions'' aggregating in excess of the reporting threshold during 
the covered period, regardless of whether those contributions consist 
of (1) only ``forwarded'' contributions, (2) only ``received and 
credited'' contributions, or (3) some combination of the two types of 
bundled contributions, and regardless of whether those contributions 
were forwarded or received either (1) one-by-one during the covered 
period or (2) all at once.
    The final rule requires the reporting committee to disclose the 
aggregate amount of bundled contributions ``forwarded by or received 
and credited to,'' rather than the amount ``provided by,'' each 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC as was proposed in the 
NPRM. This change was made to enhance precision and clarity and is not 
a substantive change. Otherwise, the provisions are the same as those 
in the proposed rule. The Commission received no comments on the 
proposed provision.
2. Bundled Contributions That are Returned or Refunded
i. Returned Contributions
    If a bundled contribution is not deposited and is, instead, 
returned pursuant to 11 CFR 103.3(a) and (b), 110.1(b)(3)(i), 
110.2(b)(3)(i), or 110.4(c)(2), then it does not aggregate toward the 
reporting threshold for disclosure of bundled contributions and it does 
not have to be reported on the reporting committee's Form 3L.
ii. Refunded Contributions
    If a bundled contribution is received, deposited, and later 
refunded pursuant to 11 CFR 102.9(e), 103.3(b)(3), 110.1(b)(3)(i) or 
110.2(b)(3)(i), or for any other reason, then the bundled contribution 
does aggregate toward the reporting threshold for the covered period in 
which it was received. Accordingly, it must be reported on the 
reporting committee's Form 3L if the reporting threshold is exceeded 
for that covered period. See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(1); 11 CFR 104.22(b)(1). 
If the receipt of the bundled contribution is reported on Form 3L, then 
the refund of the bundled contribution should also be reported on Form 
3L for the covered period in which the refund occurred.
3. 11 CFR104.22(b)(2)--Determining Whether a Person is Reasonably Known 
to be a Lobbyist/Registrant or Lobbyist/Registrant PAC
    HLOGA Section 204 requires the disclosure of information about a 
person who forwards, or who is credited with having raised, two or more 
bundled contributions aggregating in excess of the reporting threshold 
during the covered period if the person is ``reasonably known by the 
[reporting] committee to be'' a lobbyist/registrant or a lobbyist/
registrant PAC. 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(1). HLOGA also requires the Commission 
to ``provide guidance to [reporting] committees with respect to whether 
a person is reasonably known by a committee to be'' a lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC. 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(5)(B). In so 
doing, the Commission is to include a ``requirement that [reporting] 
committees consult the websites maintained by the Secretary of the 
Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives containing 
information filed pursuant to the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995.'' 2 
U.S.C. 434(i)(5)(B).
    The Commission proposed 11 CFR 104.22(b)(2) to provide guidance 
with respect to how reporting committees

[[Page 7299]]

would comply with these requirements. Specifically, under the proposed 
rule, reporting committees would have had to consult the websites 
maintained by the Clerk of the House of Representatives, the Secretary 
of the Senate, and the Federal Election Commission in order to 
determine whether a person is identified on a filing under the LDA or 
FECA as a registrant, a lobbyist, or a political committee established 
or controlled by a registrant or lobbyist. The NPRM requested 
suggestions as to other sources that reporting committees might be 
required to check to determine whether a contributor is a lobbyist/
registrant or a lobbyist/registrant PAC.
    The Commission received two comments in response, both supporting 
the proposed rule. One comment also recommended amending the proposed 
rule to provide a safe harbor, such that a reporting committee will be 
deemed to have complied with the regulation if it relies on the 
websites for purposes of determining whether a person is a lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC. See discussion below of section 
104.22(b)(2)(ii).
    Consistent with the proposed rule, the final rule at 11 CFR 
104.22(b)(2)(i) requires reporting committees to consult the House, 
Senate and Commission websites to determine if a person is a lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC. If a person is listed on any of 
these websites as a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, 
then the person is ``reasonably known to be'' a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC, and information about the person is subject to 
the reporting requirement of 11 CFR 104.22(b).
    The House and Senate Web sites identify registered lobbyists and 
registrants. The websites also list political committees disclosed as 
being established or controlled by lobbyists/registrants on their semi-
annual reports of contributions to candidates and Federal officeholders 
and donations to related entities. These political committees are 
``lobbyist/registrant PACs'' under new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4)(i). To 
ensure that reporting committees have the most up-to-date information 
available about lobbyist/registrant PACs, and to provide information 
about lobbyist/registrant PACs that are unable to ascertain from the 
Secretary of the Senate or Clerk of the House of Representatives 
whether they are established or controlled by a lobbyist/registrant, 
but which meet the Commission's additional ``established or 
controlled'' criteria under 11 CFR 104.22(a)(4)(ii), these final rules 
require reporting committees to check the Commission's Web site as 
well. Any political committee that is ``established or controlled'' by 
a lobbyist/registrant must identify itself as such on its Statement of 
Organization (FEC Form 1), which will be posted on the Commission's 
website. See 11 CFR 104.22(c), discussed below.
    Each reporting committee must consult the House, Senate, and 
Commission websites ``in a manner reasonably calculated to find the 
name of each person who is a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant 
PAC.'' 11 CFR 104.22(b)(2)(i). The Commission recognizes that reporting 
committees that have exercised due diligence in searching House, 
Senate, and Commission Web sites must be able to rely on the results of 
their searches. Under new 11 CFR 104.22(b)(2)(i), a reporting committee 
will not be deemed to have ``reasonably known'' about the status of a 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC whose name the committee 
did not find in searching the House, Senate, and Commission Web sites, 
so long as the reporting committee performs its searches in a manner 
reasonably calculated to find the name of each lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC listed on the Web sites.
    New 11 CFR 104.22(b)(2)(ii) provides that a computer printout or 
screen capture showing the absence of the person's name on the House, 
Senate, or Commission Web sites on the date in question, may be used to 
demonstrate that the reporting committee consulted the required Web 
sites in a manner reasonably calculated to find the name of each person 
who is a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, and did not 
find the name of the person in question. This provision allows 
reporting committees to rely on the results of website searches, 
provided that the printout shows that the search history utilized by 
the reporting committee to verify that the search was performed in a 
manner reasonably calculated to find the name of the person in 
question, as discussed above. Such a computer printout or screen 
capture constitutes conclusive evidence that the reporting committee 
has consulted the websites and not found the name of the person sought. 
Accordingly, except as described below, such evidence demonstrates that 
a person was not reasonably known by the reporting committee to be a 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC for the purposes of 11 
CFR 104.22(b)(1). A reporting committee also may provide other credible 
evidence to show that it has consulted the websites in compliance with 
11 CFR 104.22(b)(2)(i).
    Notwithstanding new 11 CFR 104.22(b)(2)(ii), a reporting committee 
is not entitled to rely on the results of a website search if the 
reporting committee knows that the person who forwarded or is credited 
with raising contributions is a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC. New 11 CFR 104.22(b)(iii) provides that a reporting 
committee is required to report bundled contributions forwarded by or 
received and credited to a person that the reporting committee actually 
knows is a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC as defined in 
11 CFR 104.22(a)(2) or (a)(3), even if the reporting committee 
consulted the Web sites in accordance with 11 CFR 104.22(b)(2)(i) and 
(2)(ii), and did not find the person's name on any of the Web sites. A 
reporting committee is deemed to have actual knowledge if the candidate 
involved, the treasurer of the reporting committee, or any members of 
the reporting committee's staff who are responsible for verifying the 
accuracy of Form 3L have actual knowledge that the person who forwarded 
or is credited with raising contributions is required to be listed as a 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC.

C. 11 CFR 104.22(c)--Lobbyist/Registrant PAC Reporting Requirements

    Prior to HLOGA, the Commission required political committees to 
identify themselves as only one type of political committee on their 
Statements of Organization. See FEC Form 1 Statement of Organization, 
Question 5 (``Type of Committee'').
    The NPRM sought comments on how, going forward, an organization 
that is both an SSF and a ``lobbyist/registrant PAC'' should identify 
itself on its Statement of Organization, and whether one type of 
registration should control or whether political committees should 
identify themselves as both types. The Commission received no comments 
on this issue.
    To promote the greatest disclosure and to accommodate entities that 
qualify as more than one type of political committee, the Commission is 
revising FEC Form 1 to make it possible for committees to identify 
themselves as more than one type of political committee. Under new 11 
CFR 104.22(c), all new leadership PACs and lobbyist/registrant PACs 
that register with the Commission after the effective date of this rule 
(30 days after publication in the Federal Register) must check all 
appropriate boxes on FEC Form 1, in accordance with 11 CFR 102.2(a)(1). 
See 11 CFR 100.5(e)(6) (definition of leadership PAC) and 11 CFR 
104.22(a)(3) (definition of lobbyist/registrant PAC). Leadership PACs 
and lobbyist/registrant PACs already

[[Page 7300]]

registered with the Commission must amend their FEC Form 1 in 
accordance with 11 CFR 102.2(a)(2) no later than ten days after the 
effective date of this rule (ten days after the thirty-day period from 
the date of publication of these rules in the Federal Register).

D. 11 CFR 104.22(d)--Where to File

    New section 104.22(d) requires reporting committees to file FEC 
Form 3L in accordance with 11 CFR Part 105. Under 11 CFR Part 105, 
authorized committees of candidates for the House of Representatives, 
the principal campaign committees of presidential candidates, and any 
other political committees that support such candidates must file 
reports with the Commission. See 11 CFR 105.1, 105.3 and 105.4. 
Authorized committees of candidates for the Senate and any other 
political committees that support only Senate candidates must file 
their reports with the Secretary of the Senate. See 11 CFR 105.2. The 
Commission requested but received no comments on this provision in the 
NPRM.

E. 11 CFR 104.22(e)--When to File

    Under HLOGA Section 204, the first report required to be filed by a 
reporting committee under 2 U.S.C. 434 and 11 CFR Part 104.5 after each 
covered period must set forth the name, address, and employer of each 
person reasonably known by the committee to be a lobbyist/registrant or 
lobbyist/registrant PAC who provided two or more bundled contributions 
to the reporting committee in an aggregate amount greater than the 
threshold amount during the reporting period. See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(1).
    New 11 CFR 104.22(e) implements this provision of HLOGA. It 
provides that reporting committees must file Form 3L with the first 
campaign finance report that they file under 11 CFR 104.5 following the 
end of each covered period.
    New 11 CFR 104.22(e) mirrors the proposed rule, on which the 
Commission requested comments in the NPRM. No comments addressed this 
section of the proposed rule specifically, although many did comment on 
the related ``covered period'' definition.
    As discussed above, new 11 CFR 104.22(a)(5) defines the term 
``covered period'' as the semi-annual periods of January 1 through June 
30 and July 1 through December 31, and as the periods that coincide 
with a reporting committee's monthly or quarterly campaign finance 
reporting periods under 11 CFR 104.5. Accordingly, reporting committees 
must file Form 3L to disclose information about any lobbyist/registrant 
or lobbyist/registrant PAC that forwards, or is credited by the 
reporting committee for having raised, bundled contributions that 
aggregate in excess of the reporting threshold semi-annually and at the 
end of each reporting period under 2 U.S.C. 434 and 11 CFR 104.5.
    When a reporting committee is required to file pre- and post-
election reports under 2 U.S.C. 434 and 11 CFR 104.5, each of those 
reporting periods constitutes a new covered period. Accordingly, the 
reporting committee must also file FEC Form 3L for those periods if it 
receives bundled contributions in excess of the reporting threshold 
during those periods. Similarly, when a reporting committee is required 
to file reports in connection with special elections, under 11 CFR 
104.5(h), or runoff elections, each of those reporting periods 
constitutes a new covered period, and the reporting committee must file 
FEC Form 3L if it receives bundled contributions in excess of the 
reporting threshold during those periods.

F. 11 CFR 104.22(f)--Recordkeeping

    Commission regulations implement certain statutory recordkeeping 
requirements that also apply to certain bundled contributions. For 
example, political committees must keep a record and account of each 
contribution exceeding $50 for three years after filing the report to 
which the record or account relates. See 2 U.S.C. 432(c)(2) and (d); 11 
CFR 102.9(a) and (c). In addition, any person who receives and forwards 
contributions to any political committee must also forward certain 
information about the original contributor. See 2 U.S.C. 432(c) and 
441a(a)(8); 11 CFR 102.8(c). Any authorized committee that receives 
contributions forwarded by a ``conduit'' or ``intermediary'' must also 
maintain records regarding the information forwarded with the 
contributions by the conduit or intermediary. See 11 CFR 110.6(c) and 
102.9(c).
    New 11 CFR 104.22(f) refers to the existing recordkeeping 
requirements in Commission regulations at 11 CFR 102.8, 102.9 and 
110.6. The new provisions also require reporting committees to maintain 
for three years after filing a report, records of any bundled 
contributions forwarded by or received and credited to a lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC that aggregate in excess of the 
reporting threshold for any covered period. The rule requires reporting 
committees to maintain records that document the name and address of 
the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, the employer of the 
lobbyist/registrant (if an individual), and the aggregate amount of 
bundled contributions forwarded by or received and credited to each 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC by the reporting 
committee during the covered period.
    The rule requires only the maintenance of documentation with 
respect to the matters required to be reported, which shall provide in 
sufficient detail the necessary information and data from which the 
filed reports may be verified, explained, clarified, and checked for 
accuracy and completeness. If a committee is not required to file such 
a report because it has not received any contributions meeting the 
definition of ``bundled contributions'' under this section, then the 
new recordkeeping provision does not apply. Additionally, the new 
recordkeeping provision does not require reporting committees to create 
records the committee would not otherwise have created under its usual 
fundraising and accounting practices. These provisions are similar to 
the provisions in proposed 11 CFR 104.22(e), on which the Commission 
received no comments.

G. 11 CFR 104.22(g) and 110.17(e)(2) and (f)--Price Index Increase

    New 11 CFR 104.22(g) requires that the disclosure threshold for 
reporting bundled contributions be indexed by applying a price index 
increase similar to the price index increase applied to contribution 
limitations in FECA and Commission regulations. These final rules also 
add a cross-reference to 11 CFR 104.22(g) in 11 CFR 110.17(e)(2) and 
(f), which governs the price index increases for certain contribution 
and expenditure limitations under FECA.
1. 11 CFR 104.22(g)--Price Index Increase
    HLOGA Section 204 requires that the reporting threshold be indexed 
for inflation annually, using the Consumer Price Index as verified by 
the Secretary of Labor, with 2006 as the ``base period.'' See 2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(3)(B). New 11 CFR 104.22(g) implements this provision by 
requiring that the initial $15,000 disclosure threshold be indexed in 
the same manner as certain contribution limits under FECA and 
Commission regulations. See 2 U.S.C. 441a(c) and 11 CFR 110.17. The 
Commission has placed this provision in new 11 CFR 104.22 rather than 
in 11 CFR 110.17, which contains similar indexing provisions, because 
the dollar amount here is a threshold for disclosure, rather than the 
contribution

[[Page 7301]]

and expenditure limits covered under 11 CFR Part 110.
    New 11 CFR 104.22(g) is the same as the one proposed by the 
Commission in the NPRM. The Commission requested but received no 
comments on it.
    The NPRM also requested but received no comments on the timing of 
the application of the indexing for inflation requirement. HLOGA 
Section 204 provides that the indexing requirement ``shall apply'' to 
the reporting threshold ``[i]n any calendar year after 2007.'' 2 U.S.C. 
434(i)(3)(B). HLOGA also provides, however, that 2 U.S.C. 434(i) will 
go into effect ``with respect to reports filed * * * after the 
expiration of the 3-month period which begins on the date that the 
regulations required to be promulgated by the Commission [under new 2 
U.S.C. 434(i)] become final.'' Pub. L. No. 110-81, sec. 204(b), 121 
Stat. 735 at 746 (2007). Given that these rules are expected to go into 
effect in March 2009, the initial $15,000 reporting threshold provided 
for in HLOGA Section 204 will be indexed for 2009. The Commission will 
publish a notice of the 2009 reporting threshold in the Federal 
Register and on the Commission's Web site in accordance with new 11 CFR 
110.17(e)(2), discussed below.
2. 11 CFR 110.17(e)(2) and 110.17(f)--Price Index Increase
    Current 11 CFR 110.17 governs the price index increases for certain 
contribution and expenditure limitations, as well as the publication of 
those limitations on a biennial basis. While the bundling disclosure 
dollar threshold is not a contribution or expenditure limit, it is 
indexed for inflation on an annual basis, in the same manner as the 
limitations in 11 CFR 110.17 are indexed biennially. The Commission 
concluded that it would be helpful to the regulated community to place 
a cross-reference in 11 CFR 110.17 to the indexing provision in new 11 
CFR 104.22(f). Accordingly, the Commission is adding a cross-reference 
in new 11 CFR 110.17(f) to new 11 CFR 104.22(g). Additionally, as an 
aid to providing the new annual threshold to the regulated community, 
the Commission has added new 110.17(e)(2), requiring the lobbyist/
registrant bundling threshold to be published in the Federal Register 
annually and posted on the Commission's Web site.

H. Application of Rule to In-Kind Contributions

    The NPRM requested comments on whether the new rules should apply 
to in-kind contributions as well as monetary contributions. No comments 
addressed this issue.
    HLOGA uses the term ``contributions.'' See 2 U.S.C. 434(i)(1). FECA 
and Commission regulations define ``contributions'' as including in-
kind contributions. See 2 U.S.C. 431(8)(A)(i) and 11 CFR 100.51(a), 
100.52, 100.54, 100.56, 109.21. Nothing in HLOGA or its legislative 
history suggests that ``contributions'' is intended to have a different 
meaning from that already established in FECA and Commission 
regulations. Thus, the Commission determined that these rules apply to 
both in-kind and monetary contributions. For example, if a lobbyist/
registrant asked several contributors to send monetary contributions to 
a reporting committee and asked others to send computers, furniture, 
and office supplies to the reporting committee, with a total aggregate 
value of monetary and in-kind contributions exceeding the reporting 
threshold during the covered period, and the reporting committee 
credited the lobbyist/registrant with having raised the contributions, 
then the reporting committee would have to file Form 3L disclosing 
information about the lobbyist/registrant for the covered period.

Certification of No Effect Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) (Regulatory 
Flexibility Act)

    The Commission certifies that the attached final rules do not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The basis for this certification is that few, if any, small 
entities will be affected by these rules, which apply only to Federal 
candidates and their campaign committees, political committees 
established, financed, maintained or controlled by Federal candidates 
or individuals holding Federal office, political committees of 
political parties, and political committees established or controlled 
by lobbyist/registrants. Authorized committees of Federal candidates 
are not considered small entities under the definition at 5 U.S.C. 
601(6). Leadership PACs established, financed, maintained or controlled 
by Federal candidates or individuals holding Federal office also do not 
qualify as small entities. Such committees, while established by an 
individual, are not independently owned and operated because they are 
not financed and controlled by a small identifiable group of 
individuals; rather, they rely on contributions from a variety of 
persons to fund the committees' activities. Political committees 
representing the Democratic and Republican parties have a major 
controlling influence within the political arena and are thus dominant 
in their field. However, to the extent that any party committees 
representing major or minor political parties or any other political 
committees might be considered ``small organizations,'' the number that 
would be affected by this rule is not substantial.
    Additionally, any separate segregated funds that are affected by 
these rules are not-for-profit political committees that do not meet 
the definition of ``small organization'' because they are financed by a 
combination of individual contributions and financial support for 
certain expenses from corporations, labor organizations, membership 
organizations, or trade associations, and therefore are not 
independently owned and operation. Most of the other political 
committees that are affected by these rules are not-for-profit 
committees that do not meet the definition of ``small organization.'' 
Most political committees are not independently owned and operated 
because they are not financed by a small identifiable group of 
individuals. In addition, most political committees rely on 
contributions from a large number of individuals to fund the 
committees' operations and activities.
    Furthermore, any small entities affected should not feel a 
significant economic impact from the final rule. The activity being 
regulated (receiving bundled contributions that have been forwarded by, 
or that have been raised by and credited to, lobbyists/registrants or 
lobbyist/registrant PACs) is entirely voluntary. Any reporting 
obligations for reporting committees are triggered only if entities 
choose to engage in this activity above the reporting threshold for any 
given covered period. The reporting obligations for reporting 
committees are also limited to contributions either forwarded by or 
raised by and credited to lobbyists/registrants or lobbyist/registrant 
PACs. The reporting requirement for lobbyist/registrant PACs is limited 
to the political committee disclosing itself as a lobbyist/registrant 
PAC on the political committee's initial Form 1 (Statement of 
Organization) filed with the Commission, or to filing a single 
amendment to the political committee's Form 1. Therefore, the final 
rules do not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities.

List of Subjects

11 CFR Part 100

    Elections.

[[Page 7302]]

11 CFR Part 104

    Campaign funds, political committees and parties, reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

11 CFR Part 110

    Campaign funds, political committees and parties.

0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Federal Election 
Commission is amending Subchapter A of Chapter 1 of Title 11 of the 
Code of Federal Regulations as follows:

PART 100--SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS (2 U.S.C. 431)

0
1. The authority citation for part 100 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431, 434, and 438(a)(8).


0
2. Section 100.5 is amended by adding new paragraphs (e)(6) and (7) to 
read as follows:


Sec.  100.5  Political committee (2 U.S.C. 431(4), (5), (6)).

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (6) Leadership PAC. Leadership PAC means a political committee that 
is directly or indirectly established, financed, maintained or 
controlled by a candidate for Federal office or an individual holding 
Federal office but which is not an authorized committee of the 
candidate or individual and which is not affiliated with an authorized 
committee of the candidate or individual, except that leadership PAC 
does not include a political committee of a political party.
    (7) Lobbyist/Registrant PAC. See 11 CFR 104.22(a)(3).
* * * * *

PART 104--REPORTS BY POLITICAL COMMITEES AND OTHER PERSONS (2 
U.S.C. 434)

0
3. The authority citation for part 104 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431(1), 431(8), 431(9), 432(i), 434, 
438(a)(8) and (b), 439a, 441a, and 36 U.S.C. 510.


0
4. Section 104.22 is added to read as follows:


Sec.  104.22  Disclosure of bundling by Lobbyists/Registrants and 
Lobbyist/Registrant PACs (2 U.S.C. 434(i)).

    (a) Definitions.
    (1) Reporting Committee. Reporting committee means:
    (i) An authorized committee of a Federal candidate as defined at 11 
CFR 100.5(f)(1);
    (ii) A leadership PAC as defined at 11 CFR 100.5(e)(6); or
    (iii) A party committee as defined at 11 CFR 100.5(e)(4).
    (2) Lobbyist/Registrant. Lobbyist/registrant means a person who, at 
the time a contribution is forwarded to, or is received by, a reporting 
committee, is:
    (i) A current registrant under Section 4(a) of the Lobbying 
Disclosure Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1603(a)); or
    (ii) An individual who is named on a current registration or 
current report filed under Section 4(b)(6) or 5(b)(2)(C) of the 
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1603(b)(6) or 1604(b)(2)(C)).
    (3) Lobbyist/Registrant PAC. Lobbyist/registrant PAC means any 
political committee that a lobbyist/registrant ``established or 
controls,'' as defined in paragraph (a)(4) of this section.
    (4) Established or Controls.
    (i) For purposes of this section only, a lobbyist/registrant 
established or controls any political committee that the lobbyist/
registrant is required to disclose to the Secretary of the U. S. Senate 
or Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives as being established or 
controlled by that lobbyist/registrant under Section 203 of the Honest 
Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007, amending the Lobbying 
Disclosure Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1604(d)(1)(C)).
    (ii) If, after consulting guidance from the offices of the 
Secretary of the Senate or Clerk of the U.S House of Representatives, 
or communicating with such offices, a political committee is unable to 
ascertain whether it is established or controlled by a lobbyist/
registrant, a lobbyist/registrant will be deemed to have established or 
to control a political committee if:
    (A) The political committee is a separate segregated fund with a 
current registrant under Section 4(a) of the Lobbying Disclosure Act (2 
U.S.C. 1603(a)) as its connected organization; or
    (B) The political committee meets either of the following criteria:
    (1) A lobbyist/registrant had a primary role in the establishment 
of the political committee, excluding the provision of legal or 
compliance services or advice; or
    (2) A lobbyist/registrant directs the governance or operations of 
the political committee, excluding the provision of legal or compliance 
services or advice.
    (5) Covered Period. Covered period means:
    (i) Semi-annually. The semi-annual periods of January 1 through 
June 30, and July 1 through December 31; and the period described in 
paragraph (a)(5)(ii), (iii) or (iv), below, that applies to the 
reporting committee.
    (ii) Quarterly. For reporting committees that file campaign finance 
reports under 11 CFR 104.5 on a quarterly basis, the covered period 
also includes the quarters beginning on January 1, April 1, July 1, and 
October 1 of each calendar year and the applicable pre- and post-
election reporting periods in election years; in a nonelection year, 
reporting committees not authorized by a candidate need only observe 
the semi-annual period described in paragraph (a)(5)(i) above; or
    (iii) Monthly. For reporting committees that file monthly campaign 
finance reports under 11 CFR 104.5, the covered period also includes 
each month in the calendar year, except that in election years the pre- 
and post-general election reporting periods shall constitute the 
covered period in lieu of the monthly November and December reporting 
periods.
    (iv) Alternative for monthly filers. Any reporting committee that 
files monthly campaign finance reports under 11 CFR 104.5 may choose to 
file reports pursuant to the quarterly covered period in paragraph 
(a)(5)(ii) of this section instead of the monthly covered period in 
paragraph (a)(5)(iii) of this section. It shall do so by notifying the 
Commission in writing of its intention to do so at the time the 
reporting committee files a monthly report under paragraph (a)(5)(iii) 
of this section. The reporting committee will be required to file its 
next report under the new filing frequency. The reporting committee may 
change its filing frequency no more than once per calendar year.
    (v) Runoffs and Special Elections. For special elections and runoff 
elections set by State law, the covered period shall be the same as the 
reporting periods set under 11 CFR 104.5(h).
    (6) Bundled Contribution. Bundled contribution means any 
contribution that meets the definition set forth in either paragraph 
(i) or (ii) below:
    (i) Forwarded contribution means a contribution delivered or 
transmitted, by physical or electronic means, to the reporting 
committee by a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC, or by 
any person that the reporting committee knows to be forwarding such 
contribution on behalf of a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant 
PAC.
    (ii) Received and credited contribution means a contribution 
received by the reporting committee from the contributor or 
contributors, and credited by the reporting committee or candidate 
involved to a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC through 
records, designations, or other means of recognizing that a certain

[[Page 7303]]

amount of money has been raised by the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC.
    (A) Records, designations, or other means of recognizing. Records 
means written evidence (including writings, charts, computer files, 
tables, spreadsheets, databases, or other data or data compilations 
stored in any medium from which information can be obtained) that the 
reporting committee or candidate involved attributes to a lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC contributions raised by that 
person or entity and received by the reporting committee.
    Designations or other means of recognizing bundled contributions 
means benefits given by the reporting committee to persons for raising 
a certain amount of contributions, including but not limited to:
    (1) Titles that the reporting committee assigns to persons who have 
raised a certain amount of contributions;
    (2) Tracking identifiers that the reporting committee assigns and 
that are included on contributions or contributions-related materials 
(for example, contributor response devices, cover letters, or Internet 
Web site solicitation pages) for the purpose of maintaining information 
about the amounts of contributions that a person raises;
    (3) Access (including offers or attendance) to events or activities 
given to the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC by the 
reporting committee as a result of raising a certain amount of 
contributions; and
    (4) Mementos, such as photographs with the candidate or autographed 
copies of books authored by the candidate, given by the reporting 
committee to persons who have raised a certain amount of contributions.
    (B) The candidate involved. The candidate involved means the 
candidate by whom the authorized committee is authorized; the candidate 
or individual holding Federal office who directly or indirectly 
established, finances, maintains or controls the leadership PAC; or the 
chairman of the committee in the case of a political party committee.
    (iii) Bundled contributions do not include contributions made by 
the lobbyist/registrant PAC or from the personal funds of the lobbyist/
registrant that forwards or is credited with raising the contributions 
or the personal funds of that person's spouse.
    (b) Reporting requirement for reporting committees.
    (1) FEC Form 3L. Each reporting committee must file FEC Form 3L 
(Report of Contributions Bundled by Lobbyist/Registrants and Lobbyist/
Registrant PACs) if it has received two or more bundled contributions 
(see paragraph (a)(6)) forwarded by or received and credited to a 
person reasonably known by the reporting committee to be a lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC aggregating in excess of $15,000 
during the covered period. The form shall set forth:
    (i) The name of each lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant 
PAC;
    (ii) The address of each lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant 
PAC;
    (iii) The employer of each lobbyist/registrant; and
    (iv) The aggregate amount of bundled contributions forwarded by or 
received and credited to each lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC by the reporting committee during the covered period.
    (2) Determining whether a person is reasonably known to be a 
lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC.
    (i) In order to comply with paragraph (b)(1) of this section, a 
reporting committee must consult, in a manner reasonably calculated to 
find the name of each person who is a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC, the Web sites maintained by the Clerk of the House of 
Representatives, the Secretary of the Senate, and the Federal Election 
Commission to determine whether, at the time a contribution was 
forwarded to, or received by, the reporting committee:
    (A) The person was listed as a current registrant under Section 
4(a) of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1603(a));
    (B) The person was an individual listed on a current registration 
filed under Section 4(b)(6) or a current report filed under Section 
5(b)(2)(C) of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1603 or 
1604);
    (C) The person identified itself as a lobbyist/registrant PAC on 
its Statement of Organization, FEC Form 1, filed with the Commission; 
or
    (D) The person was listed as a political committee established or 
controlled by a lobbyist or registrant on a report filed under Sec. 
203(a) of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007, 
amending the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1604).
    (ii) A manner reasonably calculated to find the name of each person 
who is a lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC may be 
demonstrated by the reporting committee producing a computer printout 
or screen capture from a Web browser indicating that the name of the 
person sought was not listed in the results of the Web site 
consultations performed in accordance with paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this 
section. Such a computer printout or screen capture shall constitute 
conclusive evidence that the reporting committee has consulted such Web 
sites and not found the name of the person sought, but shall not be the 
exclusive means by which the reporting committee may provide evidence 
that it has consulted such Web sites and not found the name of the 
person sought.
    (iii) A reporting committee shall be subject to the reporting 
requirement under paragraph (b)(1) of this section if it had actual 
knowledge that, at the time a contribution was forwarded or received, 
the person whose name is sought was required to be listed on any 
registration or report described in paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this 
section.
    (c) Lobbyist/Registrant PAC reporting requirements. Any political 
committee that is a lobbyist/registrant PAC as defined in paragraph 
(a)(3) of this section must identify itself as such on FEC Form 1 
either upon registration with the Commission if it is a new political 
committee, or by amendment in accordance with 11 CFR 102.2(a)(2) if it 
is a political committee registered with the Commission.
    (d) Where to file. Reporting committees shall file either with the 
Secretary of the Senate or with the Federal Election Commission in 
accordance with 11 CFR Part 105.
    (e) When to file. Reporting committees must file the forms required 
under this section with the first report that they file under 11 CFR 
104.5 following the end of each covered period.
    (f) Recordkeeping. In addition to any requirements to maintain 
records and accounts under 11 CFR 102.8, 102.9 and 110.6, each 
reporting committee must maintain for three years after the filing of 
the report to which the information relates a record of any bundled 
contributions (see 11 CFR 104.22(a)(6)) provided by a lobbyist/
registrant or lobbyist/registrant PAC that aggregate in excess of 
$15,000 for any covered period. The information required to be 
maintained is:
    (1) The name and address of the lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC;
    (2) The employer of the lobbyist/registrant; and
    (3) The aggregate amount of bundled contributions forwarded by or 
received and credited to each lobbyist/registrant or lobbyist/
registrant PAC by the reporting committee during the covered period.
    (g) Price index increase.
    (1) The threshold for reporting bundled contributions established 
in

[[Page 7304]]

paragraph (b)(1) of this section shall be increased by the percent 
difference between the price index as defined at 11 CFR 110.17(d), as 
certified to the Commission by the Secretary of Labor, for the 12 
months preceding the beginning of the calendar year and the price index 
for the base period.
    (2) Each contribution bundling threshold so increased shall be the 
threshold in effect for that calendar year.
    (3) For purposes of this paragraph (g), the term base period means 
calendar year 2006.
    (4) If any amount after the increases under this paragraph (g) is 
not a multiple of $100, such amount shall be rounded to the nearest 
multiple of $100.

PART 110--CONTRIBUTION AND EXPENDITURE LIMITATIONS AND PROHIBITIONS

0
3. The authority citation for part 110 is revised to read as follows:

    Authority: 2 U.S.C. 431(8), 431(9), 432(c)(2), 434(i)(3), 
438(a)(8), 441a, 441b, 441d, 441e, 441f, 441g, 441h and 36 U.S.C. 
510.


0
4. In section 110.17, paragraph (e) is revised and paragraph (f) is 
added to read as follows:


Sec.  110.17  Price index increase.

* * * * *
    (e) Publication of price index increases.
    (1) Expenditure and Contribution Limitations. In every odd-numbered 
year, the Commission will publish in the Federal Register the amount of 
the expenditure and contribution limitations in effect and place such 
information on the Commission's Web site.
    (2) Lobbyist/registrant and lobbyist/registrant PAC contribution 
bundling disclosure threshold. In every calendar year, the Commission 
will publish in the Federal Register the amount of the lobbyist/
registrant and lobbyist/registrant PAC contribution bundling disclosure 
threshold in effect and place such information on the Commission's Web 
site.
    (f) Price index increases for lobbyist/registrant and lobbyist/
registrant PAC contribution bundling threshold. The threshold for 
disclosure of lobbyists/registrants and lobbyist/registrant PACs that 
bundle contributions shall be indexed for each calendar year in 
accordance with 11 CFR 104.22(g).

    Dated: February 5, 2009.

    On behalf of the Commission,
Steven T. Walther,
Chairman, Federal Election Commission.
 [FR Doc. E9-2838 Filed 2-13-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P