Wmc Litigation Center
Public records show a registered, tax-exempt organization in good standing.
What it says it does
THE WMC LITIGATION CENTER'S MISSION IS TO REPRESENT CLIENTS IN LEGAL ACTIONS TO FOSTER AND PROTECT THE FREE ENTERPRISE SYSTEM.
- Income
- $464,923
- Spending
- $437,839
- Spent on programs
- 93%
- Reserves
- 3.5 months of spending
- Largest source of income
- donations and private grants, 94%
- Employees
- 3
- Volunteers
- 6
- Highest pay
- $678,211, director
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2025, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Financial health
Good: 81 out of 100. Higher than 54% of charities in its peer group (education, $250k to $1m).
Reserves
20 of 35Spendable reserves would cover 3.5 months of spending.
Debt
16 of 20It owes 22% of what it owns.
Living within its means
15 of 15Income exceeded spending by 6% of income.
Income trend
15 of 15Income rose 4% on the year before.
Spending floor
15 of 1593% of spending went to programs and raising each dollar of donations cost 1 cents.
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2025, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Governance
Strong: 90 out of 100. Higher than 81% of charities in its peer group (education, $250k to $1m).
Independent board
25 of 255 of 8 voting board members are independent.
Conflict of interest policy
15 of 15Has a written conflict of interest policy.
Whistleblower policy
8 of 8Has a written whistleblower policy.
Record keeping policy
7 of 7Has a written policy on keeping and destroying records.
Board minutes
5 of 5Keeps minutes of board meetings.
Board sees the tax return
0 of 10Did not give the board a copy of this return before filing it.
Pay set independently
5 of 5Sets its chief executive's pay through independent review and comparison.
Independent check of accounts
15 of 15Its accounts were audited by an independent accountant.
No reported misuse
10 of 10Reports no diversion of assets, excess benefits or loans to insiders.
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2025, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Impact evidence
Describes programs. Its tax return describes what it does but we have found no measurable results in it.
Programs described in its return (1)
- $405,785 spent. THE WMC LITIGATION CENTER ("LITIGATION CENTER") IS DEDICATED TO LESSENING THE BURDENS OF GOVERNMENT THROUGH LITIGATION AND EDUCATING THE PUBLIC ABOUT ECONOMIC FREEDOM AND RELATED ISSUES THROUGH COMMUNICATIONS, OUTREACH, AND LEGAL AND POLICY EDUCATION. THE LITIGATION CENTER'S CORE MISSION IS TO REPRESENT CLIENTS IN LEGAL ACTIONS TO FOSTER AND PROTECT THE FREE ENTERPRISE SYSTEM. THE LITIGATION CENTER DEFENDS THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND INDIVIDUALS FROM GOVERNMENT ENTITIES THAT ACT BEYOND THEIR AUTHORITY BY COMMENCING LAWSUITS, FILING AMICUS BRIEFS, AND ASSISTING OUTSIDE COUNSEL IN SELECT CASES. THE LITIGATION CENTER IS COMMITTED TO PROVIDING HIGH-QUALITY LEGAL SERVICES. AS A 501(C)(3) NOT-FOR-PROFIT, PUBLIC-INTEREST LAW FIRM, THE LITIGATION CENTER DOES NOT COLLECT FEES FROM ITS CLIENTS FOR ITS SERVICES. IN CALENDAR YEAR 2025, THE LITIGATION CENTER REPRESENTED CLIENTS IN A TOTAL OF 13 LEGAL MATTERS. THE MATTERS FALL INTO SEVEN MAIN CATEGORIES: ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, SEPARATION OF POWERS, ECONOMIC LIBERTY, PROPERTY RIGHTS, AND GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY. BENASZESKI V. WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES(JEFFERSON COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, CASE NUMBER 2025CV506)THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED THIS LAWSUIT IN 2025 ON BEHALF OF TWO INDIVIDUALS WHO OWN LAND THAT WAS ALLEGEDLY CONTAMINATED BY A GAS STATION THAT OWNED THE LAND SEVERAL DECADES AGO. THE LAWSUIT ALLEGES THAT WISCONSIN LAW DOES NOT IMPOSE LIABILITY ON INNOCENT LANDOWNERS AND, IF IT DOES, IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL. THIS LAWSUIT SEEKS TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC GENERALLY BY ELIMINATING "INNOCENT LANDOWNER AND "INNOCENT BUYER" LIABILITY UNDER WISCONSIN'S SPILLS LAW. THIS FORM OF LIABILITY IS PATENTLY UNFAIR AND IS FINANCIALLY RUINING HOMEOWNERS AND SMALL BUSINESSES ACROSS WISCONSIN.THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR OBTAIN ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER. WISCONSIN MANUFACTURERS AND COMMERCE, INC. V. VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE(WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS, CASE NUMBER 2025AP2013; WAUKESHA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, CASE NUMBER 2022CV515)THE LITIGATION CENTER IS REPRESENTING A NOT-FOR-PROFIT BUSINESS TRADE ASSOCIATION IN THIS MATTER. IN MARCH 2024, THE WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS ISSUED A WRITTEN OPINION WHICH CONCLUDED THAT THE VILLAGE OF PEWAUKEE'S SO-CALLED TRANSPORTATION USER FEE IS AN "IMPERMISSIBLE TAX." IN NOVEMBER 2024, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED A MOTION ASKING THE TRIAL COURT TO HOLD PEWAUKEE IN CONTEMPT BECAUSE PEWAUKEE CONTINUED IMPOSING THIS UNLAWFUL TAX ON ALL PROPERTY OWNERS VILLAGE-WIDE AFTER THE WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS STRUCK IT DOWN. THE TRIAL COURT HELD A HEARING, FOUND PEWAUKEE IN CONTEMPT, AND ORDERED PEWAUKEE TO REIMBURSE ALL ITS PROPERTY OWNERS FOR THE UNLAWFUL TAXES THEY PAID SINCE THE COURT OF APPEALS DECISION. IN EARLY 2025, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED A REPLY BRIEF SUPPORTING ITS CONTEMPT MOTION. BECAUSE THE LITIGATION CENTER SUCCEEDED ON ITS CONTEMPT MOTION, IT FILED A MOTION SEEKING ATTORNEY FEES AND TWO SUPPORTING BRIEFS. THE TRIAL COURT DENIED THE REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY FEES, SO THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED AN APPEAL. IN LATE 2025, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED AN OPENING BRIEF IN THE APPEAL SEEKING ATTORNEY FEES. THIS CONTEMPT PROCEEDING SOUGHT TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC GENERALLY BY DETERRING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FROM IMPOSING UNLAWFUL TAXES, ESPECIALLY AFTER A COURT HAS STRUCK THEM DOWN. THIS CONTEMPT PROCEEDING THUS ENCOURAGES THE GOVERNMENT TO COMPLY WITH COURT RULINGS. THIS CONTEMPT PROCEEDING THUS SEEKS TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC GENERALLY BY FORCING A VILLAGE GOVERNMENT TO OPERATE WITHIN THE LIMITS OF ITS LEGAL AUTHORITY AND TO COMPLY WITH A COURT RULING. IN ADDITION, THIS CONTEMPT PROCEEDING SOUGHT TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC GENERALLY BY OBTAINING A REFUND OF UNLAWFUL TAXES FOR ALL PROPERTY OWNERS IN THIS VILLAGE. THE REQUEST AND APPEAL SEEKING ATTORNEY FEES BENEFIT THE PUBLIC FOR MANY OF THE SAME REASONS. MORE GENERALLY, IT IS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST FOR A COURT TO AWARD ATTORNEY FEES TO A NOT-FOR-PROFIT LEGAL ORGANIZATION. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR OBTAIN ANY FEES FROM ITS CLIENTS IN THIS MATTER. AS NOTED, THE LITIGATION CENTER SOUGHT BUT DID NOT RECEIVE ANY COURT-AWARDED ATTORNEY FEES FROM THE TRIAL COURT, AND IT IS APPEALING THAT RULING. BINVERSIE V. TOWN OF EUREKA(WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS, CASE NUMBER 2025AP366; POLK COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, CASE NUMBER 2024CV209)IN 2024, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED THIS LAWSUIT AGAINST THE TOWN OF EUREKA IN POLK COUNTY, WISCONSIN ON BEHALF OF TWO RESIDENTS AND TAXPAYERS IN EUREKA. THE LAWSUIT ALLEGES THAT A EUREKA ORDINANCE UNLAWFULLY IMPOSES SEVERAL MONETARY AND PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS ON LIVESTOCK FARMS OVER A CERTAIN SIZE. IN 2025, THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED AN APPEAL FROM THE TRIAL COURT'S DECISION DISMISSING THIS LAWSUIT ON PROCEDURAL GROUNDS. THE LITIGATION CENTER ALSO FILED TWO BRIEFS IN THIS APPEAL IN 2025. THIS LAWSUIT SOUGHT TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC GENERALLY BY PREVENTING THE TOWN FROM SPENDING TAXPAYER MONEY ENFORCING AN UNLAWFUL ORDINANCE. THIS LAWSUIT ALSO SOUGHT TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC GENERALLY BY REMOVING THE TOWN'S ONEROUS AND UNLAWFUL RESTRICTIONS ON LIVESTOCK FARMS, THEREBY ALLOWING LIVESTOCK FARMS TO MAINTAIN AFFORDABLE PRICES FOR THEIR PRODUCTS AND GENERALLY PROMOTING THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR OF THIS RURAL COMMUNITY'S ECONOMY. THIS LAWSUIT ALSO SOUGHT TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC GENERALLY BY SETTING JUDICIAL PRECEDENT STRIKING DOWN THIS TYPE OF ORDINANCE - SEVERAL OTHER MUNICIPALITIES IN WISCONSIN HAVE A VIRTUALLY IDENTICAL ORDINANCE. THE LITIGATION CENTER DID NOT SEEK OR OBTAIN ANY FEES IN THIS MATTER. WISCONSIN MANUFACTURERS AND COMMERCE INC. V. WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE(WISCONSIN COURT OF APPEALS, APPEAL NUMBER 2025AP354; DANE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, CASE NUMBER 2023CV3275)THE LITIGATION CENTER FILED THIS LAWSUIT IN 2023 ON BEHALF OF A NOT-FOR-PROFIT TRADE ORGANIZATION THAT HAD SUBMITTED A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST TO THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ). THE DOJ DENIED THE PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST, CLAIMING THAT EVERY RESPONSIVE DOCUMENT WAS PRIVILEGED AS AN ATTORNEY-
Source: Form 990 for the year ending December 31, 2025, filed with the Internal Revenue Service. Rating method 2026.2. How we rate
Legitimacy checks
Is it registered with the IRS? Passed.
Listed in the IRS master file of tax-exempt organizations as a 501(c)(3) charitable organization.
Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.
Has the IRS revoked its tax-exempt status? Passed.
Not on the IRS automatic revocation list.
Source: Automatic revocation of exemption list, Internal Revenue Service, file dated November 6, 2026.
Are donations tax-deductible? Passed.
On the IRS list of organizations eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions.
Source: Publication 78 data: organizations eligible for tax-deductible contributions, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.
Is it keeping up with its IRS filings? Passed.
Most recent return on file covers the year ending December 2025.
Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.
How long has it been tax-exempt? Passed.
Recognized by the IRS since September 2012.
Source: Exempt Organizations Business Master File, Internal Revenue Service, file dated October 13, 2026.
Is it in good standing with state regulators? Passed.
Not on California's list of charities barred from soliciting. Other states are not yet checked.
Source: May Not Operate or Solicit for Charitable Purposes list, California Attorney General, Registry of Charities and Fundraisers, file dated November 4, 2026.
Ratings and checks are our reading of public records, using the published method. They are not a statement about anyone's honesty. If you work for this organization, you can send corrections or results, confirm you want gifts through Veridonate, or ask to be removed from giving.