Connect with us

Finance

Top State House officials cited for campaign finance violations

Published

on

Top State House officials cited for campaign finance violations

The New Hampshire Attorney General’s office has cited top state officials — including House Majority Leader Jason Osborne and Karen Liot Hill, the Executive Council’s lone Democrat — with violating state campaign finance laws. The Department of Justice simultaneously announced separate campaign finance sanctions against the House’s deputy majority leader and the political committee run by House Republican leaders.

The flurry of cease-and-desist orders and fines amount to something relatively rare in New Hampshire politics: the enforcement of state campaign finance laws against State House candidates, committees and office holders.

Each case, announced in a press release from the Department of Justice Friday afternoon, also involves individuals who are lighting rods in Concord’s increasingly polarized political environment.

Osborne, who has led Republicans in the House since 2020, was fined $2,000 for failing to file required finance reports for his campaign committee, “Friends of Jason Osborne” during the past two election cycles.

State prosecutors say in investigating a complaint they determined that Osborne, who lives in Auburn, failed to file seven required campaign reports for the 2024 election cycle. In a January 24, 2025 letter, the Attorney General’s office asked Osborne to file the missing reports within 30 days. He didn’t, but on May 9 he provided prosecutors with a spreadsheet showing his committee’s “recipes and expenditures between 2022 and 2024.”

Advertisement

Prosecutors say that information confirmed that Osborne should have filed reports for both election cycles. Osborne eventually did so for both elections. But state prosecutors said the time lag was unacceptable and merited sanction.

“[Y]ou filed your reports for the 2022 cycle more than 33 months after they were due, and you filed your report for the 2024 election cycle more than ten months after they were due,” Assistant Attorney General Brendan O’Donnell wrote Osborne, in a cease and desist order.

The order requires Osborne to comply with state campaign finance laws going forward, and to pay a $2,000 fine within 30 days.

Osborne is also cited in the state’s enforcement action against the Committee to Elect House Republicans, the political committee controlled by GOP caucus leaders for which Osborne serves as chairman.

In that cease and desist order, the Attorney General’s Office wrote that a complaint prompted it to seek more information about the committee from Osborne and House Speaker Sherman Packard on January 24, 2025. Subsequent correspondence names House Speaker Pro Tempore Jim Kofalt, who later replaced Packard as the committee’s treasurer.

Advertisement

At issue are what the New Hampshire Department of Justice called “several substantial discrepancies” in the committee’s 2024 campaign finance reports.

According to the committee’s filing from November 2, 2022, it held a surplus of $154,025. By its June 8 2023 filing, the committee’s surplus was reported as $67,601, but the missing $86,418 difference was never accounted for in 2024 filings.

According to prosecutors, the committee’s filings also failed to reconcile a $15,491 surplus from a 2023 special election. There were also other issues, including missing finance filings, late filings and filings with “significant revisions.”

Prosecutors noted the committee “voluntarily and diligently worked to correct the issues with its filings, including hiring an accountant.”

However the committee’s “initial failure to timely and accurately report its receipts during the 2020 and 2024 electron cycles is not acceptable,” O’Donnell wrote.

Advertisement

Granite Solutions, the political advocacy group operated by Rep. Joe Sweeney of Salem, the House’s deputy majority leader, was also cited for a violation Friday. The cited conduct in this case, for which Granite Solutions was fined $500, included Sweeney’s failure to file a receipts and expenditure report on September 18, 2024, and file an independent expense report within 48 hours after sending out a campaign mailer unauthorized by any candidate.

The mailer in question, titled “Tim Cahill’s Stolen Valor — A Disgrace to our Veterans,” was, according to the state’s cease and desist order, “allegedly sent out on or around September 7 2024.” And while the mailer disclosed it was “not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee,” Granite Solutions failed to file the required independent expenditures report. In the state’s order, O’Donnell wrote that after the state contacted Sweeney in February, he did submit a receipts and expenditures report the following month, and an independent expenditures report in April. But O’Donnell said Sweeney’s conduct still merited sanction, prosecutors determined.

“Although this office appreciates that Granite Solutions promptly filed these overdue campaign finance reports, the organization’s initial failure to file these reports violated campaign finance law and deprived the public of timely access to this information during the 2024 election cycle,” the letter from the Department of Justice reads.

Executive Councilor Karen Liot Hill, who is in her first term in Concord but who has sat on Lebanon’s city council for two decades, was meanwhile fined $1,000 for failing to “timely file 2024 election reports that excluded improper expenditures.”

According to its cease-and-desist order, the Attorney General’s office first sought “additional information” about Liot Hill’s use of political committee funds in late December 2024.

Advertisement

Prosecutors asked why Liot Hill, a Democrat, had initially filed reports that claimed “certain itemized expenditures,” before later removing them in amended reports. Specifically, they sought to understand why Liot Hill reduced what had been listed as a $3,000 contribution to herself down to $731 in an amended filing, and why she’d claimed spending on clothing and to hire a cleaning company as campaign expenditures.

In February, Liot Hill wrote prosecutors she’d initially claimed expenses tied to registering her car for campaign travel, because she considered the cost of maintaining her vehicle “reasonably a campaign expenditure.” At the same time, Liot Hill acknowledged it wasn’t appropriate to use campaign money to pay for “urgent care, home heating oil, and grocery store items,” which she said had been “inadvertent.”

Prosecutors said Liot Hill also acknowledged she’d initially included three expenditures for gifts for campaign volunteers as political expenses because she’d believed they were “promoting the success of a candidate” before later removing them after concluding they were “possibly being considered personal in nature.”

“Outside of a few express statutory exceptions, campaign funds cannot be spent for personal purposes,” O’Donnell wrote in the cease-and-desist order. He also warned Liot Hill to file accurate reports in the future, including “recording contributions and loans from yourself to your committee and ensuring that no expenditures are made for personal subsistence.”

Advertisement

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Finance

German finance minister wants to scrap spousal tax splitting

Published

on

German finance minister wants to scrap spousal tax splitting

Last weekend, several thousand people took to the streets in Munich to demonstrate against abortion and assisted suicide. One speaker made an extremely dramatic plea against what he called the “culture of death” that has allegedly taken hold in Germany. One sign of this, the speaker argued, was that the government is planning to abolish a regulation known as “spousal tax splitting.”

Is tax law really relevant to deep philosophical debates on the sanctity of life? It is even a matter of life and death at all? Surely we needn’t go that far? In any case, the intense political uproar surrounding the new debate on whether to abolish spousal tax splitting is notable, even by today’s standards of populist outrage.

An advantage for couples with widely divergent incomes

The row was sparked by Germany’s vice chancellor and finance minister, Lars Klingbeil, of the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD), who said he wanted to abolish and replace the joint taxation of spouses’ income, a system that has been in place since 1958.

How exactly does spousal tax splitting work? In Germany, married couples (and since 2013, couples in civil partnerships), can choose to have their income assessed jointly by the tax authorities.

It means that the taxable income for both spouses together is halved – as if both partners had each earned an equal half of the income. Their tax liability is then determined by simply doubling the income tax due on one half.

Advertisement

As people who earn more pay higher taxes in Germany, this system benefits couples where one partner (and often this is still the man) earns significantly more than the other (in practice often the woman).

Lars Klingbeil
Lars Klingbeil thinks spousal splitting is outdated and costs the state too muchImage: Bernd von Jutrczenka/dpa/picture alliance

Costs of up to €25 billion per year

If for example one partner earns €60,000 ($70,512) a year and the other partner earns nothing, the couple will be taxed as if they earned €30,000 each. In this example, the couple would save nearly €5,800 in taxes per year compared to the amount they would owe if both partners filed their taxes separately. According to the Finance Ministry, spousal tax splitting costs the government a total of up to €25 billion annually.

Some critics have long viewed splitting as a tool to keep women out of the labor market, because the more a woman earns, the larger her tax burden becomes. Klingbeil seems to agree, arguing on ARD television in late March that the system was “out of step with the times.” The spousal splitting system reflects “a view of women and families that is completely at odds with my own,” he said.

Chancellor Merz said to be in favor of splitting

On Monday of this week, Klingbeil got some surprising support on this from Johannes Winkel, head of the youth wing of the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU).

“Given the demographic reality, the government should create incentives to ensure that both partners in a relationship are employed,” Winkel told the Funke Media Group. “In the future, tax relief should primarily be granted to married couples when they are facing hardships related to raising children.”

Advertisement

But the chancellor is a vocal skeptic of the proposal. “I am not convinced by the claim that joint filing for married couples discourages women from working,” Friedrich Merz said at a conference organized by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper. “Marriage is a relationship based on shared income and mutual support. And in a marriage, income must be treated as a joint income for tax purposes, not separately.”

Berlin under pressure to fix pensions, health care and taxes

To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video

Klingbeil’s alternative plan

At around 74%, the labor force participation rate for women in Germany is one of the highest in Europe, but half of them work part-time.

Klingbeil’s idea is to replace the existing system with a more flexible approach: Both partners would be able to distribute tax-free income among themselves in such a way that it minimizes their tax liability. This would allow the couple to continue enjoying a tax advantage, albeit not to the same extent as before. And whether one partner earns more than the other would become less important.

However, it remains to be seen whether Klingbeil will be able to push through his proposal. Aside from Germany, similar regulations offering tax benefits to couples exist in Poland, Luxembourg, Portugal and France.

Advertisement

This article was originally written in German.

Continue Reading

Finance

Departing inspector general targets Council Office of Financial Analysis

Published

on

Departing inspector general targets Council Office of Financial Analysis

The $537,000-a-year office created in 2014 to advise the City Council on financial issues and avoid a repeat of the parking meter fiasco has failed to deliver on that mission, the city’s chief watchdog said Tuesday.

Days before concluding her four-year term, Inspector General Deborah Witzburg said a shortage of both adequate staff and financial information closely held by the mayor’s office prevents the Council’s Office of Financial Analysis from helping the Council be the the “co-equal branch of government” it aspires to be.

In a budget rebellion not seen since “Council Wars” in the 1980s, a majority of alderpersons led by conservative and moderate Democrats rejected Mayor Brandon Johnson’s corporate head tax and approved an alternative budget, including several revenue-generating items the mayor’s office adamantly opposed.

But Witzburg said the renegades would have been in an even better position to challenge Johnson if only their financial analysis office had been “equipped and positioned to do what it’s supposed to do” — provide the Council with “objective, independent financial analysis.”

“We are entering new territory where the City Council is asserting new, independent authority over the budget process. It can’t do that in a meaningful way without its own access to financial analysis,” Witzburg told the Chicago Sun-Times.

Advertisement

Chicago Inspector General Deborah Witzburg’s latest report focuses on the Chicago City Council’s Office of Financial Analysis.

Jim Vondruska/Jim Vondruska/For the Sun-Times

But the Council’s financial analysis office, she added, “has never been equipped or positioned to do what it needs to do. It needs better and more independent access to data, and it needs enough staff to do its job. It has a small number of employees and comparatively limited access to data.”

Advertisement

The inspector general’s farewell audit examined the period from 2015 through 2023. During that time, the financial analysis office budget authorized “either three or four” full-time employees. It now has a staff of five .

Witzburg is recommending a staffing analysis to identify how many people the financial office really needs — and also recommending that the office “get data directly” from other city departments, “ rather than having it go through the mayor’s office.”

The audit further recommends that the office develop “better procedures to meet their reporting requirements” in a timely manner. As it stands now, reports are delivered “sometimes late, sometimes not at all,” the inspector general said.

“We find that those reports have been both not timely and not complete in terms of what they are required to report on and that those reports therefore have provided limited assistance to the City Council in its responsibility to make decisions about the city’s budget,” she said.

The Council Office of Financial Analysis responded to the audit by saying it hopes to add at least three full-time staffers in the short term and has made “some progress” over the last three years in improving their access to data, but not enough.

Advertisement

The office was created in 2014 to provide Council members with expert advice on fiscal issues.

For nearly two years the reform was stuck in the mud over whether former 46th Ward Ald. Helen Shiller had the independence and policy expertise to lead the office.

Shiller ultimately withdrew her name, but the office was a bust nevertheless. In an attempt to breathe new life into it, sponsors pushed through a series of changes.

Instead of allowing the Budget chair alone to request a financial analysis on a proposal impacting the city budget, any alderperson was allowed to make that request.

The office was further required to produce activity reports quarterly, not just annually.

Advertisement

Now former-Budget Chair Pat Dowell (3rd) then chose Kenneth Williams Sr., a former analyst for the office, as director and gave him the “autonomy” the ordinance demanded.

Two years ago, a bizarre standoff developed in the office.

Budget Committee Chair Jason Ervin (28th) was empowered to dump Williams after Williams refused to leave to make way for a director of Ervin’s own choosing.

The standoff began when Williams said he was summoned to Ervin’s office and told the newly appointed Budget chair was “going in a different direction, and I’m putting you on administrative leave” with pay.

“He took all my credentials and access away. I would love to come to work. I wasn’t allowed to come to work,” Williams said then.

Advertisement

Williams collected a paycheck for doing nothing while serving out the final days remainder of a four-year term.

Ervin’s resolution stated the director “may be removed at any time with or without cause by a two-thirds” vote or 34 alderpersons. He chose Janice Oda-Gray, who remains chief administrator.

Continue Reading

Finance

Reilly Barnes Returns to Little League® as Purchasing/Finance Assistant

Published

on

Reilly Barnes Returns to Little League® as Purchasing/Finance Assistant

Little League® International has announced that Reilly Barnes accepted a new role as Purchasing/Finance Assistant, effective April 6, 2026. Barnes transitions from a temporary Purchasing Assistant to this full-time position to assist in the year-round demands of purchasing for the organization, as well as the region and Little League Baseball and Softball World Series tournaments. 

“We are thrilled to welcome back Reilly to our team as a full-time Purchasing/Finance Assistant. Reilly’s prior experience, time management, and attention to detail make him an invaluable asset to the purchasing team,” said Nancy Grove, Little League Materials Management Director. “We look forward to the positive contributions he will have on our organization.” 

In this role, Barnes will be responsible for processing purchase requisitions, coordinating souvenir products, and tracking order fulfillment. He will also assist with evaluating suppliers, reviewing product quality, and negotiating contracts for effective operations.  

After most recently working as a Logistician Analyst at Precision Air in Charleston, South Carolina, Barnes, a Williamsport native, returns after honing his skills in the fast-paced environment. Prior to his time at Precision Air, Barnes served as a Procurement Specialist at The Medical University of South Carolina, where his expertise and knowledge were instrumental in supporting both education and healthcare needs.  

“I am thrilled to return to Little League in this full-time role,” said Barnes. “Coming back to my hometown and having the opportunity to work for an organization that has played such a special part of my upbringing means a lot. I can’t wait begin this new opportunity.” 

Advertisement

Barnes graduated from the University of Pittsburgh in 2022 with a B.A. in Supply Chain Management, Finance, and Business Analytics.  

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending