Public records · US organizations

How to check an organization’s tax-exempt status in IRS records

A charity’s website displays an old approval letter. An internet search also finds its name on a revocation list. Which should you believe? Start by checking whether both records describe the same organization, then arrange the decisions by the dates when they took effect. A document can be authentic and still answer a question about the past.

The IRS Tax Exempt Organization Search, or TEOS, is the starting point for this US federal check. Choose the dataset that fits the claim, search by the organization’s EIN when available, and retain the dates beside the result. This is a method for reading public records; it does not decide whether your particular donation is deductible or whether an organization deserves your support.

Choose the record before interpreting the result

The IRS TEOS overview identifies several datasets with different purposes:

• Pub. 78: eligibility to receive tax-deductible charitable contributions.
• Form 990 series and 990-N: returns and annual notices.
• Automatic Revocation List: recorded automatic loss of exemption.
• Determination letters: IRS decisions recognizing exemption.

That distinction changes the search. If someone supplies a return from a past year, record it as a filing for that period. Do not relabel it a current approval. If the claim concerns eligibility for deductible contributions, a search limited to returns has not finished the job.

Write the claim in a form you can test: “The organization identified by this EIN appears in the relevant IRS eligibility data checked on this date.” Leave broader claims about the campaign’s honesty, spending or website ownership for separate checks.

Search the identifier and keep the name as recorded

Open TEOS through the IRS page above. Select a dataset and search the EIN, the organization’s federal identification number. If you have only a name, compare the recorded name and location before choosing a result. The IRS search instructions warn that popular names may be absent; Pub. 78 does not list DBA, or “doing business as,” names.

Keep two name fields in your notes: the name used in the claim and the name returned by the source. Do not overwrite one with the other. A campaign label may differ from the legal organization, and an unexplained match by name is too weak to join their records.

Copy the identifier from the source carefully, including leading zeroes. Then compare it with the identifier supplied in the claim. If they differ, stop combining the documents. Search the second identifier separately and describe the mismatch without deciding its cause.

A revocation entry is a dated event

The IRS explains that missing required annual filings for three consecutive years triggers automatic revocation. Its list carries event dates, and reinstatement can follow. A new determination letter and updated listings may document that later decision. Read the IRS explanation of revocation and reinstatement before treating an older event as the present status.

For a contested claim, distinguish three clocks:

1. Effective date: when the decision applies.
2. Posting or update date: when the source made the record available.
3. Observation time: when you actually checked it.

For example, a page downloaded in October can describe a decision effective in May. Writing “revoked in October” from the download date would change the evidence. Preserve the source’s labels rather than renaming every date “last updated.”

Try this four-record check

Fictional exercise. “Community Workshop A” and the token EIN-A are invented teaching labels, not a real organization or usable tax identifier. Assume the four supplied records have been obtained from their stated sources and all match that identifier. All dates below are in 2026 except the first letter.

Now edit these three statements:

“It has never lost exemption.” The 2018 letter cannot support that. The packet includes a later revocation.

“It remains revoked because it appears on the revocation list.” That ignores the reinstatement letter and subsequent listing. A more careful finding names both the revocation and the later reinstatement, with their effective dates.

“This proves every donation throughout 2026 is deductible.” The packet does not settle that donor-specific conclusion. In particular, do not fill the period between 15 May and 1 July by assumption. Determining the treatment of a contribution on a particular date requires the applicable IRS rules and, where needed, qualified tax advice.

A suitable research note is: “The supplied records match EIN-A and show revocation effective 15 May, followed by reinstatement effective 1 July. The September Pub. 78 dataset, observed on 20 October, includes the organization. The campaign’s connection to that entity has not been examined.”

Remove the reinstatement letter from the exercise. The remaining later listing is still relevant, but you can no longer report the 1 July effective date from this packet. The next task becomes finding the decision that supplies that date. This small change tests whether your conclusion is attached to a record or simply sounds plausible.

If the search returns nothing

First record exactly which dataset, identifier and filters you used. Retry an over-restricted location filter or a campaign name with the legal name and EIN. Keep “no result for this search” separate from “no exemption.”

The IRS identifies eligible recipients that may not appear in Pub. 78, including certain churches, group-exemption subordinates and governmental units. An absent row needs a coverage check; it is not a fraud finding. Seek documentation relevant to the claimed category rather than attaching a negative label to the organization.

Finish with a record receipt someone else can follow

Keep a short receipt for each source: dataset name, exact query, returned legal name, EIN, source link or document filename, relevant effective date, data update date, and retrieval time with timezone. Add one sentence saying which claim the record supports. If a stable result link is unavailable, retain the search terms and permitted public document so another reviewer can repeat the check.

The IRS record question can often be resolved directly in the official sources. If the unresolved part is whether a particular website or campaign belongs to that entity, continue with OSINT Jet’s guide to checking an organization and its website claims. It helps separate an existing entity from an unproven affiliation. Carry the IRS receipt into that work; do not turn a correct tax-status match into a blanket endorsement.