Reasonable Inference
Where a coordinating actor directs multiple nominal donors to make contributions earmarked for a common recipient, those contributions are attributed to the original source — not the nominal donor — and aggregate against that source’s individual contribution limits. The conduit or intermediary is required to report the original source and intended recipient to the FEC, and where the conduit exercises direction or control over the recipient designation, the contribution counts against both the original contributor’s and the conduit’s limits. Making contributions in the name of another person is independently prohibited. A knowing and willful violation of these provisions involving contributions aggregating $25,000 or more in a calendar year constitutes a federal felony punishable by up to five years’ imprisonment.
Citations
52 U.S.C. § 30116(a)(8) (“all contributions made by a person, either directly or indirectly, on behalf of a particular candidate, including contributions which are in any way earmarked or otherwise directed through an intermediary or conduit to such candidate, shall be treated as contributions from such person to such candidate”), available at https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title52-section30116&num=0&edition=prelim.
11 C.F.R. § 110.6(b)(2) (providing that where a conduit “exercises any direction or control over the choice of the recipient candidate,” the contribution is attributed to the conduit as well as the original contributor), available at https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/11/110.6.
52 U.S.C. § 30122 (prohibiting contributions made in the name of another person or permitting one’s name to be used for such purpose), available at https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title52-section30122&num=0&edition=prelim.
52 U.S.C. § 30109(d)(1)(A)(i) (any person who knowingly and willfully commits a FECA violation involving contributions aggregating $25,000 or more during a calendar year shall be fined or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both), available at https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title52-section30109&num=0&edition=prelim.
Rep. Bryan Steil, Chairman, House Committee on Administration, identified as anomalous the “receipt of a significant number of donations from individuals who are retired and live on a fixed income” and donations “disproportionate to a person’s net worth or previous giving history.” Steil Expanded Investigation Announcement (Aug. 5, 2024), https://cha.house.gov/2024/8/chairman-steil-launches-expanded-investigation-into-online-political-donations-through-actblue . Among the 18 Connecticut smurf-tier donors identified by Rapini, 10 had their occupation listed as “retired” and 3 as “not employed” in FEC data. Inside Investigator (June 2, 2025), https://insideinvestigator.org/acting-blue-evidence-of-fraudulent-political-donations-targeting-retirees/.
Political donation rates are strongly income-correlated and highly concentrated demographically. Only a tiny fraction of Americans make itemized contributions (over $200). OpenSecrets, Donor Demographics, https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/donor-demographics. Academic research confirms income is “a strong predictor of whether an individual is asked to donate” and that richer donors give disproportionately more. Laurent Bouton, Julia Cagé, et al., “Small Campaign Donors,” NBER Working Paper No. 30050 (2022), https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w30050/w30050.pdf
John Solomon & Steven Richards, ‘Hundreds of ActBlue donors say they never made contributions attributed to them,’ Just the News, Sept. 5, 2023, https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/hundreds-actblue-donors-say-they-never-made-contributions-attributed-them