Independent expenditure rules

This section codifies independent-expenditure rules directly in statute, defining what constitutes an independent expenditure, establishing a reporting requirement with cross-references to specific statutory sections (AS 15.13.040, 15.13.100–15.13.110), and providing a clear threshold for exemption ($250 annual budget for nongroup entities). The statute also mandates compliance with disclosure requirements (AS 15.13.090) and specifies the content and visibility of required notices. The rule is statutorily grounded and enumerated, satisfying the procedural-clarity criterion.

“An independent expenditure supporting or opposing a candidate for election to public office, except an independent expenditure made by a nongroup entity with an annual operating budget of $250 or less, shall be reported in accordance with AS 15.13.040 and 15.13.100 — 15.13.110 and other requirements of this chapter.”

A.R.S. § 16-922 provides clear statutory codification of independent-expenditure rules, establishing the foundational definition of permissible independent expenditures (subsection A), defining what renders an expenditure non-independent through actual coordination or nonpublic-information tests (subsection B), and specifying rebuttable-evidence factors and firewall exceptions (subsections C–D). The statute explicitly addresses third-party spending separate from candidate committees, defining coordination standards and safe harbors, which satisfies the procedural-clarity requirement for this criterion.

“A. Any person may make independent expenditures. B. An expenditure is not an independent expenditure if either of the following applies: 1. There is actual coordination with respect to an expenditure between a candidate or candidate's agent and the person making the expenditure or that person's agent. 2. Both of the following apply: (a) The expenditure is based on nonpublic information about a candidate's or candidate committee's plans or needs that the candidate or candidate's agent provides to the person making the expenditure or that person's agent. (b) The candidate or candidate's agent provides the nonpublic information with an intent toward having the expenditure made.”

The section provides explicit statutory codification of independent-expenditure rules, including registration thresholds ($200 aggregate), timing requirements (15 days), record-retention obligations (4 years for contributor and expenditure records), resident-agent requirements, and penalty provisions (late-filing fees). All core procedural elements—definition, enumeration of requirements, and enforcement mechanism—are grounded directly in statute rather than delegated to administrative discretion.

The section provides comprehensive statutory codification of independent-expenditure rules, including registration requirements (§ 1-45-107.5(3)(a), timing (two business days), threshold ($1,000), disclosure of entity information (§ 1-45-107.5(3)(b)), and donor-reporting requirements (§ 1-45-107.5(4)(b)). These procedural elements are enumerated in statute rather than delegated to administrative discretion, satisfying the criterion's demand for statutory grounding of IE frameworks.

Connecticut Gen. Stat. § 9-601d provides comprehensive statutory codification of independent-expenditure rules, including definitions, threshold triggers ($1,000 aggregate), filing timelines (24 hours), reporting formats (long-form and short-form), required disclosure fields (filer identity, certification of non-foreign-national status, candidate name, expenditure amount and description), and source-of-funds transparency for covered transfers. The framework is statutorily grounded and enumerated with specificity sufficient to satisfy the procedural-clarity requirement for CONT.2.

“Any person, as defined in section 9-601 , may, unless otherwise restricted or prohibited by law, including, but not limited to, any provision of this chapter or chapter 157, make unlimited independent expenditures, as defined in section 9-601c , and accept unlimited covered transfers, as defined in said section 9-601 . Except as provided pursuant to this section, any such person who makes or obligates to make an independent expenditure or expenditures in excess of one thousand dollars, in the aggregate, shall file statements according to the same schedule and in the same manner as is required of a treasurer of a candidate committee pursuant to section 9-608 .”

The statute codifies independent-expenditure rules with statutory force by defining the threshold ($500 aggregate), the triggering event (third-party advertisement expenditure), the reporting obligation, the filing deadline (24–48 hours depending on proximity to election), required disclosures (contributor identity, amounts, dates, purposes, candidate beneficiary), and penalties (perjury). The rules distinguish third-party expenditures from candidate-committee and party spending, establishing a clear procedural framework.

“Any person other than a candidate committee or political party who makes an expenditure for any third-party advertisement that causes the aggregate amount of expenditures for third-party advertisements made by such person to exceed $500 during an election period shall file a third-party advertisement report with the Commissioner.”

§ 12³(2) codifies the treatment of third-party spending — payment of a political party's expenses by third parties is a prohibited donation, so independent expenditure on a party's behalf is regulated as, and folded into, the donation regime.

“payment of the expenses of a political party by third parties for the political party”

§ 106.1437 + Ch. 106 independent-expenditure regime governs miscellaneous expenditures. § 97.0575 (4794) regulates third-party voter registration organizations. Codified independent-expenditure rules.

“Any advertisement, other than a political advertisement, independent expenditure, or electioneering communication, on billboards, bumper stickers, radio, or television, or in a newspaper, a magazine, or a periodical, intended to influence”

The section codifies a statutory procedure for independent expenditures by noncandidate committees, defining the threshold ($500), timing window (14–4 days before election), filing deadline (third day before election), filing mechanism (electronic system), and exhaustive enumeration of required disclosure items (amount, date, vendor details, purpose, and candidate identification). This constitutes clear statutory grounding and procedural specificity for independent-expenditure regulation.

“A noncandidate committee that makes independent expenditures in an aggregate amount of more than $500 within the period between fourteen and four calendar days prior to any election shall file a late expenditure report by means of the commission's electronic filing system on or before the third calendar day prior to the election. The late expenditure report shall include the following information for each expenditure: (1) The amount and date made; (2) The vendor name, address, and contact information; and (3) The purpose, including the name of any candidate supported, opposed, or clearly identified by the expenditure.”

Idaho Code § 67-6611 codifies independent-expenditure rules directly in statute, establishing a clear threshold ($100), filing requirement, and disclosure obligations. The section enumerates filing deadlines (pre-election and post-election timeframes, plus expedited 48-hour reporting for large expenditures near Election Day) and specifies required disclosure information (payee identity, amount, date, purpose, candidate/measure identification, and support/opposition designation).

“Each person who makes independent expenditures in an aggregate amount exceeding one hundred dollars ($100) in support of or in opposition to any one (1) candidate, political committee, or measure shall file a statement of the expenditure with the secretary of state.”

10 ILCS 5/9-8.6 codifies IE definition (separation from coordinated spending), $3,000 trigger for disclosure within 2 business days, continuing $1,000-increment reporting obligation, and the natural-person/political-committee distinction.

“An independent expenditure is not considered a contribution”

The section explicitly codifies independent-expenditure rules in statute by defining the record-keeping obligations for persons making independent expenditures, including the requirement to obtain and preserve receipted documentation for all such expenditures and a three-year retention period. This provides clear statutory grounding for independent-expenditure procedure without relying on regulation or administrative discretion.

Iowa Code § 68A.404 comprehensively codifies independent-expenditure rules in statute, defining the term, establishing authorization requirements for non-individual persons (§2.a-b), prohibiting foreign nationals from making independent expenditures (§2.c), exempting certain entities (§2.d), mandating filing within 48 hours (§4.a), specifying detailed disclosure content (§5.a-h), requiring attribution (§6), and imposing consultant restrictions (§7). The framework is explicit, enumerated, and statutorily grounded rather than delegated to administrative discretion.

The statute codifies a clear definition of independent expenditures (third-party spending separate from candidate and party committees), establishes a $1,000 threshold for disclosure, enumates required filing contents (payee identity, amounts, dates, purposes, candidate identification), specifies filing deadlines, and designates the filing location based on office level. The procedural framework is comprehensively statutorily grounded.

“Every person, other than a candidate or a candidate committee, party committee or political committee, who makes independent expenditures in an aggregate amount of $1,000 or more within a calendar year shall file a statement of independent expenditures with the commission that includes the following: (1) The name and address of each person who receives payment in an aggregate amount that is in excess of $500 for an independent expenditure or for the creation or distribution of an independent expenditure; and (2) the date, amount and purpose of each independent expenditure, including the name and the office sought of each candidate identified in an independent expenditure and if such independent expenditure was in support of or in opposition to such candidate.”

KRS 121.250 codifies independent-expenditure rules: a political issues committee making independent expenditures must file certifications and meet reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and KRS 121.252 codifies the duties of persons making independent expenditures. KRS 121.150 separately recognizes the 'independent expenditure' as a distinct category. Independent-expenditure rules are codified.

Latvia codifies third-party (independent) campaigning — § 5 of the Pre-election Campaign Law defines the 'unrelated person' who may campaign separately from candidates and parties, capped at 15 minimum monthly wages, with notification and accounting duties to the Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau.

“an unrelated person may use funds not exceeding 15 minimum monthly wages.”

Maryland Election Law § 13-306 comprehensively codifies independent-expenditure rules in statute, including registration thresholds ($5,000), reporting requirements ($10,000 triggers), enumerated report contents (donor identity, amounts, dates, candidate/issue support), filing deadlines (48 hours), and registered-agent requirements ($50,000+). The rules are explicit, exhaustive, and statutorily grounded rather than delegated to administrative discretion.

“Within 48 hours after a person makes aggregate independent expenditures of $5,000 or more in an election cycle for campaign material that is a public communication, the person shall file a registration form with the State Board.”

The statute exhaustively codifies independent-expenditure rules in statutory language, defining the $250 threshold, the 7-business-day filing window (or 24-hour preliminary report for late spending), required disclosure fields (filer identity, candidate name, recipient, amount, purpose, date), filing location (director or local clerk), and penalty schedule ($5,000 fine or up to 1 year imprisonment). All core procedural elements—statutory grounding, enumeration, enforcement, and penalty—are present.

“Every individual, group, association, corporation, labor union, political committee or other entity that makes independent expenditures in an aggregate amount exceeding $250 during any calendar year for the express purpose of promoting the election or defeat of a candidate shall file with the director, except as provided in subsection (b), within 7 business days after the goods or services for which the independent expenditure was made are utilized to advocate for the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate, on a form prescribed by the director, a report stating: (i) the name and address of the individual, group, association, corporation, labor union, political committee or other entity making the expenditure; (ii) the name of the candidate whose election or defeat the expenditure promoted; (iii) the name and address of any person to whom the expenditure was made; (iv) the total amount or value; and (v) the purpose and the date of the expenditure.”

The section codifies independent expenditure committees, their formation, filing obligations, permitted contributions/expenditures, prohibition on contributions to candidate committees, and felony penalties with a defined schedule.

“One or more persons may create an independent expenditure committee and shall file a statement of organization under section 24. An independent expenditure committee shall file campaign statements under sections 33 and 35 and as otherwise provided in this act.”

The statute explicitly defines independent expenditures, establishes a monetary threshold ($200), mandates filing of disclosure statements with specified contents, and creates a certification requirement under penalty of perjury. The rules are grounded in statute with enumerated procedural elements (threshold, filing requirement, contents, oath/certification), satisfying the CONT.2 criterion for codified independent-expenditure rules.

Montana codifies independent-expenditure rules — § 13-37-232 requires incidental committees (the vehicle for independent expenditures, above a $250 threshold) to disclose their contributions and expenditures, and § 13-35-225 requires 'paid for by' attribution on every independent expenditure.

“that makes less than $250 in expenditures does not form a political committee and is not required to file as an incidental committee”

The section explicitly defines independent expenditures in statute, establishes a $250 reporting threshold, mandates filing within ten days with the commission, specifies required form and content elements (date, description, amount, payee identity, filer identity, contributor details above $250), and provides both a statutory penalty schedule (late fees up to $1,500; Class IV misdemeanor) and enforcement mechanism (filing with commission). All core procedural elements—statutory definition, enumeration of filing deadlines and content, and penalty schedule—are codified.

“Any person, other than a committee, who makes an independent expenditure advocating the election of a candidate or the defeat of a candidate's opponents or the qualification, passage, or defeat of a ballot question, which is in an amount of more than two hundred fifty dollars, shall file a report of the independent expenditure, within ten days, with the commission.”

The statute explicitly defines the persons subject to independent-expenditure reporting rules (subsection 1(a)) and establishes detailed, enumerated reporting deadlines and thresholds (subsections 2-7). The framework is codified in NRS § 294A.210 with clear statutory grounding for who must report, what triggers reporting ($1,000 threshold), and when reports are due. While enforcement mechanisms and penalties are not detailed in this section itself, the procedural requirements for independent-expenditure disclosure are comprehensively specified in statute.

Section 664:6, paragraph III explicitly codifies independent-expenditure rules in statute, establishing a $1,000 threshold, a 48-hour filing deadline with subsequent filing every additional $1,000 expended, required disclosure elements (date, payee, candidate, amount, purpose, aggregate), and a certification requirement that expenditures meet the statutory definition in RSA 664:2, XI. The procedural requirements are enumerated exhaustively within the statute itself.

“Any political committee whose independent expenditures, in aggregate, exceed $1,000 shall file an itemized statement with the secretary of state which shall be received by the secretary of state not later than 48 hours after such expenditures are made, and thereafter each time a further $1,000 is expended. Such itemized statements shall cover the period during which independent expenditures totaling $1,000 were made. Each statement shall include a certification by the chairman of the political committee that the independent expenditure meets the definition in RSA 664:2, XI. Each statement shall contain the date of each independent expenditure; the name and address of the person to whom the expenditure was made; the name of the candidate on whose behalf or against whom each independent expenditure was made; the amount of each expenditure; the purpose of each expenditure, and the aggregate amount of all previous independent expenditures.”

The statute exhaustively codifies independent-expenditure rules, including definitional triggers (dollar thresholds by election type), filing deadlines (three days or twenty-four hours depending on timing and amount), recipient reporting (name, address, amount, date, purpose), and source-of-funds disclosure requirements (with differentiated rules based on total expenditure amounts). All procedural elements are grounded in statute rather than delegation to administrative discretion.

§ 14-107 codifies independent-expenditure rules: defines 'Independent expenditure', requires registration of independent expenditure committees, disclosure of donors, public reporting. § 14-114 codifies coordination-prohibition. Comprehensive IE regime codified.

The statute explicitly codifies independent-expenditure rules, defining who may make them (individuals and other entities not prohibited), establishing reporting thresholds ($100 for initial report, $5,000 for expedited disclosure), specifying reporting timelines (within 30 days or 10 days before an election; 48 hours for large late expenditures), and requiring identification of donors and their principal occupations. The procedural framework—enumeration of reportable events, timing requirements, donor identification, and electronic-filing mandates—is grounded entirely in statute rather than delegated to administrative discretion.

“Subject to G.S. 163-278.39 and G.S. 163-278.14 , individuals and other entities not otherwise prohibited from doing so may make independent expenditures.”

§ 16.1-08.1-03.7 codifies independent-expenditure rules for political committees that register under federal law: must file the federal report with the Secretary of State at time of federal filing, including ultimate source of funds over $200. § 16.1-08.1-03.5 codifies corporate contributions/expenditures. § 16.1-10-04.1 codifies disclosure on political advertisements. § 16.1-08.1-03.2 codifies committee/candidate registration.

ORC 3517.105 codifies independent-expenditure source-identification rules: defines public political advertising, thresholds for required statements ($100/$250/$500 by office), and content of disclaimer.

“Whenever a candidate, a campaign committee, a political action committee or political contributing entity with ten or more members, or a legislative campaign fund makes an”

The section provides explicit statutory codification of independent-expenditure rules, defining the threshold ($5,000), timing requirements (15 days pre-election and 14 days through election day), reporting obligations, required disclosure fields (expenditure amount, date, description, candidate name and whether supported/opposed), contributor-identification requirements (name, address, business activity for contributions over $50), and coordination-prohibition enforcement (subsection H treating coordinated expenditures as contributions). All key procedural elements are enumerated in the rule itself.

ORS § 260.044 comprehensively codifies independent-expenditure rules in statute, including: a threshold ($250), triggering obligations (electronic filing), filing deadlines (7 days initially, 30 days generally, 7 days during election periods), definitions of independent expenditures (subsection 7), and distinctions from contributions. The rules establish clear procedures rather than delegating to administrative discretion, satisfying the procedural-clarity standard.

§ 1628 codifies independent-expenditure reporting: $500-threshold late-contribution/independent-expenditure report within 24 hours via telegram/mailgram/overnight/fax, with confirmation duty on the supervisor.

“any person making an independent expenditure”

The section codifies independent-expenditure rules directly in statute, including definition of what constitutes independent expenditures (spending not coordinated with candidates/committees), reporting thresholds ($1,000), filing deadlines (7 days, or 24 hours within 30 days of election), and required disclosure elements (identity of spender, recipients, amounts, candidate/referendum identification, affirmation of non-coordination, and donor disclosure). The framework is exhaustively enumerated with specific procedural and reporting requirements.

§ 12-27-16 codifies independent-expenditure communication rules including statements and disclaimers. § 12-27-16.1 codifies parallel with content requirements. § 12-1-22 codifies HAVA-arbitration. Independent-expenditure framework codified.

Section 94B(3) codifies statutory rules for independent expenditure by third parties, establishing when third-party spending must be disregarded from contribution limits and setting out explicit conditions (A, B, C) that must be met. The section provides clear enumeration of which expenditures count toward third-party limits and under what circumstances they are excluded, grounding independent-expenditure regulation directly in statute rather than administrative discretion.

“In determining for the purposes of section 94(3)(a) whether a limit is exceeded by a third party during a regulated period, controlled expenditure incurred by or on behalf of the third party is to be disregarded if— a conditions A and B are met in relation to the expenditure, and b condition C is met.”

52 USC § 30104(f) codifies independent-expenditure reporting requirements (electioneering-communication disclosures, IE thresholds).

The section provides explicit statutory codification of independent-expenditure rules, including: a clear triggering threshold ($1,000 cumulative), a mandatory filing deadline (31 calendar days), identification of the filing recipient (chief election officer), required disclosure fields (filer identity, expenditure date/amount/recipient, candidate/proposition affected, goods/services description, and donor information for donors of $1,000+), and certification requirements. These procedural elements are enumerated exhaustively in the statute rather than delegated to regulation or administrative discretion.

“within 31 calendar days after the day on which a person has made a total of at least $1,000 in independent expenditures during an election cycle, the person shall file an independent expenditure report with the chief election officer”

Vermont codifies independent-expenditure rules: § 2922 requires each 'independent expenditure-only political committee' to register with the Secretary of State within 10 days of crossing the $500 threshold, § 2964 codifies its periodic reporting, and § 2944 codifies accountability for related campaign expenditures made on a candidate's behalf. Independent-expenditure committees are regulated by statute.

The statute codifies independent-expenditure rules by defining the universe of actors subject to reporting (persons, candidate campaign committees, political committees), establishing monetary thresholds ($1,000 for statewide, $200 for other races) that trigger disclosure, specifying the content and purpose (express advocacy for election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate), and prescribing mandatory reporting deadlines (24 hours of expenditure or publication). The filing venue, electronic and written submission procedures, and cross-references to organizational statement requirements are also statutorily enumerated, providing clear procedural grounding independent from regulatory discretion.

“Any person, candidate campaign committee, or political committee that makes independent expenditures, in the aggregate during an election cycle, of $1,000 or more for a statewide election or $200 or more for any other election shall maintain records and report pursuant to this chapter all such independent expenditures made for the purpose of expressly advocating the election or defeat of a clearly identified candidate. Independent expenditure reports shall be due (i) within 24 hours of the time when the funds were expended or (ii) within 24 hours of the time when materials, as described in subsection A of this section, are published or broadcast to the public, whichever (i) or (ii) first occurs.”

RCW 29B.25.120 provides a comprehensive statutory framework for independent expenditures, including a statutory definition with clear exclusions, filing thresholds ($100 trigger), specific reporting deadlines (within 5 days of hitting threshold, then 21 days and 7 days before election, 10 days after, and monthly), mandatory disclosure fields (filer identity, recipient, amount, date, purpose), and foreign-source verification requirements. The procedural elements are enumerated exhaustively in statute rather than delegated to administrative discretion.

“For the purposes of this section the term "independent expenditure" means any expenditure that is made in support of or in opposition to any candidate or ballot proposition and is not otherwise required to be reported pursuant to RCW 29B.25.070, 29B.25.090, and 29B.25.100.”

West Virginia Code § 3-8-2 codifies comprehensive independent-expenditure rules in statute, establishing a threshold ($1,000), mandatory disclosure requirements with enumerated content fields (person identity, direction/control, book custodian, principal place of business, expenditure amounts, candidate names, support/opposition intent, contributor names and details, and non-coordination certification), and specific filing deadlines (within 24 hours for late-stage expenditures above $5,000/$500 thresholds; within 48 hours for pre-election expenditures of $10,000+). The statute defines the universe of required disclosures and does not delegate substantive rule-making to administrative discretion.

“any person who makes independent expenditures in an aggregate amount or value in excess of $1,000 during a calendar year shall file a disclosure statement, according to the requirements of §3-8-5 of this code, that contains all of the following information”

The section codifies a spending threshold ($1,000) for foreign campaigners' independent expenditure, establishing a clear statutory rule. However, § 314AH is only a simplified outline; the criterion requires full codification of independent-expenditure rules (definition of 'foreign campaigner,' authorization procedures, disclosure, enforcement mechanisms, and audit trails). This provision addresses the expenditure cap but omits the operational and procedural detail necessary for complete statutory grounding of the rules.

“Electoral expenditure incurred by or with the authority of a foreign campaigner must not total $1,000 or more in a financial year. Amounts fundraised for that purpose must not total $1,000 or more in a financial year.”

The section statutorily codifies that independent expenditures by 'closely associated organizations' (nahestehenden Organisationen) and candidate committees (Personenkomitees) are counted toward the party's spending limit, establishing a framework for independent expenditures. However, the section does not exhaustively define what qualifies as a 'closely associated organization,' referencing instead § 2 Z 4 (not provided), and does not fully specify disclosure, verification, or enforcement procedures specifically for independent expenditures separate from the general campaign-spending framework.

“In die Höchstsumme sind auch die Aufwendungen im Sinne des § 2 Z 4 von nahestehenden Organisationen, Personenkomitees sowie einzelner Wahlwerber, die auf einem von der politischen Partei eingebrachten Wahlvorschlag kandidiert haben, einzurechnen”

The statute does recognize and codify independent expenditures by electors supporting candidates without reimbursement, establishing a spending limit (1,000 UFIR) and exemption from accounting requirements. However, the provision lacks enumeration of critical procedural details: no definition of what constitutes permissible independent spending, no distinction between different types of independent expenditures, no disclosure or record-retention requirements, no penalty schedule for violations, and no enforcement mechanism. The exemption from accounting ('não sujeitos a contabilização') creates ambiguity about audit and verification procedures.

The section provides a penalty schedule with clear statutory reference to third-party expense limits (subsections 349.1-349.3, section 349.4, 349.5-349.8, 349.91-349.94), establishing that independent expenditure rules exist and are codified in statute. However, this enforcement section does not itself enumerate the substantive rules—it cross-references them without restating the limits, definitions, or procedural requirements (e.g., what constitutes an 'exceeding' limit, registration thresholds, filing deadlines, or audit requirements). To fully assess CONT.2, one would need to examine those cited sections (349.1-349.94) to confirm the rules are exhaustively defined in statute.

“Every person is guilty of an offence who, being a third party, contravenes (a) any of subsections 349.1(1) to (3) (exceeding pre-election period expenses limits); (b) section 349.4 (foreign third party incurring pre-election period expenses); (c) section 349.5 (failure to identify self in advertising); (d) subsection 349.6(1) (failure to register); (e) section 349.7 (failure to appoint financial agent) or subsection 349.8(1) (failure to appoint auditor); (f) subsection 349.91(1) or 349.92(1) (failure to file interim third-party expenses return)”

This section provides a statutory definition of 'third party' by cross-reference to the Electoral Act 1997, which establishes that independent-expenditure rules are grounded in statute. However, this section itself contains only the definition; the actual rules governing third-party spending (caps, disclosure, coordination prohibitions, enforcement) are not enumerated here and would require examination of section 22(2)(aa) and related provisions of the 1997 Act. The procedural elements of independent-expenditure regulation are not exhaustively codified in this definitions section.

Lithuania regulates independent political-campaign participants under the Funding Law (§ 3 definitions, § 5-6 registration, § 11 representation) and the Pre-election Campaign provisions of the Seimas Election Law; the surfaced section is the unrelated EP electoral-rolls article.

The statute codifies a disclosure requirement for electioneering communications by third parties (persons, committees, entities, organizations making disbursements), specifying name, address, telephone, and web-address disclosure in subsection (2)(c). However, the section does not define what constitutes an 'independent expenditure,' does not establish numerical limits or restrictions on such spending, and does not provide a complete procedural framework including penalty schedules or enforcement mechanisms. The statute addresses disclosure clarity but lacks comprehensive statutory definition and enforcement procedure for independent expenditures as a distinct regulatory category.

The section identifies that third-party spending ('un tiers agissant pour le compte') counts toward electoral expenses and is therefore subject to the expenditure framework, establishing statutory recognition of third-party involvement. However, the section does not codify independent-expenditure rules per se—it does not distinguish between spending coordinated with candidates versus genuinely independent spending, does not establish separate reporting or disclosure requirements for independent expenditures, and does not define the procedural or enforcement mechanisms specific to third-party spending. The recognition of third-party spending is present but incomplete.

The section references independent expenditures as a defined term tied to § 1019-B(1), demonstrating statutory grounding for the concept. However, this section (§1064) focuses narrowly on foreign-government-influenced entities' prohibition from making independent expenditures; it does not codify the substantive independent-expenditure rules themselves (source-of-funds tracking, verification procedures, disclosure timing, or detailed reporting requirements). The statute delegates the operative definition to another section, leaving the full procedural framework for independent expenditures to be found elsewhere in the code.

“"Independent expenditure" has the meaning given in section 1019-B, subsection 1.”

This section establishes that candidates/aspirants face sanctions for receiving resources from unauthorized persons and for omitting received resources in reports. However, the section does not explicitly codify independent-expenditure rules or third-party spending frameworks—it focuses on candidate-direct violations. Independent expenditure rules would require statutory definition of who qualifies as an independent spender, what spending is permitted, and separate disclosure obligations for non-candidate entities. The section references authorization requirements but does not enumerate the independent-expenditure regime itself.

Article 54(5) establishes a statutory prohibition on financing by certain classes of persons, including anonymous persons and third parties (54(5)(c)), which touches on independent expenditure control. However, the section does not clearly define what constitutes 'independent expenditure' as distinct from candidate-committee spending, does not enumerate separate registration or disclosure requirements for independent spenders, and does not establish a distinct compliance or enforcement regime for third-party spending separate from candidate committees. The provision addresses who cannot fund campaigns but lacks the procedural clarity needed for independent-expenditure governance (registration thresholds, disclosure timing, coordination rules, etc.).

The section explicitly references 'independent expenditures' as a triggering event for reporting requirements and mandates that independent expenditures be reported with specificity (name, address, amount, date, purpose, beneficiary). However, the section does not define what constitutes an independent expenditure, does not distinguish independent expenditures from contributions or direct expenditures, and does not establish the legal framework or restrictions governing who may make them or under what conditions. The statute codifies reporting procedures for independent expenditures but not the rules defining or regulating independent expenditures themselves.

“Upon the receipt or expenditure of campaign contributions or the making of independent expenditures totaling, in an accumulated aggregate, two thousand five hundred dollars or more, a ballot measure committee required to file a statement of organization pursuant to Section 8-13-1304(B) must file an initial certified campaign report within ten days of these initial receipts or expenditures.”

The section establishes a statutory filing requirement for organizations making independent expenditures and specifies venue (county clerk for local races, secretary of state for state races), but does not codify substantive independent-expenditure rules such as definition, permissible sources, coordination prohibitions, disclosure content, or timing restrictions. Filing location alone is procedurally incomplete without enumeration of what must be reported and how.

“any organization that causes an independent expenditure or electioneering communication to be made within the county, shall file with the county clerk”

Section 17-5-2 provides definitions for key terms like 'contribution,' 'expenditure,' and 'electioneering communication,' but these are definitional provisions only. The section does not establish independent-expenditure rules (e.g., rules for political action committees, separate segregated funds, or third-party spending separate from candidate committees) or codify the procedures governing such spending. While the definitions reference political committees and PACs, actual independent-expenditure rules—such as coordination prohibitions, disclaimer requirements, or reporting procedures specific to independent spending—would be found in other sections of the chapter, not in this definitions section. For CONT.2 (independent-expenditure rules codified in statute), statutory grounding requires the operative rules themselves, not merely definitions.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 16 establishes contribution limits for donations to political parties (1% for legal persons, 2% for natural persons), but does not address independent expenditures or third-party spending rules. The section focuses exclusively on direct party donations and does not codify any framework governing spending by entities independent of candidate committees or parties.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 130 of the Belgian Electoral Code addresses state and municipal funding of election administration costs (ballots, polling-station staffing, voter transportation, insurance). It contains no statutory codification of independent-expenditure rules, which concern third-party spending separate from candidate committees. The section is purely about government expense allocation, not campaign-finance disclosure, contribution limits, or independent-expenditure procedures.

No matching sections in corpus (FTS returned 0 candidates) — concept not codified in this jurisdiction's election statute.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: § 19212 is source-code escrow for voting systems — unrelated to independent expenditure. CA's independent-expenditure framework (Gov Code 85204, 85500) wasn't ingested.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses seat allocation and preferential voting in a special electoral district for Croatian diaspora voters. It contains no rules governing independent expenditures, third-party spending, candidate committees, or any aspect of campaign finance. It is purely procedural electoral law relating to vote counting and candidate selection, not campaign-finance regulation.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section is purely procedural, addressing judicial review of election results and remedies for campaign-finance violations (court proceedings, timelines, and financial penalties for breaches). It contains no substantive rules defining what independent expenditures are, whether they are permitted, limited, disclosed, or how third-party spending separate from candidate committees is regulated. The section references 'zvláštním zákonem' (special law/statute), indicating the substantive rules exist elsewhere, but this particular section does not codify independent-expenditure rules.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article L118-2 addresses administrative procedures for contesting election results based on campaign spending limits and the review of campaign accounts by a designated commission. It does not codify rules governing independent expenditures or third-party spending separate from candidate committees. The section deals with post-election dispute resolution and campaign-account review procedures, not the framework for independent-expenditure regulation.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: § 19a addresses the procedural mechanics of calculating and distributing state funding to parties based on votes and reported donations, with detailed deadlines and forfeiture penalties. It does not address independent expenditures or third-party spending rules at all. The section concerns only the allocation formula and timing for public party financing, not the regulation of external campaign spending.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Σύνταγμα Άρθρο 54 (meta). Article 10 of Law 3023 covers broadcast time but independent-expenditure framework is not separately codified in surfaced sections.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 60 addresses allocation of public expenditures for election administration (printing, publication, ballots) between the state treasury and municipalities. It contains no codification of independent-expenditure rules, third-party spending limits, or procedures governing non-candidate campaign spending. The section is purely administrative budgeting and does not engage with campaign-finance procedure for independent actors.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses public funding of political parties and their campaign reimbursement, not independent expenditure rules. It establishes baseline funding, proportional distribution of state funds, and a campaign-cost reimbursement mechanism for parties running in multiple districts, but contains no statutory codification of rules governing third-party or independent expenditures separate from candidate committees.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section contains only procedural directives about posting penalties and depositing copies of the electoral law at polling stations. It does not address independent expenditures, third-party spending, or any substantive rules governing spending by entities separate from candidate committees. The section is a heading introducing Chapter VII on electoral expenses but provides no codified independent-expenditure rules.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 45 addresses the appointment and oath of auditors assisting the Commission but does not codify independent-expenditure rules, their thresholds, disclosure requirements, or coordination restrictions. The section concerns audit procedure and confidentiality obligations, not the substantive statutory framework for third-party spending.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: § 130.011 is a definitions section that does not contain independent-expenditure rules. While it defines 'committee' broadly to include various types of entities, it does not establish substantive rules governing independent expenditures, spending limits, coordination prohibitions, or reporting requirements specific to third-party spending. Independent-expenditure rules would need to appear in operational sections elsewhere in chapter 130, not in this definitional section.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses government subsidies to political parties and administrative reporting to parliament, but contains no independent-expenditure rules, definitions, or procedures governing third-party spending separate from candidate committees. The text does not codify, enumerate, or address independent expenditures at all.

This section prohibits using intermediaries to conceal contribution sources and restricts third-party funding arrangements, but it does not codify a comprehensive independent-expenditure framework. It addresses circumvention and intermediary abuses rather than defining when third-party spending is permissible, how it must be disclosed, what contribution limits apply, or coordination rules. The section establishes breach-of-contract consequences but lacks the statutory enumeration of independent-expenditure definitions, thresholds, and procedural requirements necessary to satisfy CONT.2.

“make or solicit contributions through intermediaries for the purpose of concealing or misrepresenting the source of the contribution”

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 90 establishes the formation and governance of candidate committees for presidential elections, including appointment of electoral and financial agents. It contains no provisions addressing independent expenditures, third-party spending, or rules governing organizations spending separately from candidate committees. The section does not codify any statutory framework for independent-expenditure regulation.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 32 addresses judicial appeals to the Constitutional Court regarding candidate-registration decisions. It contains no provisions related to independent expenditures, third-party spending, candidate committees, or any campaign-finance procedure. This section is entirely procedural regarding candidacy disputes and bears no relationship to the statutory codification of independent-expenditure rules required by CONT.2.

No matching sections in corpus (FTS returned 0 candidates) — concept not codified in this jurisdiction's election statute.

Article 59 codifies expenditure authority for electoral funds. Independent expenditure (third-party spending) is not explicitly codified separately — Russian law channels all election-related spending through registered candidate/party funds via Article 58.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Article 98 of LOREG addresses the publication and distribution of election results (acta de escrutinio) and the duties of the electoral board (Mesa). It contains no provisions whatsoever regarding independent expenditures, third-party spending, candidate committees, or the regulation of campaign finance by non-candidate entities. This section concerns electoral administration and result certification, not campaign finance rules.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses criminal penalties for election fraud and voting-system tampering, not campaign finance or independent expenditure rules. It contains no statutory framework governing third-party spending, disclosure of independent expenditures, or the procedural rules distinguishing independent spending from candidate committees.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: The FTS query surfaced § 254.0401 (internet availability of reports) and vote-harvesting / mail-application offenses, none of which codifies independent-expenditure rules. Texas regulates 'direct campaign expenditures' under § 251.001 and § 254.261, but no independent-expenditure provision was surfaced for this datapoint.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.

No candidate sections returned by FTS.