[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 1 (Tuesday, January 2, 2024)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 5-14]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27906]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION
11 CFR Part 113
[Notice 2023-19]
Candidate Salaries
AGENCY: Federal Election Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Commission is revising its regulations concerning the use
of campaign funds by a candidate's principal campaign committee to pay
compensation to the candidate. The Commission is issuing these rules in
response to a Petition for Rulemaking filed by a former candidate for
the United States House of Representatives.
DATES: The effective date is March 1, 2024.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy L. Rothstein, Assistant General
Counsel for Policy, Joseph P. Wenzinger, Attorney, or Cheryl A.
[[Page 6]]
Hemsley, Attorney, 1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20463, (202)
694-1650 or (800) 424-9530.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission is revising its regulations
at 11 CFR part 113 concerning the use of campaign funds by a
candidate's principal campaign committee to pay compensation to the
candidate. Specifically, the Commission is revising the criteria for
determining whether a candidate is eligible to receive compensation
from campaign funds, the maximum amount of compensation that a
candidate may receive from campaign funds, and the period during which
a candidate may receive compensation from campaign funds. The
Commission is also making miscellaneous changes to its regulations on
candidate compensation for purposes of continuity, clarity, and
administration. The Commission is not, at this time, addressing the use
of campaign funds to pay a candidate's health insurance premiums and
dependent care costs. The Commission's advisory opinions addressing the
use of campaign funds to pay a candidate's dependent care costs remain
in effect. Members of the public may also submit requests for
additional advisory opinions on those subjects.
Transmitting Final Rules to Congress
Before promulgating rules or regulations to carry out the
provisions of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended
(the ``Act''),\1\ the Commission transmits the rules or regulations to
the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President of the
Senate for a thirty-legislative-day review period.\2\ The effective
date of this final rule is March 1, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 52 U.S.C. 30101-45.
\2\ Id. 30111(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background
The Act prohibits a candidate's authorized committee from
converting campaign funds to ``personal use.'' \3\ ``Personal use'' is
defined as the use of campaign funds ``to fulfill any commitment,
obligation, or expense of a person that would exist irrespective of the
candidate's election campaign or individual's duties as a holder of
Federal office.'' \4\ The Act and Commission regulations provide a non-
exhaustive list of expenses that, when paid using campaign funds,
constitute per se conversion of those funds to personal use.\5\ The
Commission determines on a case-by-case basis whether the use of
campaign funds to pay expenses other than those listed would be a
prohibited conversion of the funds to personal use.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Id. 30114(b).
\4\ Id. 30114(b)(2); see also 11 CFR 113.1(g) (defining
``personal use'').
\5\ See 52 U.S.C. 30114(b)(2); 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1)(i).
\6\ See 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1)(ii) (providing non-exhaustive list of
expenses to be determined for personal use on a case-by-case basis).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Candidates' Salaries
The Act does not identify the use of campaign funds to pay
candidate salaries as per se personal use. In Advisory Opinion 1999-01
(Greene), however, the Commission concluded that the Act would prohibit
a federal candidate from using campaign funds to pay himself a salary
because the candidate would indirectly use the funds to pay his
mortgage, utilities, groceries, and clothing--all of which are per se
personal use.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Advisory Opinion 1999-01 (Greene) at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2002, the Commission proposed to codify this conclusion in a
regulation.\8\ The proposed regulation would have prohibited candidates
``from using campaign funds to pay themselves salaries or otherwise
compensate themselves in any way for income lost as a result of
campaigning for Federal office.'' \9\ The Commission received several
public comments opposing this proposal, and no public comments
supporting it. Comments argued that the use of campaign funds to pay
candidates' salaries would not fulfill a commitment, obligation, or
expense that would exist irrespective of the campaign, and therefore
satisfies the Act's ``irrespective'' test because, ``were it not for
their campaign responsibilities, candidates would not have to leave
their jobs and give up their salaries.'' \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Disclaimers, Fraudulent Solicitation, Civil Penalties, and
Personal Use of Campaign Funds (``2002 Proposed Rule''), 67 FR 55348
(Aug. 29, 2002), https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2002-08-29/pdf/02-21893.pdf.
\9\ Id. at 55353.
\10\ Disclaimers, Fraudulent Solicitation, Civil Penalties, and
Personal Use of Campaign Funds (``2002 Final Rule''), 67 FR 76962,
76971 (Dec. 13, 2002), https://sers.fec.gov/fosers/
showpdf.htm?docid=8982#page=10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission ``agree[d] with the commenters that the payment of a
salary to a candidate is not a prohibited personal use as defined under
Commission regulations.'' \11\ The Commission explained that this use
of campaign funds satisfied the ``irrespective'' test because, ``but
for the candidacy, the candidate would be paid a salary in exchange for
services rendered to an employer.'' \12\ Moreover, the Commission
stated, a ``salary paid to a candidate would be in return for the
candidate's services provided to the campaign and the necessity of that
salary would not exist irrespective of the candidacy.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Id.
\12\ Id.
\13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission included in the final regulation various safeguards
against abuse. To be a permissible use of campaign funds, the salary
paid to a candidate must not exceed the lesser of the minimum salary
paid to a ``Federal officeholder holding the Federal office that the
candidate seeks'' or the earned income received by the candidate the
year before becoming a candidate.\14\ Further, any earned income that a
candidate receives from salary or wages from any source other than
campaign funds counts against the minimum salary paid to a federal
officeholder as described in the regulation.\15\ In addition,
candidates must provide income tax records for the relevant years and
other evidence of earned income upon the Commission's request.\16\ The
regulation also provides that campaign funds cannot be used to pay a
candidate's salary before the filing deadline for access to the primary
election ballot for the federal office that the candidate seeks, as
determined by state law, or January 1 of each even-numbered year in
states that do not conduct primaries.\17\ Finally, the regulation
requires salary payments to be computed on a pro-rata basis and
prohibits candidates who are also federal officeholders from receiving
salary payments from campaign funds.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1)(i)(I).
\15\ Id.
\16\ Id.
\17\ Id. Under this regulation, if the candidate wins the
primary election, his or her principal campaign committee may pay
him or her a salary from campaign funds through the date of the
general election, up to and including the date of any general
election runoff. If the candidate loses the primary, withdraws from
the race, or otherwise ceases to be a candidate, no salary payments
may be paid beyond the date he or she is no longer a candidate. In
odd-numbered years in which a special election for a federal office
occurs, the principal campaign committee for that office may pay the
candidate a salary from campaign funds starting on the date the
special election is set and ending on the day of the special
election.
\18\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Candidates' Childcare Expenses
The Act and Commission regulations do not include the use of
campaign funds to pay candidates' childcare expenses as a per se
personal use. The Commission has addressed this use of campaign funds
in several advisory opinions, and has approved the use of campaign
funds to pay candidates' overnight childcare expenses incurred when the
candidates travel for their own
[[Page 7]]
campaigns,\19\ and to pay caregiver expenses and full-time daycare when
candidates' campaign responsibilities and activities prevented them
from caring for their children themselves.\20\ In each of these
advisory opinions, the Commission concluded that the candidate could
use campaign funds to pay the candidate's childcare expenses to the
extent that the expenses were a ``direct result of campaign activity,''
because such expenses would not have existed irrespective of the
candidate's campaign.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Advisory Opinion 2022-07 (Swalwell); Advisory Opinion 1995-
42 (McCrery).
\20\ Advisory Opinion 2018-06 (Liuba for Congress); Advisory
Opinion 2019-13 (MJ for Texas).
\21\ Advisory Opinion 2022-07 (Swalwell) at 3-4; Advisory
Opinion 2019-13 (MJ for Texas) at 3; Advisory Opinion 2018-07 (Liuba
for Congress) at 3; Advisory Opinion 1995-42 (McCrery) at 2; c.f.
Advisory Opinion 2005-09 (Dodd) at 3 (approving proposed use of
campaign funds to pay travel expenses for candidate's children to
accompany their parents ``provided that the parents are traveling to
participate in a function directly connected to the Senator's bona
fide official responsibilities''); Advisory Opinion 1995-20 (Roemer)
at 2 (approving proposed use of campaign funds to pay travel
expenses of candidate's young children when they travel with
candidate and his wife for campaign events, where such travel is
``only required because of the campaign'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Candidates' Medical Insurance Premiums
The Act and Commission regulations do not include the use of
campaign funds to pay candidates' medical insurance premiums as a per
se personal use, and the Commission has not addressed this issue in
advisory opinions.\22\ The Commission has, however, addressed the use
of campaign funds to pay health insurance premiums in an enforcement
matter. In MUR 7068 (Mowrer for Iowa), the Commission found reason to
believe that a congressional candidate and his campaign committee had
improperly converted campaign funds to personal use by using funds from
the candidate's principal campaign committee to reimburse the candidate
for payment of his health insurance premiums.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ The petitioner had previously requested an advisory opinion
to clarify whether a candidate's health insurance premiums were a
permissible campaign expense, see Advisory Opinion Request 2020-01
(Nabilah for Georgia), but her request became moot when she stopped
being a candidate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Petition for Rulemaking
On March 23, 2021, the Commission received a Petition for
Rulemaking from Ms. Nabilah Islam, a former candidate for the United
States House of Representatives in Georgia.\23\ The Petition asked the
Commission to amend Section 113.1(g) of its regulations to expand the
category of candidates eligible to receive compensation from their
authorized committees and the duration of their eligibility, and to
authorize the use of campaign funds to pay candidates' health insurance
premiums.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Petition for Rulemaking to Improve Candidate Salary Rules
(``Petition'') (Mar. 23, 2021), https://sers.fec.//
showpdf.htm?docid=413694.
\24\ Id. at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Petition asserted that ballot access deadlines for state
primaries, which ``vary wildly based on state law,'' \25\ leave many
candidates with short periods for receiving a salary under the
Commission's regulation.\26\ Moreover, the Petition alleged that the
current maximum salary limitation ``leaves candidates who are full time
caretakers or who have had gaps in employment out in the cold,'' \27\
and that rising health insurance costs act as a barrier to the
prospective candidacies of ``working class people.'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Id. at 3-4.
\26\ Id. at 4 (noting, for example, that in Pennsylvania in
2018, Congressional candidates were eligible to receive a salary for
only 56 days).
\27\ Id. at 4-5.
\28\ Id. at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Petition asked the Commission to ``lower the barriers for
working Americans to run for Federal office'' by amending its personal
use regulations at 11 CFR 113.1(g) to:
(1) Extend the date on which a candidate may begin drawing a
campaign salary to at least 180 days before the primary election; \29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Id. at 4, 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Establish a minimum candidate salary of no less than the
annualized salary of $15 per hour; \30\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Id. at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Expressly permit a candidate to use campaign funds to pay the
costs of any health benefit plan already provided to other campaign
employees beginning on the date the candidate is eligible to receive a
campaign salary.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Id. at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Public Comments on the Petition
On May 23, 2021, the Commission published a Notification of
Availability (``NOA'') seeking public comment on the Petition.\32\ The
Commission received 22 comments in response, 14 of which supported
initiating a rulemaking, agreeing generally that the Petition's
proposals would make it easier for individuals of modest means who are
not already federal officeholders to run for federal office.\33\
Several comments noted that the current candidate salary regulation
offers little assistance to full-time caregivers or those who have
experienced a recent financial hardship because candidate salaries
cannot currently exceed the amount of income earned in the year before
their candidacy. Comments also indicated that the period during which a
candidate is eligible to receive a salary is too short and does not
reflect the financial costs and other demands of campaigning today.
These comments generally agreed that a candidate's campaign committee
should be able to use campaign funds to pay the candidate's health
insurance premiums. Five comments opposed initiating a rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Rulemaking Petition: Candidate Salaries, Notification of
Availability (``NOA''), 86 FR 23300 (May 3, 2021), https://sers.fec.gov/fosers/showpdf.htm?docid=413869.
\33\ The comments are available on the Commission's website at
https://sers.fec.gov/fosers/, referencing REG 2021-01 (Candidate
Salaries).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
On December 12, 2022, the Commission published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (``NPRM'') in the Federal Register, proposing to amend its
regulations regarding the use of campaign funds to pay candidates'
compensation, including salaries, health insurance premiums, and
dependent care costs.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Candidate Salaries, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(``NPRM''), 87 FR 75945 (Dec. 12, 2022), https://sers.fec.gov/
fosers/showpdf.htm?docid=421006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the NPRM, the Commission proposed several changes to its
personal use regulations, including a reorganization of the
Commission's current regulations at 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1) through (8)
addressing personal use, and the candidate salary regulation at 11 CFR
113.1(g)(1)(i)(I). The Commission proposed to remove, reserve, and
redesignate several paragraphs \35\ and add new paragraph (g)(6) to
address candidate compensation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ The Commission proposed to remove and reserve 11 CFR
113.1(g)(1)(i)(I) and redesignate current paragraphs (g)(6), (g)(7),
and (g)(8) as (g)(7), (g)(8), and (g)(9), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission proposed the new paragraph 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6) to
have seven subparagraphs as follows, each of which is explained further
below:
New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(i), to prohibit federal
officeholders from receiving compensation as candidates from campaign
funds. This prohibition already appears in the Commission's
regulation.\36\ The Commission is adopting this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1)(i)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(ii), to limit the amount of
compensation that a candidate could receive from campaign funds. The
Commission proposed six alternative compensation caps, each of which
would have enabled principal campaign committees to compensate
[[Page 8]]
candidates even if they had not earned income the year prior to
becoming a candidate. The Commission is adopting a modified version of
these proposals.
New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(iii), to define ``compensation''
for purposes of the regulation. This definition does not currently
appear in Commission regulations. The Commission proposed three
alternative definitions, each of which would have defined compensation
to include direct payments to the candidate and payments for at least
some other employee-related benefits, such as health insurance premiums
or dependent care costs. The Commission is adopting a modified version
of these proposals.
New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(iv), to require a candidate's
committee to reduce the maximum amount of compensation that the
candidate could receive from campaign funds by the amount of any earned
income the candidate received while also receiving compensation from
campaign funds. This provision would have revised a requirement already
in the Commission's regulation.\37\ The Commission is adopting a
modified version of this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(v), to establish the period during
which a candidate would be eligible to receive compensation from
campaign funds. This provision would have increased the length of the
eligibility period already in Commission regulations.\38\ The
Commission is adopting a modified version of this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(vi), to prohibit a candidate's
principal campaign committee that seeks to settle debts for less than
their full value from paying compensation to the candidate or
satisfying a debt to the candidate for compensation, and to prohibit
any debt settlement plan created under 11 CFR 116.7 from providing for
the payment of compensation to the candidate before all other creditors
are paid. These prohibitions do not currently appear in the
Commission's regulations. The Commission is adopting a modified version
of this proposal.
New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(vii), to require a candidate who
receives compensation from campaign funds to provide evidence of prior
earned income upon the request of the Commission in certain
circumstances, and to require a candidate to maintain and preserve such
evidence for three years, pursuant to the Commission's regulations on
the preservation of records. This provision would have revised a
requirement currently appearing in the Commission's regulation.\39\ The
Commission is adopting this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Public Comments on the NPRM
The Commission received 62 written comments in response to the
NPRM. Ten comments were submitted by or on behalf of 15 organizations,
3 were submitted by former candidates for federal office, and 49 were
from other individuals.
As explained further below, these comments unanimously supported
some version of the Commission's proposals to permit principal campaign
committees to compensate candidates who did not receive income in the
year prior to becoming a candidate, although the comments varied widely
in the alternatives they supported. These comments echoed the Petition
and comments on the Petition in pointing out that the current
regulation does not allow full-time caregivers, or those who have had a
recent gap in employment, to receive compensation from campaign funds.
The comments also supported allowing candidates to obtain compensation
from campaign funds at the start of their campaigns. These comments
cited, as did the Petitioner and comments on the Petition, the wide
disparity among state ballot access deadlines and the demands that
modern campaigns place on candidates as early as the start of their
campaigns. The comments also supported allowing winning candidates to
accept compensation from campaign funds until they are sworn into
office; some comments additionally urged the Commission to extend the
eligibility period for losing candidates by allowing them to continue
accepting campaign funds for a short period after the end of their
candidacies to wind down their campaign committees. The comments also
generally agreed that a candidate's campaign committee should be able
to use campaign funds to pay the candidate's health insurance premiums
or dependent care costs.
H. Public Hearing
On March 22, 2023, the Commission held a public hearing on
Candidate Salaries. The Commission heard testimony from 11 witnesses,
all but one of whom supported making changes to the Commission's
regulations on candidate compensation. The witnesses included one
Member of Congress, five former congressional candidates, a legal
academic, and representatives from four organizations: a national labor
organization, a national party committee, and two public interest
organizations that advocate for campaign finance reform. After the
hearing, four witnesses submitted additional information to the
Commission.
As explained further below, the Member of Congress and former
congressional candidates testified to the hardships they faced in
running for federal office, due to the limited time period that
candidates are eligible to receive compensation from campaign funds
under the current regulation. These witnesses also expressed support
for many of the Commission's proposals. The legal academic and most of
the witnesses representing organizations generally argued that the cap
on candidate compensation should be untethered from previous earnings,
that the date of eligibility should be moved to the start of candidacy,
and that candidates should be able to receive benefits from campaign
funds.
One witness argued that the payment of any candidate compensation
violates the Act's ``irrespective'' test because it allows candidates
to pay indirectly for personal living expenses. The witness suggested
that the Commission should either repeal the current regulation or not
increase the ability of candidates to receive compensation under it.
II. Revised 11 CFR Part 113.1--Definitions
Considering the issues raised in the Petition, public comments, and
witness testimony,\40\ the Commission is amending its regulations
regarding the use of campaign funds for compensation to candidates, as
described below. The Commission has previously concluded that ``the
payment of a salary to the candidate is not a prohibited personal use
as defined under the Commission regulations since, but for the
candidacy, the candidate would be paid a salary in exchange for
services rendered to an employer.'' \41\ Nothing has occurred to change
the Commission's conclusion in this regard. Instead, the Commission
intends to revise its regulations to reflect more accurately the
appropriate amount of campaign funds that may be used to ``compensate
candidates for lost income that is forgone due to becoming a
candidate.'' \42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ For purposes of this document, ``comment'' applies to both
written comments and supplemental information and oral testimony at
the public hearing.
\41\ 2002 Final Rule, 67 FR at 76972.
\42\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As proposed in the NPRM, the Commission is also reorganizing its
[[Page 9]]
current regulations at 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1) through (8) addressing
personal use \43\ and adding new paragraph (g)(6) to address candidate
compensation. This reorganization is being made for purposes of clarity
and to accommodate the regulatory revisions set out in this Notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ Specifically, the Commission is removing and reserving 11
CFR 113.1(g)(1)(i)(I); redesignating current paragraphs (g)(6),
(g)(7), and (g)(8) as (g)(7), (g)(8), and (g)(9), respectively; and
adding new paragraph (g)(6) to address candidate compensation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(i)--Federal Officeholders
The Commission's current regulations prohibit a federal
officeholder who is also a federal candidate from receiving a salary
from campaign funds.\44\ The Commission explained that, in the absence
of this prohibition, ``an incumbent officeholder would be receiving two
salaries, one from his or her campaign and one for his or her official
duties.'' \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1)(i)(I). The term ``federal officeholder''
is defined at 11 CFR 113.1(c).
\45\ 2002 Final Rule, 67 FR at 76972.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to maintain this prohibition
at 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(i) by providing that a federal officeholder may
not receive compensation as a candidate from campaign funds. The
Commission received no comments on this proposal. The Commission is
maintaining this prohibition and moving it to new 11 CFR
113.1(g)(6)(i).
B. New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(ii)--Candidate Compensation Cap
Under the current regulation, salary payments from campaign funds
to a candidate are limited to the lesser of the minimum salary for the
federal office that the candidate seeks, or the earned income that the
candidate received during the year prior to becoming a candidate.\46\
Accordingly, candidates may receive salary payments from campaign funds
only if they earned income the year prior to becoming a candidate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1)(i)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the NPRM, the Commission proposed six alternatives (Proposed
Compensation Cap Alternatives A through F) for revising the cap on the
amount of compensation a candidate may receive from campaign funds. The
Commission proposed these alternatives because, as indicated in the
Petition and comments on the Petition, the current regulation does not
adequately address ``income that is forgone due to becoming a
candidate,'' \47\ especially by individuals who had a gap in employment
or an unusually low level of income the year before becoming a
candidate. The Commission sought comment on whether it should adopt any
of the proposals or a combination of aspects of the proposals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ NPRM, 87 FR at 75948 (quoting 2002 Final Rule, 67 FR at
76972).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For each alternative, the Commission proposed to require principal
campaign committees to calculate the compensation and cap at the daily
rate, rounded to the nearest dollar. Under this approach, the
compensation and cap would be allocated based on the number of days per
year that the candidate spent campaigning.
In addition to comments on specific alternatives as described
below, the comments supporting the NPRM's proposals agreed that the
Commission should expand the pool of candidates eligible to receive
compensation from campaign funds to include people who otherwise might
be prevented from campaigning due to a lack of funds, such as students,
caregivers, and those who lost jobs before becoming a candidate.
Several comments also agreed that no candidate should be able to accept
compensation from campaign funds exceeding the salary for the federal
office sought by the candidate.
Proposed Alternatives A, B, and C
Proposed Compensation Cap Alternatives A, B, and C did not consider
a candidate's prior earned income in setting a cap on the amount of
compensation the candidate could receive from campaign funds.
Proposed Compensation Cap Alternative A (50% minimum officeholder
salary approach) would have capped the amount of campaign funds that a
candidate's principal campaign committee could use to pay compensation
to the candidate at 50% of the minimum salary for the federal office
sought. This cap would have applied to all candidates for the same
office, regardless of the amount of income they earned the year before
becoming a candidate. Five comments generally supported the approach
taken in Alternative A, but differed as to whether the cap should be
set at 50% or 100% of the salary for the office sought by the
candidate.
Proposed Compensation Cap Alternative B (hourly minimum wage
approach) would have capped a candidate's compensation from campaign
funds at the daily rate of the annualized hourly minimum wage.
Annualized hourly minimum wage was defined as the amount an individual
receiving the federal minimum wage would earn by working 40 hours a
week for 52 weeks, except that an individual residing in a state with a
higher minimum wage than the federal minimum wage could use the state
minimum wage. Three comments opposed Alternative B, arguing that the
annualized hourly minimum wage was too low to provide a living wage to
candidates, not objectively justifiable, and neither compensated
candidates for the services demanded by a modern campaign nor
reasonably accounted for their opportunity costs incurred in running
for office. No comments supported this alternative.
Proposed Compensation Cap Alternative C ($15 per hour approach)
would have capped candidate compensation based on the amount an
individual receiving $15 per hour would earn by working 40 hours per
week for 52 weeks--calculated at the daily rate--rather than the
federal or state minimum wage. Three comments opposed Alternative C,
arguing that this alternative was too low to provide a living wage to
candidates, not objectively justifiable, and would neither compensate
candidates for their services to a campaign nor reasonably account for
their opportunity costs incurred in running for office. No comments
supported this alternative.
Proposed Alternatives D, E, and F
Proposed Compensation Cap Alternatives D, E, and F, like the
current regulation, would have considered the candidate's previous
earned income, but in different ways.
Proposed Compensation Cap Alternative D (prior 12-month income
approach) would have capped a candidate's compensation from campaign
funds at the candidate's earned income in the 12-month period before
becoming a candidate or the annualized hourly minimum wage, whichever
was greater, but not to exceed the minimum annual salary for the office
sought by the candidate. One comment supported Alternative D, because
it would ensure that all candidates could receive at least the
annualized minimum wage and enable candidates who had earned more
during the relevant period to receive commensurately more compensation
from campaign funds.
Proposed Compensation Cap Alternative E (three-year income
approach) would have enabled a candidate to receive compensation from
campaign funds up to the average annual income that the candidate had
earned during the most recent three calendar years in which the
candidate earned income prior to becoming a candidate, capped by the
salary for the office sought by the candidate. No comments supported
this alternative.
[[Page 10]]
Proposed Compensation Cap Alternative F (three-year income with
minimum wage approach) would have been the same as Alternative E, while
also offering candidate committees the option of paying candidates up
to the annualized minimum wage if the minimum wage was greater than the
candidate's prior average earned income. Two comments supported
Alternative F with modifications and two comments opposed it.
Final Rule
After considering the comments, the Commission is adopting a
variation of Proposed Compensation Cap Alternative E. Under new 11 CFR
113.1(g)(6)(ii), the use of campaign funds by a candidate's principal
campaign committee to pay compensation to the candidate is not personal
use, provided that the compensation does not exceed the lesser of 50%
of the minimum annual salary paid to a Member of the U.S. House of
Representatives (regardless of the specific office sought), and the
average annual income that the candidate earned during the most recent
five calendar years in which the candidate earned income prior to
becoming a candidate. The new regulation requires the average annual
income and 50% of the minimum House Member salary to be calculated at
the daily rate, rounded to the nearest dollar.
Example 1: Candidate A earned an average annual income of $35,000
in the most recent five calendar years in which Candidate A earned
income prior to becoming a candidate, which means the daily rate is $96
for purposes of the compensation cap ($35,000/365, rounded to the
nearest dollar). The minimum annual House Member salary is $174,000,
which means the daily rate is $238 (($174,000 x 50%)/365, rounded to
the nearest dollar). Under these facts, Candidate A's compensation is
capped at $96 per day because the daily rate of the candidate's 5-year
average earned income is less than the daily rate of 50% of the minimum
House Member salary.
Example 2: Candidate B earned an average annual income of $100,000
in the most recent five calendar years in which Candidate B earned
income prior to becoming a candidate, which means the daily rate is
$274 ($100,000/365). The minimum annual House Member salary is
$174,000, which means the daily rate is $238 (($174,000 x 50%)/365),
rounded to the nearest dollar). Under these facts, Candidate B's
compensation is capped at $238 per day because the daily rate of 50% of
the minimum House Member salary is less than the daily rate of
Candidate B's 5-year average earned income.
Example 3: Candidate C becomes a candidate in 2023. Candidate C
earned income averaging $60,000 per year in 2021, 2019, 2018, 2017, and
2016, but did not earn any income in 2022 or 2020. Because Candidate
C's 5-year average earned income in the five most recent calendar years
in which Candidate C earned income was $60,000, which is less than 50%
of the minimum House Member salary of $174,000 in 2023, Candidate C
would be entitled to receive $164 per day ($60,000/365) in compensation
from campaign funds in 2023.
Like Proposed Compensation Cap Alternative E and the current
regulation, the revised compensation cap allows a candidate's principal
campaign committee to use campaign funds to pay the candidate
compensation up to the lesser of the candidate's pre-candidacy earned
income and a percentage of the minimum annual salary paid to a federal
officeholder. The revised cap, however, allows the principal campaign
committee to consider the candidate's prior earned income over a period
of five years, instead of three years as proposed in the NPRM and one
year as in the current regulation. The Commission intends this longer
look-back to provide a more realistic estimate of the income a
candidate forgoes in running for office; averaging income earned over a
longer period is intended to moderate any aberrations in the
candidate's prior annual earnings.
The Commission's revised regulation also differs from Proposed
Compensation Cap Alternative E and the Commission's current regulation
in that it places an upper-level cap at 50% of the minimum annual
salary paid to a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives, rather
than 100% of the minimum annual salary paid to a federal officeholder
holding the office that the candidate seeks. These changes are intended
to better reflect substantial differences between running for federal
office and holding federal office, especially in a higher-level
position such as the presidency or a leadership position in Congress.
Officeholders have significant duties under the Constitution, and their
salaries are set by the political branches subject to Constitutional
restraints.\48\ Officeholders must continue to execute the duties of
their offices while campaigning and they accordingly receive their full
salaries while campaigning. Candidates who do not hold office may also
choose to continue their employment while running for office, but
should they decide otherwise and prefer to campaign full-time, the
Commission notes that half of the minimum congressional salary exceeds
the current median household income in the United States.\49\ Limiting
candidate compensation in this way helps protect against personal
enrichment from one's candidacy and is tailored to real financial need.
Moreover, the record before the Commission does not establish the need
for salaries exceeding this amount, with near-universal agreement in
comments that changes to the Commission's regulations were needed to
allow individuals of modest means to run for office.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ See U.S. Const. amend. XXVII.
\49\ In 2022, half of the annual salary for Members of the House
of Representatives under 2 U.S.C. 4501(1)(A) was $87,000, while the
real median household income was $74,580. Income in the United
States: 2022, United States Census Bureau, Sept. 12, 2023, https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2023/demo/p60-279.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission is not adopting the other alternative cap proposals
presented in the NPRM or comments. Although several comments presented
policy arguments in favor of the other proposals (such as the
desirability of providing a fair living wage, enhancing the diversity
of candidates, and reducing bias that favors incumbents), these
proposals would have enabled candidates to receive an amount of
compensation from campaign funds that was divorced from the candidate's
prior earnings history, and therefore did not reflect the candidate's
demonstrated earning potential and income forgone by running for
office. As the Commission has stated previously, the payment of
campaign funds to a candidate is not personal use when it
``compensate[s] candidates for lost income that is forgone due to
becoming a candidate.'' \50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ 2002 Final Rule, 67 FR at 76972.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Commission's view, a candidate's earned income history over
the most recent five years that the candidate earned income, capped by
50% of the minimum House Member salary, provides a better picture of
the income forgone by a candidate running for office.
C. New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(iii)--Definition of ``Compensation''
As explained above, the Act does not specifically address
compensation to candidates in its provisions on the personal use of
campaign funds. While the Commission's current regulations permit the
use of campaign funds to pay a ``salary'' to a candidate in certain
circumstances, the regulations do not define ``salary'' or explicitly
address the use of campaign funds to pay such
[[Page 11]]
employment-related benefits as health insurance premiums or dependent
care costs. Nor do the Commission's current regulations define
``compensation'' in this context.
In the NPRM, the Commission proposed three alternative definitions
of ``compensation,'' each of which included ``direct payments to the
candidate,'' as well as payments for at least some other employment-
related benefits. Several comments on the NPRM generally supported
these proposals. One comment was concerned that the proposed
definitions could be read to encompass payments to candidates for non-
compensation purposes, such as campaign expense reimbursements and loan
repayments.
The Commission agrees with this concern. The term ``compensation''
is intended to include only payments to a candidate to make up for
salary forgone by becoming a candidate and is not intended to make
otherwise permissible payments, such as candidate expense
reimbursements and candidate loan repayments, subject to the
compensation cap. Accordingly, new 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(iii) defines
``compensation'' as ``direct payments to the candidate unless the
payments are otherwise permitted by law, such as candidate expense
reimbursements and candidate loan repayments under 11 CFR part 116.''
The Commission is not addressing the payment of a candidate's
health insurance premiums and dependent care costs in these final
rules. Although several comments supported including payments for these
benefits in the definition of ``compensation,'' arguing that such
benefits are inextricably linked to employment and requiring candidates
to forgo those benefits while campaigning could prevent some
individuals from running for federal office, the advisory opinion
process is better suited to addressing this use of campaign funds.
Determining whether an impermissible conversion of campaign funds to
personal use would result from a campaign committee's payment of a
candidate's health insurance premiums or dependent care costs is a
fact-specific inquiry.\51\ Accordingly, the Commission has decided to
continue its current practice of addressing this issue on a case-by-
case basis through the advisory opinion process.\52\ The Commission's
advisory opinions addressing the use of campaign funds to pay a
candidate's or officeholder's dependent care costs remain in effect.
Any person whose factual circumstances differ materially from those
described in these advisory opinions may request an advisory opinion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ For example, in Advisory Opinion 2022-07 (Swalwell), the
Commission concluded that an officeholder could use campaign funds
to pay overnight childcare expenses that he incurred when traveling
for his own campaign but did not approve a response to the question
whether the officeholder could use campaign funds to pay childcare
expenses incurred when he campaigned for others. In Advisory Opinion
2019-13 (MJ for Texas), the Commission concluded that a candidate
who left her job to work full-time on her campaign could use
campaign funds to pay for full-time daycare for her children, where
she would spend the ``vast majority'' of her time away from her
family on campaign activities and would reimburse the campaign for
childcare costs incurred when not campaigning. In Advisory Opinion
2018-06 (Liuba for Congress), the Commission concluded that a
candidate who had given up her in-home consulting work to campaign
and hired a caregiver for her children could use campaign funds to
pay childcare expenses when her campaign responsibilities prevented
her from caring for the children herself.
\52\ See, e.g., Advisory Opinion 2022-07 (Swalwell) at 4
(approving use of campaign funds to pay candidate's childcare
expenses to extent expenses are the ``direct result of campaign
activity''); Advisory Opinion 2019-13 (MJ for Texas) at 3 (same);
Advisory Opinion 2018-07 (Liuba for Congress) at 3 (same); see also
Advisory Opinion 1995-42 (McCrery) at 2 (approving use of campaign
funds to pay childcare expenses when Congressman and spouse attend
campaign events, where expenses result only from campaign activity
and otherwise would not exist).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(iv)--Outside Earned Income
As noted above, the Commission's current regulation caps the amount
of campaign funds that a candidate may receive in salary from the
candidate's principal campaign committee at either (1) the amount of
income earned by the candidate in the 12-month period immediately
preceding candidacy, or (2) the minimum annual salary for the federal
office that the candidate seeks, whichever amount is lower. For
purposes of this calculation, the current regulation further requires
the minimum salary of the office that the candidate seeks to be reduced
by the amount of any earned income that the candidate receives from
salaries or wages from any source other than the candidate's principal
campaign committee.\53\ The Commission has explained that it requires
campaign committees to count any outside earned income received by a
candidate against the officeholder salary limit to ``prevent candidates
from paying themselves a salary from campaign funds on top of other
earned income that they receive from other sources, such as from
private sector employment, to the extent that such combined payments
exceed the minimum annual salary for the Federal office that the
candidate is seeking.'' \54\ The current regulation does not, however,
require a campaign committee to count outside income earned by a
candidate against the limit set by the amount of pre-candidacy income
earned by a candidate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1)(i)(I).
\54\ 2002 Final Rule, 67 FR at 76972.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the NPRM, the Commission proposed new 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(iv) to
rectify the apparent imbalance in the salary cap reduction by requiring
the amount earned by a candidate from other sources to count against
the maximum amount of compensation that a candidate can receive from
campaign funds, rather than counting against only the minimum annual
salary for the office sought by the candidate. Although these final
rules incorporate a standard tied to the minimum House Member salary
even if the candidate is not seeking that office, the NPRM's proposal
regarding the reduction for outside earned income remains otherwise
unchanged.
Three comments supported the proposed regulation. They indicated
that it would enhance oversight of candidates receiving compensation
from campaign funds and was particularly apt considering the
Commission's proposed expansion of candidates' ability to accept
compensation from campaign funds and the period during which they may
do so. No comment opposed the proposal.
The Commission agrees that earned income a candidate receives from
non-campaign sources should count against the maximum amount of
compensation that the candidate can receive from campaign funds. If a
candidate earns income from outside sources while campaigning for
federal office, that income has not been lost to campaigning, and the
Commission discerns no reason for treating outside earned income
differently based on whether the applicable compensation cap is set by
the candidate's pre-candidacy earned income or the minimum House Member
salary. Therefore, the Commission is adopting the proposal at new 11
CFR 113.1(g)(6)(iv) to require a candidate's principal campaign
committee to reduce the maximum amount of permissible candidate
compensation from campaign funds by the amount of income earned by the
candidate from other sources after the candidate files a Statement of
Candidacy.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ The final rule differs from the proposed rule in one
additional respect. The proposed rule would have reduced the maximum
amount of compensation that a candidate could receive from campaign
funds if the candidate earned income from outside sources ``while
the candidate receives compensation from campaign funds.'' In
response to a comment, the final rule provides, instead, that the
maximum amount of compensation a candidate can receive from campaign
funds must be reduced if the candidate earns income from outside
sources ``after the candidate files a Statement of Candidacy under
11 CFR 101.3(a).'' This revision is intended to avoid the impression
that the compensation cap will be affected only if the candidate
earns income from outside sources simultaneously with the receipt of
compensation from campaign funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 12]]
Example 1: Candidate A earned an annual average of $60,000 during
the most recent five calendar years in which Candidate A earned income
before becoming a candidate, and the minimum House Member salary is
$174,000 per year. Because $60,000 is less than half of the minimum
House Member salary ($87,000), Candidate A could receive up to $164/day
($60,000/365). But, if Candidate A earns $30,000 in income from outside
sources after filing a Statement of Candidacy with the Commission, the
maximum amount that Candidate A may receive as compensation from
campaign funds must be reduced by $30,000, meaning that the total
compensation paid to the candidate may not exceed $82/day (($60,000-
$30,000)/365).
Example 2: Candidate B earned an annual average of $100,000 during
the most recent five calendar years in which Candidate B earned income
before becoming a candidate, and the minimum annual House Member salary
is $174,000 per year. Because half of the Minimum Officeholder Salary
($87,000) is less than $100,000, Candidate B could receive up to $238/
day. But, if Candidate B earns $30,000 in income from outside sources
while also receiving compensation from campaign funds, the maximum
amount that Candidate B may receive as compensation from campaign funds
must be reduced by $30,000, meaning that the total compensation paid to
the candidate may not exceed $156/day (($87,000-$30,000)/365).
E. New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(v)--Eligibility Period
The Commission's current regulation prohibits the use of campaign
funds to pay a candidate's salary before the filing deadline for access
to the primary election ballot for the federal office that the
candidate seeks, as determined by state law, or January 1 of each even-
numbered year in states that do not conduct primaries.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1)(i)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to allow candidates to begin
receiving compensation from campaign funds on the date the candidate's
principal campaign committee files a Statement of Organization with the
Commission, regardless of when the candidate is required to file for
ballot access under state law. This proposal was intended to reflect
more accurately when a candidate may start to forgo salary because of
the campaign, and to apply uniform criteria for when candidates'
principal campaign committees may start using campaign funds to
compensate the candidate.
The comments generally supported this proposal. Echoing the
Petition, several comments argued that ballot access deadlines are an
inaccurate means of determining when a candidate begins losing income
due to campaigning, and the lack of uniformity in state ballot access
deadlines militates against using those deadlines to trigger
candidates' eligibility to receive compensation from campaign funds.
The comments largely agreed with the Commission's proposal to allow
candidates to begin drawing compensation from campaign funds on the
date that their principal campaign committee files a Statement of
Organization with the Commission, but two comments suggested that the
eligibility period should begin when the candidate files the Statement
of Candidacy.
The Commission is adopting new 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(v) to allow
candidates to begin receiving compensation from campaign funds on the
date they file their Statement of Candidacy, rather than on the date of
the state's filing deadline for ballot access as under the current
regulation or when a principal campaign committee files a Statement of
Organization with the Commission as proposed. The comments indicate
that campaigns often start well before the state's filing deadline for
ballot access under state law. Moreover, under the Act and Commission
regulations, each candidate must file a new Statement of Candidacy with
the Commission for each election in which the candidate runs for
office, but a principal campaign committee is not required to file a
new Statement of Organization for each election. The Statement of
Candidacy is the first document that a campaign must file with the
Commission.\57\ Therefore, the Commission has determined that the
filing of a Statement of Candidacy will serve as a more accurate
standard than the state's deadline for filing for ballot access or a
Statement of Organization for determining when a campaign begins and
when a candidate becomes eligible to receive compensation from campaign
funds in each election. Moreover, the new regulation will help promote
uniformity in determining the start of the eligibility period.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ A candidate must file a Statement of Candidacy within 15
days after becoming a candidate, 11 CFR 101(a), and a principal
campaign committee must file a Statement of Organization within 10
days after the candidate's Statement of Candidacy, 11 CFR 102.1(a).
\58\ The final rules differ from the proposed rules in one
additional respect. In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to provide
that, in the case of a special election, a candidate's principal
campaign committee could pay the candidate compensation starting on
the date the special election is set. The Commission received no
comments on this proposal and as noted above, received ample
comments supporting the notion that a candidate should be eligible
to receive compensation upon filing a Statement of Candidacy. The
Commission discerns no reason to differentiate special elections
from other types of elections in this respect. Therefore, under
these final rules, candidates, whether in special elections or
regularly scheduled elections, may begin receiving compensation from
campaign funds upon filing their Statement of Candidacy with the
Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The current regulation prohibits the use of campaign funds to pay a
candidate's salary after the date the candidate loses the primary
election, withdraws from the race, or otherwise ceases to be a
candidate or, if the candidate wins the primary, after the date of the
general election or general election runoff.\59\ For special elections
occurring in odd-numbered years, the eligibility period runs until the
date of the special election.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ 11 CFR 113.1(g)(1)(i)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the NPRM, the Commission proposed to extend the eligibility
period for candidates who win the general election, general election
runoff, special election, or special election runoff by allowing them
to continue receiving compensation from campaign funds up to the date
they are sworn into office, rather than on the date of the election as
under the current regulation. For losing candidates and any other
individual who ceases to be a candidate, such as by withdrawing from
the race, the Commission proposed to continue the approach under the
current regulation and prohibit compensation from being paid beyond the
date of losing the election or otherwise ceasing to be a candidate.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many of the comments supported the Commission's proposal to permit
winning candidates to receive compensation from campaign funds up to
the date they are sworn into office, rather than the date of the
election, and two suggested lengthening the period for losing
candidates as well. One comment argued that losing candidates should be
permitted to receive compensation for a reasonable period, such as 60
days after the election, and another organization suggested 1 or 2
[[Page 13]]
months, so that the candidates may wind down their campaigns.
The Commission is adopting new 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(B) to enable all
candidates to accept compensation from campaign funds for 20 calendar
days after winning or losing the election or otherwise ceasing to
become a candidate. As the comments pointed out, all candidates must
spend time after a campaign winding down their campaigns, and a 20-day
period reflects the timelines of reportable activity for post-general
election reports.\61\ The Commission is extending the same rationale to
candidates who lose primary elections or otherwise drop out of the race
to maintain consistency between candidates who do and do not advance to
the general election.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ See id. 104.5(a)(2)(ii)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
F. New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(vi)--Debts and Debt Settlement
To prevent candidates from enriching themselves at the expense of
other campaign creditors, the Commission proposed in the NPRM to
prohibit any principal campaign committee seeking to settle debts for
less than full value from paying compensation to the candidate or
satisfying a debt to the candidate for compensation. In addition, under
the proposal, any debt settlement plan created under 11 CFR 116.7 would
be prohibited from providing for the payment of compensation to the
candidate before all other creditors are paid.
The Commission received two comments supporting this proposal, at
least in part. One comment said the proposed revision is necessary for
sufficient oversight of candidates receiving compensation from campaign
funds. The other agreed that a principal campaign committee's debt to a
candidate for compensation should be subordinated to debts owed to the
committee's other creditors in any debt settlement plan, but suggested
that committees seeking to settle debts for less than the full value
should also be permitted to settle a debt for compensation with the
candidate.
The Commission does not agree with the latter comment's suggestion.
New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(vi) is intended to prevent a principal campaign
committee from paying compensation to a candidate at the expense of the
committee's other creditors. When a principal campaign committee seeks
to settle debts for less than the full amount owed, any campaign funds
that the committee pays to the candidate for compensation are funds
that could have been, but are not being, paid to help make other
creditors whole. Accordingly, new 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(vi) prohibits a
principal campaign committee from settling or satisfying a debt for
compensation to the candidate, or otherwise paying compensation to the
candidate, when seeking to settle debts to others for less than the
full amount owed.
G. New 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(vii)--Evidence of Earned Income
The Commission's current regulations require any candidate
receiving a salary from campaign funds to provide income tax records
and other evidence of earned income upon request of the Commission.\62\
In the NPRM, the Commission proposed in Proposed Compensation Cap
Alternatives D, E, and F to maintain this requirement at new 11 CFR
113.1(g)(6)(vii). The Commission received one comment supporting the
proposal as necessary for sufficient oversight of candidates receiving
compensation from campaign funds. The Commission agrees. Because income
earned by a candidate during certain time periods is a material
consideration in determining the maximum compensation that the
candidate may receive from campaign funds, new 11 CFR 113.1(g)(6)(vii)
maintains the current requirement that candidates who receive
compensation from campaign funds must provide income tax records or
other evidence of earned income upon request of the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ Id. 113.1(g)(1)(i)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission is also adopting a proposal from the NPRM to require
candidates to maintain and preserve evidence of earned income for three
years after their principal campaign committees file reports disclosing
the payment of compensation to the candidates, pursuant to 11 CFR 102.9
and 104.14(b). The Commission received no comments on this proposal.
Sections 102.9 and 104.14(b) already require political committees and
their authorized agents to keep certain records of committee
disbursements \63\ and to maintain those records for three years after
filing a report to which such records relate.\64\ New 11 CFR
113.1(g)(6)(vii) clarifies that this record retention requirement
applies to evidence of a candidate's earned income, as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ Id. 102.9(b). Such records include bank records, vouchers,
worksheets, receipts, bills, and accounts. Id. 104.14(b)(1).
\64\ Id. 102.9(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certification of No Effect Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b) (Regulatory
Flexibility Act)
The Commission certifies that the final rules do not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The final rules provide flexibility to principal campaign committees
that choose to use campaign funds to pay their candidates compensation.
Any final rule that could be construed as placing an obligation on a
principal campaign committee would apply only to campaigns that choose
to pay their candidates compensation. The final rules would not impose
any new recordkeeping, reporting, or financial obligations on principal
campaign committees that do not choose to pay their candidates
compensation, and any such new obligations that are imposed on
principal campaign committees that do choose to pay compensation to
their candidates would be minimal. Thus, to the extent that any
entities affected by these final rules might fall within the definition
of ``small businesses'' or ``small organizations,'' the economic impact
of complying with these rules is not significant.
List of Subjects in 11 CFR Part 113
Campaign funds.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Federal Election
Commission amends 11 CFR chapter 1 as follows:
PART 113--PERMITTED AND PROHIBITED USES OF CAMPAIGN ACCOUNTS
0
1. The authority citation for part 113 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 52 U.S.C. 30102(h), 30111(a)(8), 30114, and 30116.
Sec. 113.1 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 113.1:
0
a. Remove and reserve paragraph (g)(1)(i)(I);
0
b. Redesignate paragraphs (g)(6) through (g)(8) as paragraphs (g)(7)
through (g)(9);
0
c. Add new paragraph (g)(6).
The addition reads as follows:
(6) Candidate compensation. (i) A Federal officeholder, as defined
in paragraph (c) of this section, must not receive compensation as a
candidate from campaign funds.
(ii) The use of campaign funds by a candidate's principal campaign
committee to pay compensation to the candidate is not personal use,
provided that the compensation does not exceed the lesser of: 50% of
the minimum annual salary paid to a Member of the
[[Page 14]]
United States House of Representatives under 2 U.S.C. 4501, and the
average annual income that the candidate earned during the most recent
five calendar years in which the candidate earned income prior to
becoming a candidate. The committee must calculate compensation,
minimum annual salary, and average annual income at the daily rate,
rounded to the nearest dollar.
(iii) For the purposes of this paragraph, compensation means direct
payments to the candidate unless the payments are otherwise permitted
by law, such as candidate expense reimbursements and candidate loan
repayments under 11 CFR part 116.
(iv) The candidate's principal campaign committee must reduce the
maximum amount of candidate compensation permissible under this
paragraph (g)(6) by the amount of any earned income the candidate
receives from any other source after filing a Statement of Candidacy
under 11 CFR 101.1(a).
(v)(A) Compensation shall not accrue or be paid to a candidate
before the date the candidate files a Statement of Candidacy with the
Commission. See 11 CFR 101.1(a).
(B) A candidate's principal campaign committee may pay the
candidate compensation from campaign funds up to 20 days after the
candidate wins the general election, general election runoff, special
election, or special election runoff, or otherwise ceases to be a
candidate, such as by losing an election or withdrawing from the race.
(vi) Any principal campaign committee seeking to settle debts for
less than the full value may not pay compensation to the candidate or
settle or satisfy a debt to a candidate for compensation.
(vii) The candidate must provide evidence of earned income from the
relevant years upon the request of the Commission. Any such evidence of
earned income must be maintained and preserved for three years after
the report disclosing the disbursement is filed, pursuant to 11 CFR
102.9 and 104.14(b).
Dated: December 14, 2023.
On behalf of the Commission,
Dara S. Lindenbaum,
Chair, Federal Election Commission.
[FR Doc. 2023-27906 Filed 12-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6715-01-P