FBI and IRS Launch Joint Probe of Nonprofits for Alleged Terrorism Links

Objective Facts

FBI and IRS agents are forming a new initiative to investigate nonprofit organizations over suspected possible links to domestic terrorism. The joint operation, which will be based at the FBI with IRS Criminal Investigation agents working on one-year temporary assignments, stems from a December memo by Attorney General Pam Bondi ordering federal law enforcement to prioritize investigations into antifa and other groups she deemed "extremist." Bondi's December 4 memo directs investigation of groups including "opposition to law and immigration enforcement; extreme views in favor of mass migration and open borders; adherence to radical gender ideology, anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, or anti-Christianity." The most prominent prosecution involved nine people convicted in northern Texas for using weapons and explosives and attempting murder of an Alvarado police officer at the Prairieland ICE Detention Center.

Left-Leaning Perspective

Left-leaning outlets reported that the FBI and IRS are forming a joint initiative to investigate nonprofits in response to Attorney General Pam Bondi's December memo requiring the DOJ to compile a list of potential "domestic terrorism" organizations that espouse "extreme viewpoints on immigration, radical gender ideology, and anti-American sentiment." Rights groups have for months been sounding the alarm about the implications of the underlying September directive, which they said could be used to initiate a widespread crackdown against the Trump administration's critics. Progressive activists argue that Trump's DOJ changed the indicators of domestic terrorism to include pro-immigrant, pro-LBTQ, anti-Trump, and anti-capitalist speech. Tom Brzozowski, former domestic terrorism counsel at the DOJ's National Security Division, expressed concern about the broad scope of investigatory activities and questioned whether the DOJ had established the proper predication to justify amassing a list of nonprofit groups to be targeted in a criminal probe. Journalists have drawn comparisons to authoritarian tactics, with one noting that going after nonprofit groups has long been a hallmark of regimes seeking to consolidate power, citing examples from El Salvador and Hungary's targeting of civil society organizations. Critics contend that many targeted organizations may lack resources to fight what they view as politically motivated investigations, and that the tactic—making high-profile examples to frighten other organizations into self-censorship—resembles coercive government overreach.

Right-Leaning Perspective

Right-leaning outlets describe the new multi-pronged effort by Trump administration agencies as stemming from Attorney General Bondi's memo based on an executive order, ordering federal law enforcement to bear down on "groups and individuals" who take part in Antifa actions "or are deemed 'extremist'." Conservative coverage highlights successful prosecutions, citing the convictions of nine alleged members of an Antifa cell who attacked the Prairieland ICE facility in Texas in 2025, calling it a historic application of terrorism-related statutes to alleged Antifa operatives. FBI Director Kash Patel promised in his statement after the nine were convicted: "Today justice prevailed. Terrorists who target our agents will face the full force of federal law." Right-leaning outlets frame the initiative as a pragmatic response to funding networks supporting political violence, with one source noting the partnership marks understanding that stopping terrorism requires cutting off funding and that authorities are sending a message that supporting chaos has consequences. Coverage notes that Patel drew a line between peaceful protest and organized violence, saying the investigation focuses on funding tied to criminal acts, and confirmed the FBI created a dedicated program to follow the money behind coordinated street violence. Right-leaning sources acknowledge tension between security imperatives and civil liberties but argue that for many Americans who watched cities burn during unrest, this coordinated federal action signals a long-awaited reckoning that moves beyond reacting to violence and aims to proactively choke off its resources.

Deep Dive

The joint FBI-IRS initiative emerged from National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7), a directive signed by President Trump in September that demanded a "national strategy to investigate and disrupt networks, entities, and organizations that foment political violence so that law enforcement can intervene in criminal conspiracies before they result in violent political acts." Bondi issued her memo after President Trump in late September issued an executive order on domestic terrorism that was sparked by a series of high-profile events, including the 2025 assassination of far-right influencer Charlie Kirk. The initiative represents the Trump administration's most comprehensive effort to date to target funding networks it associates with left-wing activism and violence. The recent convictions of nine individuals described as part of an antifa cell for a 2025 attack on a Texas ICE detention facility, where they were found guilty on charges including providing material support to terrorists and attempted murder of a police officer, provide right-leaning proponents with concrete evidence of the threat they seek to address. However, a senior FBI official testified in December that antifa represented one of the biggest threats but struggled to answer questions about the organization, its structure, or why the FBI labeled it as such, suggesting gaps in the empirical basis for designations. Federal law contains a "Prohibition on Executive Branch Influence over Taxpayer Audits and Investigations" in the tax code, making it a felony for top officials to use the IRS for politically-motivated retaliatory investigation, a legal constraint both sides acknowledge but interpret differently regarding this initiative's compliance. It is not yet clear what specific groups could be targeted for investigation, which remains a critical unresolved question. The key tension is whether broad ideological criteria—opposition to immigration enforcement, support for open borders, anti-capitalist or anti-American ideology—constitute legitimate predication for criminal investigation or represent political targeting dressed in law enforcement language. FBI Director Kash Patel stated on a podcast that FBI agents are "looking at those who funded these streams" and "starting to arrest people who used their funds to incite violence in the guise of political peaceful protest." Whether these arrests and investigations will produce prosecutable cases based on funding actual violent conduct—as opposed to funding advocacy organizations with some ideological opposition to government—will largely determine whether critics' fears of overreach or supporters' expectations of effective enforcement prove justified. Congressional oversight and potential civil liberties challenges will likely emerge in coming months.

OBJ SPEAKING

← Daily BriefAbout

FBI and IRS Launch Joint Probe of Nonprofits for Alleged Terrorism Links

Mar 18, 2026· Updated Mar 19, 2026
What's Going On

FBI and IRS agents are forming a new initiative to investigate nonprofit organizations over suspected possible links to domestic terrorism. The joint operation, which will be based at the FBI with IRS Criminal Investigation agents working on one-year temporary assignments, stems from a December memo by Attorney General Pam Bondi ordering federal law enforcement to prioritize investigations into antifa and other groups she deemed "extremist." Bondi's December 4 memo directs investigation of groups including "opposition to law and immigration enforcement; extreme views in favor of mass migration and open borders; adherence to radical gender ideology, anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, or anti-Christianity." The most prominent prosecution involved nine people convicted in northern Texas for using weapons and explosives and attempting murder of an Alvarado police officer at the Prairieland ICE Detention Center.

Left says: Critics warn the sweeping new initiative could be used to target left-wing political groups. The memo raises alarm among civil liberties advocates about the weaponization of tax enforcement against political opponents.
Right says: The joint task force marks a historic application of terrorism-related statutes to alleged Antifa operatives. The partnership between the FBI and IRS marks a pragmatic understanding that stopping terrorism requires cutting off its funding, and by targeting nonprofit funding, authorities are sending a clear message that supporting chaos has consequences.
✓ Common Ground
Both sides acknowledge a notable discrepancy: antifa did not come up when FBI Director Kash Patel testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee during its annual hearing on worldwide threats, nor was it referenced in the 2026 unclassified annual threat assessment of the intelligence community.
Both sides note that although the term domestic terrorism is defined in federal law, there is no criminal charge on the books for domestic terrorism; prosecutors typically charge defendants with other crimes and seek terrorism enhancements at sentencing.
Critics and officials agree that it is not yet clear what groups could be targeted for investigation, though Bondi's memo instructed all federal law enforcement agencies to scour their files for intelligence on antifa groups and forward it to the FBI.
Several observers across perspectives note that Patel drew a line between peaceful protest and organized violence, saying the investigation focuses on funding tied to criminal acts, confirming that the FBI created a dedicated program to follow the money behind coordinated street violence.
Objective Deep Dive

The joint FBI-IRS initiative emerged from National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7), a directive signed by President Trump in September that demanded a "national strategy to investigate and disrupt networks, entities, and organizations that foment political violence so that law enforcement can intervene in criminal conspiracies before they result in violent political acts." Bondi issued her memo after President Trump in late September issued an executive order on domestic terrorism that was sparked by a series of high-profile events, including the 2025 assassination of far-right influencer Charlie Kirk. The initiative represents the Trump administration's most comprehensive effort to date to target funding networks it associates with left-wing activism and violence.

The recent convictions of nine individuals described as part of an antifa cell for a 2025 attack on a Texas ICE detention facility, where they were found guilty on charges including providing material support to terrorists and attempted murder of a police officer, provide right-leaning proponents with concrete evidence of the threat they seek to address. However, a senior FBI official testified in December that antifa represented one of the biggest threats but struggled to answer questions about the organization, its structure, or why the FBI labeled it as such, suggesting gaps in the empirical basis for designations. Federal law contains a "Prohibition on Executive Branch Influence over Taxpayer Audits and Investigations" in the tax code, making it a felony for top officials to use the IRS for politically-motivated retaliatory investigation, a legal constraint both sides acknowledge but interpret differently regarding this initiative's compliance.

It is not yet clear what specific groups could be targeted for investigation, which remains a critical unresolved question. The key tension is whether broad ideological criteria—opposition to immigration enforcement, support for open borders, anti-capitalist or anti-American ideology—constitute legitimate predication for criminal investigation or represent political targeting dressed in law enforcement language. FBI Director Kash Patel stated on a podcast that FBI agents are "looking at those who funded these streams" and "starting to arrest people who used their funds to incite violence in the guise of political peaceful protest." Whether these arrests and investigations will produce prosecutable cases based on funding actual violent conduct—as opposed to funding advocacy organizations with some ideological opposition to government—will largely determine whether critics' fears of overreach or supporters' expectations of effective enforcement prove justified. Congressional oversight and potential civil liberties challenges will likely emerge in coming months.

◈ Tone Comparison

Left-leaning outlets emphasize potential governmental overreach and erosion of civil liberties, using language like "alarm," "sweeping," and references to authoritarian tactics. Right-leaning coverage emphasizes law enforcement achievement, deterrence, and accountability, using phrases like "historic application" and "direct response to a perceived failure." Both acknowledge the complexity of the legal and policy questions involved, but interpret the same facts through fundamentally different frameworks about government power and political violence.

✕ Key Disagreements
Definition and scope of who qualifies as a domestic terrorism target
Left: Left-leaning voices argue Trump's DOJ changed the indicators of domestic terrorism to include pro-immigrant, pro-LBTQ, anti-Trump, and anti-capitalist speech.
Right: Right-leaning outlets frame the targets as those engaged in "violence or the threat of violence to advance political and social agendas, including opposition to law and immigration enforcement; extreme views in favor of mass migration and open borders; adherence to radical gender ideology, anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, or anti-Christianity."
Whether investigations require sufficient legal predication
Left: Left-leaning sources cite Tom Brzozowski, former domestic terrorism counsel at the Justice Department, who raised serious legal questions about whether the FBI has sufficient legal basis to build lists of groups, noting "If you're going to pull down information and retain it in a government data set, you have to have predication to do that – especially if you're looking at it through an investigative lens."
Right: Right-leaning coverage does not substantially address the predication question raised by legal experts; instead, right-leaning outlets emphasize the justified enforcement response to demonstrated violent conduct and successful prosecutions.
Whether this represents targeting of political dissent or legitimate law enforcement
Left: Rights groups said the underlying directive could be used to initiate a widespread crackdown against the Trump administration's critics.
Right: Right-leaning sources argue that by targeting the complex web of nonprofit funding, authorities are sending a clear message that supporting chaos has consequences.
Whether tax enforcement should be involved in terrorism investigations
Left: Critics raise alarm about the weaponization of tax enforcement against political opponents.
Right: Right-leaning commentary notes that political violence often relies on money as much as ideology, and that removing funding and networks weakens any political movement.