BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION

CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER

1101 14th Street NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20005

ROGER G. WIEAND
1101 14th Street NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20005

v. MUR No. ________

RON DESANTIS,
RON DESANTIS FOR PRESIDENT
and CAITLYN TORTORICI in her
official capacity as treasurer
P.O. Box 3696
Tallahassee, FL 32315

NEVER BACK DOWN, INC. and

CABELL HOBBS in his official
capacity as treasurer
P.O. Box 341027
Austin, TX 78734
COMPLAINT

1. Ron DeSantis, a 2024 presidential candidate, has illegally coordinated with Never Back

Down, Inc. (“Never PAC” or “NBD”), an independent expenditure-only political

committee or “super PAC,” by directly or indirectly providing requests, suggestions, and

guidance regarding the super PAC’s messaging in support of his candidacy. Moreover,

Never PAC has for months coordinated its activities with and made in-kind contributions

to DeSantis and his campaign committee, contravening the explicit legal requirement that

super PACs must remain “independent” of—i.e., not coordinate with or make

contributions to—federal candidates or their campaigns. As a result, there is reason to

believe Never PAC has made, and DeSantis and his campaign have knowingly accepted,

prohibited contributions in violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act (“FECA”).

1
2. While Never PAC appears to have routinely made in-kind contributions to and

coordinated with DeSantis and his campaign, it has also raised well over $130 million

from fewer than 200 reported contributions—accepting six- and seven-figure sums from

individuals, corporations, and a Florida state PAC formerly known as “Friends of Ron

DeSantis,” which DeSantis previously established and used to raise funds supporting his

state campaigns.

3. Accordingly, there is reason to believe Never PAC is violating federal laws that have for

decades restricted the amounts and sources of money that political committees can accept

and spend in coordination with federal candidates. When candidates and “independent”

committees disregard these crucial laws, ordinary Americans suffer: Corporations and

ultra-wealthy individuals are able to spend vast sums of money on elections, leading to a

government that inequitably prioritizes special interests’ policy goals above the needs of

everyday Americans.

4. Coordination between a super PAC and a presidential candidate undermines the

“independence” that federal courts and the Commission have made clear is an essential,

legal requirement that super PACs must abide as a condition of their ability to raise and

spend unlimited sums of money on federal elections. Indeed, the “independence of

independent expenditures was a central consideration” in the Supreme Court’s Citizens

United decision, 1 which first opened the door to permit the operation of super PACs like

Never PAC, yet, as explained herein, that independence is sorely lacking in the

relationship between Never PAC and the DeSantis campaign.

1
SpeechNow.org v. FEC, 599 F.3d 686, 693 (D.C. Cir. 2010); see Citizens United, 558 U.S. 310 (2010).

2
5. By accepting corporate money and providing coordinated or in-kind contributions to

DeSantis’s campaign, Never PAC has also effectively acted as a vehicle for corporations

to contribute to and underwrite DeSantis’s campaign, circumventing FECA’s prohibition

of corporate contributions to candidates and, moreover, depriving the public of complete

and accurate information regarding the sources of funding for DeSantis’s campaign.

6. This complaint is filed pursuant to 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(1) and is based on information

and belief that Never PAC and the DeSantis campaign have violated FECA, 52 U.S.C.

§ 30101, et seq. “If the Commission, upon receiving a complaint . . . has reason to believe

that a person has committed, or is about to commit, a violation of [FECA] . . . [t]he

Commission shall make an investigation of such alleged violation.” 2

FACTS

7. Ron DeSantis is a 2024 candidate for president, and his authorized campaign committee

is Ron DeSantis for President (the “DeSantis campaign”). 3 The DeSantis campaign’s

treasurer is Caitlyn Tortorici. 4

8. Never PAC registered with the Commission as an independent-expenditure-only political

committee on February 23, 2023, and its treasurer is Cabell Hobbs. 5

9. The Washington Post reports that from the very start, DeSantis’s campaign and Never

PAC “aimed to function as an integrated whole — built with the candidate’s approval,

advised by a single law firm, overseen by a board that included DeSantis confidants and

seeded with $82.5 million” that DeSantis had raised through his state PAC, Friends of

2
52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(2) (emphasis added); see also 11 C.F.R. § 111.4(a).
3
Ron DeSantis for President, Amend. Statement of Org. at 1 (Jun. 12, 2023).
4
Id.
5
Never Back Down, Inc., Statement of Org at 1 (Feb. 23, 2023).

3
 Ron DeSantis. 6 Indeed, DeSantis’s “first campaign manager, Generra Peck, developed

the strategy and selected the leadership to lead” Never PAC, and “meetings between the

campaign-in-waiting and the super PAC’s team fine-tuned [its] mission.” 7

10. As of its last regularly filed disclosure report, Never PAC has reported receiving over

$130 million, virtually all of which came from 191 itemized contributions it received

through June 30, 2023, the end of the last reporting period for which it filed a disclosure

report. 8 Never PAC has also reported accepting numerous contributions from

corporations. 9 In addition, it has reported spending over $26.5 million on operating

expenditures and over $36.5 million on independent expenditures. 10

Never PAC Has Been Coordinating Its Activities with the DeSantis Campaign

11. On December 12, 2023, the Associated Press reported that the DeSantis campaign issued

a request or suggestion to Never PAC to continue airing a particular advertisement, which

the super PAC had recently taken off the air:

Multiple people familiar with DeSantis’ political network said that

he and his wife had expressed concerns about the messaging
of Never Back Down, the largest super PAC supporting the
governor’s campaign, in recent months as his Iowa polling numbers
stagnated in late summer and autumn. The governor and his wife,
Casey, who is widely considered his top political adviser, were
especially frustrated after the group took down a television ad last

6
Michael Scherer, et al., Ron DeSantis Wanted to Change the Way Campaigns Were Funded. Then the Fights
Started, Wash. Post (Dec. 16, 2023), https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/12/16/desantis-super-pac-
collapse/.
7
Id.
8
Never Back Down, Inc., Financial Summary, https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00834077/?tab=summary
(last visited Dec. 17, 2023).
9
See, e.g., Never Back Down, Inc., 2023 Mid-Year Report at 32 (Jul. 15, 2023), https://docquery.fec.gov/cgi-
bin/fecimg/?202307319588928206 (disclosing a $250,000 contribution from “Intervest Construction of Jax, Inc.”
and a $250,000 contribution from “MHK of Volusia County, Inc.”).
10
Never Back Down, Inc., Financial Summary, supra note 8 (showing total independent expenditures listed on
regularly scheduled reports); Never Back Down, Inc., Independent Expenditures, https://www.fec.gov/data/indepen
dent-expenditures/?data_type=processed&q_spender=C00834077&is_notice=true&most_recent=true&min_date=
07%2F01%2F2023&max_date=12%2F31%2F2024 (last visited Dec. 15, 2023) (showing independent expenditures
listed on 24/48-Hour Reports in the period not yet covered by a regularly scheduled report).

4
 month that criticized leading Republican rival Nikki Haley for
allowing a Chinese manufacturer into South Carolina when she was
governor. DeSantis’ team shared those messaging concerns with
members of Never Back Down’s board, which includes Florida-
based members with close ties to the governor, according to multiple
people briefed on the discussions. Some of the board members then
relayed the DeSantis team’s wishes to super PAC staff, which was
responsible for executing strategy, the people said. 11

12. The Never PAC ad in question attacked DeSantis’s primary opponent, Nikki Haley, for

allowing a Chinese manufacturer into South Carolina when Haley was governor. Never

PAC began airing the television ad in Iowa and New Hampshire in late October 2023 and

removed it from the air in mid-November. 12

13. Never PAC reportedly decided to take down the ad because it appeared to be

“backfiring.” 13 According to NBC’s reporting, Never PAC’s polling and focus groups

revealed that, because voters so “readily connected [DeSantis] to the super PAC,” they

believed that DeSantis was behind the highly critical ad and did not like that he was

going negative. Consequently, Never PAC grew concerned that it could not “bring down

Haley without damaging DeSantis” and, following a heated internal meeting, stopped

running the ad. 14

14. According to the Associated Press article, which cited multiple sources, DeSantis

privately expressed that he was “frustrated” by the decision to pull the ad. DeSantis’s

team shared with Never PAC board members that DeSantis wanted to see the ad go back

11
Steve Peoples and Thomas Beaumont, DeSantis’ Campaign and Allied Super PAC Face New Concerns About
Legal Conflicts, AP Sources Say, AP (Dec. 12, 2023), https://apnews.com/article/desantis-pac-never-back-down-
campaign-violation-fa2238e79fa48e18962accfc071278a2.
12
Id.; Aaron Navarro and Nidia Cavazos, DeSantis PAC Attack Ad Hits Nikki Haley on China, as 2024 Presidential
Rivalry Grows, CBS (Oct. 22, 2023), https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ron-desantis-pac-hits-nikki-haley-in-pac-
attack-ad-china/.
13
Dasha Burns, et al., Ron DeSantis’ Team Was Going After Nikki Haley. They Turned on Each Other Instead,
NBC (Nov. 21, 2023), https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/ron-desantis-nikki-haley-fight-right-never-
back-down-rcna126102.
14
Id.

5
 on the air. Those board members, in turn, “relayed the DeSantis team’s wishes to super

PAC staff [ ] responsible for executing strategy.” 15

15. This was not the first time that the DeSantis campaign provided instructions to Never

PAC, either. In a recent memo to donors, DeSantis’s campaign explained how Never

PAC and a new “independent” committee, “Fight Right,” would be supporting

DeSantis’s candidacy—implicitly conveying exactly how the campaign wanted the

“independent” groups to divide responsibilities and spend their resources. 16

16. In fact, the Washington Post reports that DeSantis’s campaign manager published the

memo “publicly instructing donors to give elsewhere for TV ads” because DeSantis and

his campaign “have been frustrated by reporting on the drama around Never Back Down

and critical of the group’s ad strategy.” 17

17. And over the summer, the DeSantis campaign reportedly “leaked” a document containing

precisely the sort of requests and strategic information that candidates and super PACs

cannot legally share with each other. 18 The document outlined the campaign’s desire to

see heightened attention on certain issues, including China. 19 Indeed, Never PAC’s

15
Peoples and Beaumont, supra note 11.
16
Memorandum to “Team DeSantis Investors” from James Uthmeier, Campaign Manager (Nov. 27, 2023),
(attached as Ex. A) (hereinafter, “Donor Memo”) (“NBD’s robust organization is unrivaled in its ability to mobilize
supporters and get out the vote. We also welcome the independent efforts of a newly established outside
organization, Fight Right, a pro-DeSantis group that announced they will work closely with NBD and devote full
attention to fighting for Ron DeSantis through powerful TV advertising. . . . In the final push for the Iowa Caucus
victory, this campaign will proudly fight alongside NBD’s impressive ground game, and Fight Right’s television
team.”).
17
Scherer, Dec. 16, supra note 6 (“Uthmeier had written a public memo on behalf of the campaign embracing
Fight Right for future television ads and describing Never Back Down as a field operation, even though the group at
that point had spent more in advertising than any other campaign or group this cycle, according to AdImpact.”).
18
“Confidential Friends and Family Update” (Jul. 6, 2023), https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23874013/00
51_001.pdf (attached as Ex. B) (hereinafter, “Campaign Memo”); see Dasha Burns, et al., Confidential DeSantis
Campaign Memo Looks to Reassure Donors Amid Stumbles, NBC News (Jul. 13, 2023), https://www.nbcnews.com
/politics/2024-election/confidential-ron-desantis-campaign-memo-reassures-donors-stumbles-rcna93995 (“The
document also outlines the message DeSantis’ team plans to deliver to voters through both paid and earned media in
the coming months.”).
19
Campaign Memo, supra note 18, at 2–3.

6
 subsequent ad attacking Haley focused on China, and the campaign reiterated—more

forcefully through private back channels when the ad came down—that the PAC should

continue that line of attack.

18. The leaked document, dated July 6, 2023, also provided additional information about the

DeSantis campaign’s needs. For instance, at a time when Never PAC was focused on

organizing voters in Iowa, the document made a plea for greater involvement in New

Hampshire: “It would be a mistake to take a paid media and field program off the table in

service of other states, we will not cede New Hampshire. . . While Super Tuesday is

critically important, we will not dedicate resources to Super Tuesday that slow our

momentum in New Hampshire.” 20 The document also noted, “While saturation of critical

states like Iowa and South Carolina is critical, we see no reason why more expensive

markets in New Hampshire should not also be prioritized.” 21 Indeed, recent reporting

confirms that Never PAC has been focusing its efforts on New Hampshire and South

Carolina, in addition to Iowa. 22 The “leaked” document further revealed a desire for

advertising about “Culture,” the economy, and “in the Fall of 2023 . . . woke military, the

deep state, school choice and beyond.” 23

19. Reporting indicates that the campaign strategy memo “was written by [DeSantis’s

campaign manager at the time, Generra] Peck,” and that Never PAC staffers “studied the

memo line by line.” 24

20
Id. at 1.
21
Id. at 3.
22
Scherer, Dec. 16, supra note 6.
23
Campaign Memo, supra note 18, at 2–3.
24
Shane Goldmacher and Maggie Haberman, The Sputtering DeSantis Campaign Looks for a Restart, N.Y. Times
(Jul. 23, 2023), https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/23/us/politics/desantis-campaign-reboot.html (“That campaign
memo landed at the pro-DeSantis super PAC’s Atlanta headquarters with a thud. It seemed to rebuke the super PAC,

7
20. These requests and suggestions from the DeSantis team are specific instances amid a

backdrop of near-constant cooperation and consultation between the campaign and Never

PAC. Since its inception, Never PAC has worked in close cooperation with the DeSantis

campaign to maximize their collective resources and execute a plan by which Never PAC

would operate as a fully sanctioned arm of the campaign, particularly with regard to the

“ground game” traditionally driven by the candidate. Indeed, reports indicate that Never

PAC “has carried out much of the work typically performed by a campaign, including

devising [DeSantis’s] game plan in Iowa as well as deciding where he goes and who he

meets, according to donors and allies.” 25

21. In April 2023, the Washington Post reported that Never PAC had begun organizing and

funding ground operations in states with early presidential nominating contests, with

Never PAC officials telling donors they “intend to push the bounds of what an

independent effort can do in presidential years” including by making a “major push into

the sort of organizing in early states that has historically been undertaken by candidates

themselves.” 26

22. A May 2023 report in the New York Times similarly indicates that Never PAC was

“taking on many tasks often reserved for the campaign itself: securing endorsements in

calling into question the group’s decision to stay off the airwaves in New Hampshire and the pricey Boston market.
Legally, super PACs and campaigns cannot coordinate strategy in private, so leaked memos are one way they
communicate.”).
25
Bill Allison, et al., DeSantis Super PAC Takes the Wheel on 2024 Bid, Overshadowing His Campaign,
Bloomberg (Aug. 18, 2023), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-08-18/desantis-super-pac-takes-
central-role-in-2024-presidential-bid.
26
Michael Scherer, et al., DeSantis Group Plans Field Program, Showing the Expanding Role of Super PACs,
Wash. Post (Apr. 19, 2023), https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/04/19/desantis-super-pac-campaign/.
According to the report, at a Never PAC-sponsored event in Iowa, “volunteers collected the names and contact
information of about 48 attendees, who [would] be contacted for future grass-roots organizing opportunities in the
state,” and Never PAC was also “launching a Students for DeSantis effort at universities in the early nominating
states” that would “involve campus screenings, trainings, speaking engagements and event planning.” Id.

8
 early primary states, sending mailers, organizing on campuses, running television ads,

raising small donations for the campaign in an escrow account and working behind the

scenes to build crowds for the governor’s events.” 27 Indeed, the report illustrates how

DeSantis’s campaign works with and benefits from Never PAC resources:

The hand-in-glove efforts [between Never PAC and DeSantis]

were on display during Mr. DeSantis’s recent trip to Iowa. After
Mr. Trump canceled a rally near Des Moines, the governor decided
he wanted to swoop in for a last-minute event in the area. But it
wasn’t the governor’s staff that scrambled to bring people to the
location but employees of the super PAC, who, working with Mr.
DeSantis’s team, sent a flurry of texts and calls to assemble a
crowd at Jethro’s BBQ that evening. 28

23. The Washington Post reported in July 2023 that the Never PAC ground operation had

mobilized an “army of paid workers” to campaign for DeSantis in Iowa:

Unlike traditional presidential field organizing—which is run by an

official campaign and driven largely by volunteers—the Never
Back Down effort is staffed with an army of paid workers, many of
whom have responded to advertisements that offer positions for
$20 to $22 an hour. . . . between 350 and 400 canvassers, all of
whom have been trained and are audited daily . . . have already
conducted 163,704 conversations at 713,732 doors, and gathered
7,246 “Commit to Caucus” cards for DeSantis in Iowa alone. 29

24. Another Washington Post report details the “extensive time” DeSantis spends with “super

PAC officials on the Never Back Down bus” traveling between “super PAC-hosted”

events in Iowa. 30 The bus tour has provided vast amounts of time for super PAC and

27
Shane Goldmacher, et al., DeSantis Allies’ $200 Million Plan for Beating Trump, N.Y. Times (May 24, 2023),
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/24/us/politics/ron-desantis-2024-super-pac.html.
28
Id. (emphasis added).
29
Michael Scherer and Josh Dawsey, Door-Knocker Complaints Show Risks of DeSantis Super PAC Strategy,
Wash. Post (Jul. 14, 2023), https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/14/desantis-never-back-down-
canvassers/.
30
Hannah Knowles, DeSantis Voiced Complaints About Top Super PAC Strategist, People Familiar With
Comments Say, Wash. Post (Sep. 8, 2023), https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/08/ron-desantis-
super-pac-debate.

9
 campaign officials to have private discussions about strategy. A person close to Never

PAC and familiar with the campaign and super PAC’s relationship said staff from the two

groups have shared a meal, are “working very well together,” and are focused on winning

the election. 31

Never PAC Has Made In-Kind Contributions to the DeSantis Campaign

25. Beyond coordinating expenditures, Never PAC is making direct in-kind contributions to

the DeSantis campaign by subsidizing its expenses.

26. According to the Washington Post, Never PAC entered into a joint lease agreement with

the DeSantis campaign, an “unusual agreement” that “allows both the DeSantis campaign

and the Never Back Down super PAC to lease planes in a larger volume at lower market

rates” than if either had leased the planes separately—effectively securing discounted

travel for DeSantis’s campaign. 32 The report indicates that “[b]oth the [DeSantis]

campaign and the super PAC [made] payments to N2024D LLC, a Florida company

created on May 22 that appears to take its name from an airplane tail number celebrating

the DeSantis campaign.” 33 However, the report notes that “Never Back Down has not yet

taken advantage of the arrangement.” 34

27. Through the end of July—the latest date for which Never PAC’s spending data has been

reported—the super PAC had disbursed $343,757 to N2024D LLC, while DeSantis’s

31
Id.
32
Michael Scherer and Isaac Arnsdorf, DeSantis Super PAC Shares Cost for Private Air Travel in Unusual Deal,
Wash. Post (Aug. 5, 2023), https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/05/desantis-plane-super-pac/.
33
Id.; see Rebecca Davis O’Brien, et al., DeSantis Super PAC Helps Pay for Private Flights, in Unusual Move,
N.Y. Times (Oct. 20, 2023), https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/20/us/politics/desantis-campaign-funding-
money.html (“Short on cash, Gov. Ron DeSantis’s presidential campaign has found an unusual way to pay for his
habit of flying in private planes: passing the cost to the better-funded super PAC that is increasingly intertwined
with his operation. . . . In July, his campaign’s first report showed that he had spent $179,000 on chartered planes, as
well as $483,000 to a limited liability company for “travel.” Never Back Down paid that same company $343,000 in
June.”).
34
Scherer and Arnsdorf, supra note 32.

10
 campaign had disbursed $501,866 to the company. 35 A more recent Washington Post

report indicates that the joint effort was designed “to offset costs for the campaign,” and

with input from both campaign and super PAC, as N2024D LLC “was founded . . . with

help from attorneys for the campaign and Never Back Down to pay for a lease of the

private plane DeSantis used to travel to events.” 36

28. Never PAC has also paid for an astounding share of DeSantis’s events and travel across

the state of Iowa, which hosts the first presidential nominating contest. As referenced

above, the super PAC plans events, invites DeSantis to speak at the events as a featured

guest, and buses him between events alongside super PAC staff, thus allowing DeSantis

to meet and greet Iowa voters and financial supporters with his travel and event expenses

fully paid for by the super PAC. 37 Never PAC has underwritten DeSantis’s Iowa travel to

such an extent that of DeSantis’s reported visits to each of Iowa’s 99 counties, Never

PAC has hosted an event in, and paid for his travel to, 92 of them. 38

29. Never PAC has even provided its research and polling to the DeSantis campaign. In

August 2023, detailed strategy documents prepared by Axiom Strategies, a firm owned

by Never PAC’s “chief strategist” Jeff Roe, were posted on the firm’s website in the days

leading up to the first debate between the Republican presidential primary candidates:

35
Disbursements to “N2024D,” https://www.fec.gov/data/disbursements/?data_type=processed&recipient_name=
N2024D (last visited Dec. 17, 2023).
36
Scherer, December 16, supra note 6.
37
Knowles, supra note 30; Brianne Pfannenstiel, Ron DeSantis Super PAC Will Host Bus Tour Through Iowa
Ahead of Lincoln Dinner, Des Moines Register (Jul. 22, 2023),
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2023/07/22/desantis-super-pac-never-
back-down-increasingly-will-hold-events/70450322007/.
38
Peoples and Beaumont, supra note 11.

11
 A firm associated with the super PAC that has effectively taken
over Mr. DeSantis’s presidential campaign posted online hundreds
of pages of blunt advice, research memos and internal polling in
early nominating states to guide the Florida governor ahead of the
high-stakes Republican presidential debate next Wednesday in
Milwaukee. . . . The documents were posted this week on the
website of Axiom Strategies, the company owned by Jeff Roe, the
chief strategist of Mr. DeSantis’s super PAC, Never Back Down. 39

These documents, which included opposition research, internal polling data, and specific

lines of attack that DeSantis should use against other candidates during the debate, were

reportedly “so strategy-heavy that it appears that the super PAC, which recently had a top

official . . . leave for the campaign, is trying to dictate how the candidate should conduct

himself on the debate stage.” Indeed, one of the documents was “entitled ‘Debate Memo,’

dated Aug. 15, which cynically describes how Mr. DeSantis . . . could wring the most

favorable media attention from the debate.” 40 Soon after the New York Times reached out

to Never PAC for comment on these documents, they were removed from the Axiom

Strategies website. 41

30. Accordingly, Never PAC has conveyed highly valuable strategic information to the

DeSantis campaign.

39
Jonathan Swan, et al., Defend Trump and ‘Hammer’ Ramaswamy: DeSantis Allies Reveal Debate Strategy, N.Y.
Times (Aug. 17, 2023), https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/17/us/politics/desantis-debate-strategy.html (“Taken
together, the documents reveal the remarkable extent to which the financially struggling DeSantis campaign is
relying upon the resources of his super PAC, which raised $130 million in the first half of the year. The outside
group is paying for research on Mr. DeSantis’s rivals, strategic insights and polling—all traditionally the work of
campaigns themselves.”).
40
Id.
41
Id. (“The New York Times was alerted to the existence of the documents by a person not connected to the
DeSantis campaign or the super PAC. After The Times reached out to Never Back Down for comment on Thursday,
the group removed from the website a key memo summarizing the suggested strategy for the debate. By Thursday
night, all the other documents that were posted had been taken down.”).

12
31. As the Washington Post reported in September 2023, amid shakeups in the campaign,

including “laying off staff [and] bringing in new leadership,” the campaign has been

“looking to the super PAC to cover more costs.” 42

SUMMARY OF THE LAW

Contribution Limits and Restrictions

32. Under FECA, a contribution includes “any gift, subscription, loan, advance, or deposit of

money or anything of value made by any person for the purpose of influencing any

election for Federal office,” and an expenditure includes “any purchase, payment,

distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value, made by any

person for the purpose of influencing any election for Federal office.” 43 Under

Commission regulations, “anything of value” in either context includes all in-kind

contributions, such as the provision of goods or services at no charge or at a discount. 44

33. FECA treats an expenditure that is “coordinated” with a federal candidate or committee

as an in-kind contribution to the federal candidate or committee with whom, or with

which, it is coordinated. 45 An expenditure is “coordinated” if it is “made in cooperation,

consultation, or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of, a candidate [or] the

candidate’s authorized committee.” 46

34. FECA prohibits making contributions to political committees other than candidate

committees aggregating in excess of $5,000 per year, and further prohibits the knowing

42
Knowles, supra note 30.
43
52 U.S.C. § 30101(8)(A)(i), (B)(i).
44
11 C.F.R. §§ 100.52(d)(1), 100.111.
45
Id. § 109.20(b).
46
Id. § 109.20(a); see also 52 U.S.C. § 30101(17) (“The term ‘independent expenditure’ means an
expenditure . . . (B) that is not made in concert or cooperation with or at the request or suggestion of such candidate,
the candidate’s authorized political committee, or their agents, or a political party committee or its agents.”).

13
 acceptance of such contributions. 47 FECA also prohibits knowingly accepting

contributions by corporations and labor organizations. 48

35. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC and the D.C. Circuit’s

decision in SpeechNow.org v. FEC, the FEC has recognized an exception to the general

$5,000 limit on contributions to political committees: Committees 49 that only make

independent expenditures, and that do not make contributions to or otherwise coordinate

with federal candidates, are permitted to solicit and raise unlimited contributions for their

independent activities, including contributions from corporations and labor unions. 50

These independent-expenditure-only PACs are now commonly known as “super PACs.”

36. Federal courts and the Commission itself have made clear that an essential condition for

super PACs to accept unlimited contributions, including corporate and union money, is

that they operate independently from the candidates they support and “make only

independent expenditures.” 51 The Supreme Court, in Citizens United, concluded that the

government’s interest in prohibiting corporate independent expenditures was insufficient

because, in the court’s view, the “absence of prearrangement and coordination of an

expenditure . . . alleviates the danger that expenditures will be given as a quid pro quo for

improper commitments from the candidate.” 52 As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.

47
52 U.S.C. § 30116(a)(1)(C), (f).
48
Id. § 30118(a).
49
Pursuant to a federal district court’s stipulated order and consent judgment in August 2011, the FEC recognized
the same limited exception to FECA’s contribution amount limits and source prohibitions for a segregated,
noncontribution account of a political committee—now commonly referred to as a “hybrid PAC”—that maintains
two separate accounts, one used to make contributions to candidates and the other used exclusively for independent
activity. See FEC Statement on Carey v. FEC (2011) (Oct. 6, 2011), https://www.fec.gov/updates/fec-statement-on-
carey-v-fec/; see also Carey v. FEC, Case No. 11-259 (D.D.C. Aug. 19, 2011) (Stipulated Order and Consent
Judgment).
50
See Citizens United, 558 U.S. 310; SpeechNow.org v. FEC, 599 F.3d 686 (D.C. Cir. 2010);
Advisory Op. 2010-11 (Commonsense Ten) (July 22, 2010); see also 52 U.S.C. §§ 30116(a)(1), 30118(a).
51
Advisory Op. 2010-11 at 3 (Commonsense Ten) (citing Citizens United and SpeechNow) (emphasis added).
52
Citizens United, 558 U.S. at 357.

14
 Circuit has noted, “[t]he independence of independent expenditures was a central

consideration in the [Citizens United] decision.” 53

37. The Supreme Court has long recognized that “the rationale for affording special

protection to wholly independent expenditures” does not extend to coordinated

expenditures, since “expenditures made after a ‘wink or nod’ often will be ‘as useful to

the candidate as cash’” and pose the same dangers of corruption and abuse. 54 Nothing in

Citizens United or any other judicial decision altered that conclusion or recognized a

corporate right to raise and spend money for these coordinated activities.

38. Because a super PAC’s ability to accept unlimited contributions and corporate general

treasury funds arises from these court decisions that, on their face, apply only to groups

that exclusively make independent expenditures—and not to groups that contribute

directly to or coordinate expenditures with a candidate or political party committee—a

political committee that contributes to or coordinates its activity with federal candidates

or party committees is, by definition, not a “super PAC,” and cannot accept contributions

that would violate FECA’s contribution amount limits and source prohibitions.

Coordinated Communications

39. Under the Commission’s regulations, payments for a communication are coordinated

expenditures, and therefore in-kind contributions, if (1) a person other than the candidate

or candidate’s campaign paid for the communication, (2) the communication contained

certain content, and (3) the communication occurred after certain coordinating conduct. 55

53
SpeechNow, 599 F.3d at 693; see id. at 696 (“We should be clear, however, that we only decide these questions
as applied to contributions to SpeechNow, an independent expenditure-only group. Our holding does not affect, for
example, [FECA’s] limits on direct contributions to candidates.”).
54
McConnell v. FEC, 540 U.S. 93, 221 (2003) (emphasis added).
55
11 C.F.R. § 109.21(a).

15
 These three requirements are known colloquially as the “payment,” “content,” and

“conduct” prongs.

40. The content prong lists five types of communications that are subject to the coordinated

communications analysis: (a) electioneering communications, (b) public communications

that republish campaign materials, (c) public communications that refer to a clearly

identified candidate and air within a specified timeframe in front of the candidate’s

electorate, (d) public communications that include express advocacy for or against a

clearly identified candidate, and (e) public communications that include the functional

equivalent of express advocacy for or against a clearly identified candidate. 56

41. The conduct prong likewise covers five types of coordinating activities. Most relevant

here, the FEC regulations provide that coordination has occurred if a third party creates,

produces, or distributes a communication “at the request or suggestion of a candidate,

authorized committee” or agent of either, or if the third party proposes a communication

and the candidate or committee assents to the proposal. 57

42. The regulations further provide that coordination is established where the candidate,

authorized committee, or an agent of either is “materially involved” in the third party’s

decisions about the content of the communication (among other topics) or participates in

one or more “substantial discussion” about the communication. 58

56
Id. § 109.21(c). For presidential elections, the timeframe covered by the content requirement listed at (c) is 120
days before the primary election or caucus in the state in which the ad airs through the day of the general election.
57
Id. § 109.21(d)(1).
58
Id. § 109.21(d)(2)–(3). The remaining two types of conduct revolve around shared vendors passing information
from a campaign to the entity paying for an ad, and former employees or independent contractors of a campaign
going to work for the entity paying for the ad. Id. § 109.21(d)(4)–(5).

16
43. Importantly, the Commission’s regulations emphasize that there does not need to be an

explicit “agreement or formal collaboration” for a communication be coordinated. 59

Reporting/Disclosure Requirements

44. FECA requires each treasurer of a political committee to file reports of receipts and

disbursements with the Commission. 60

45. For any political committee other than a candidate-authorized committee, such reports

must include the total amount of contributions made to other political committees, as well

as the name and address of each political committee that has received a contribution from

the reporting committee during the reporting period, together with the date and amount of

such contribution. 61

46. For a candidate-authorized committee, such reports must include the total amount of all

contributions received from other political committees, as well as the identification of

each political committee that makes a contribution to the reporting candidate-authorized

committee during the reporting period, together with the date and amount of such

contribution. 62

CAUSES OF ACTION

COUNT I:
NEVER BACK DOWN MADE, AND DESANTIS AND HIS CAMPAIGN KNOWINGLY ACCEPTED,
COORDINATED EXPENDITURES IN VIOLATION OF 52 U.S.C. §§ 30116 AND 30118

47. The available information provides reason to believe Never PAC has coordinated its

expenditures with DeSantis, his campaign, and his agents, such that Never PAC has

59
Id. § 109.21(e).
60
52 U.S.C. § 30104(a)(1); 11 C.F.R. § 104.1(a).
61
52 U.S.C. § 30104(b)(4)(H)(i), (b)(6)(B)(i); 11 C.F.R. § 104.3(b)(1)(v), (b)(3)(v).
62
52 U.S.C. § 30104(b)(2)(D), (b)(3)(B); 11 C.F.R. § 104.3(a)(3)(iv), (a)(4)(ii).

17
 made, and the DeSantis campaign has knowingly accepted, prohibited contributions in

the form of coordinated expenditures.

48. Recent reporting indicates that DeSantis’s campaign manager “developed the strategy

and selected the leadership to lead” Never PAC, and that “the two operations . . . aimed

to function as an integrated whole.” 63 Federal laws prohibit exactly this sort of

cooperative, “integrated” activity between a candidate’s campaign and any group or

committee that raises and spends unlimited sums of money, including corporate funds, on

election influence. Indeed, such “integrated” activity is the opposite of the independence

required of super PACs like Never PAC.

49. The public record contains extensive evidence that DeSantis and his staff are, in fact, in

regular communication with Never PAC, passing on strategic information and requests

and suggestions and assenting to the super PAC’s plans. These interactions are textbook

examples of the coordinating “conduct” described in the Commission’s regulations. 64

50. Most recently and egregiously, a news report indicates that after DeSantis expressed

frustration with Never PAC pulling down an ad attacking Nikki Haley, intermediaries

conveyed to Never PAC board members that the candidate wanted the super PAC to put

the attack ad back on the air. The board members passed that message on to the super

PAC employees responsible for making strategic decisions about communications. 65 This

conduct must trigger a coordination finding: 66 Because DeSantis has directly or indirectly

offered requests or suggestions regarding the distribution and messaging of the super

63
Scherer, Dec. 16, supra note 6.
64
See 11 C.F.R. § 109.21(d)(1).
65
Peoples and Beaumont, supra note 11.
66
See 11 C.F.R. § 109.21(d)(1).

18
 PAC’s advertising, all Never PAC spending that takes DeSantis’s input into account is

unlawfully coordinated.

51. In addition to finding reason to believe this illegal conduct has occurred, the FEC should

speedily investigate whether Never PAC is currently taking steps to act on DeSantis’s

request, which would make a coordination violation imminent. 67 There is a high

likelihood of a future violation when this recent request or suggestion follows previous

instances of Never PAC spending in cooperation with the campaign.

52. For instance, in July 2023, a memo authored by DeSantis’s campaign manager, which

was supposedly “leaked” to the media, contained key strategic insights including that the

campaign “will not cede New Hampshire” and that “[w]hile saturation of critical states

like Iowa and South Carolina is critical, we see no reason why more expensive markets in

New Hampshire should not also be prioritized.” 68 The memo also included a list of

subjects the campaign wanted to see incorporated in ads; China was one of the those

topics. 69

53. Reporting indicated that Never PAC staffers “studied the memo line by line,” and Never

PAC has since paid for ads about Nikki Haley’s stance on China and made New

Hampshire one of its priority states. 70 When a candidate’s campaign makes clear, by

request or suggestion, where and how it wants a third party like Never PAC to spend its

67
See 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(2) (“If the Commission . . . determines, by an affirmative vote of 4 of its members, that
it has reason to believe that a person has committed, or is about to commit, a violation of this Act[,] . . . [t]he
Commission shall make an investigation of such alleged violation.” (emphasis added)).
68
Campaign Memo, supra note 18.
69
Id.
70
Goldmacher and Haberman, Jul. 23, supra note 24; Peoples and Beaumont, supra note 11; Scherer, Dec. 16,
supra note 6.

19
 money on electoral communications and other support, that is among the types of

“conduct” that results in an expenditure for a communication being “coordinated.” 71

54. DeSantis has also spent “extensive time with super PAC officials on the Never Back

Down bus,” 72 and Never PAC and DeSantis’s campaign entered into a joint lease

agreement for shared use of a private jet. 73 It is difficult to conceive of how DeSantis

campaign staff and Never PAC staff could have organized a road and air travel schedule

that occupied such a large portion of the candidate’s campaigning time without

cooperation and consultation regarding Never PAC’s strategic organization of that travel.

55. In fact, Never PAC’s deep involvement in guiding DeSantis’s movements is strong

evidence of coordination. Reporting indicates that the super PAC is directly guiding

where and when DeSantis campaigns, including “devising his game plan in Iowa” and

“deciding where he goes and who he meets.” 74 This type of operational planning involves

the assent of DeSantis to the expenditures Never PAC makes to bring about those

meetings and on-the-ground contacts. A candidate approving a super PAC’s planned

expenditures is strictly prohibited. 75

56. Never PAC’s coordination with the DeSantis campaign also extends to the operational

support it has been providing to the campaign through on-the-ground canvassing and

voter data collection. Reports indicate that DeSantis’s campaign has been regularly

“looking to the super PAC to cover more costs,” particularly with respect to organizing

on-the-ground campaign efforts in Iowa, which holds one of the earliest presidential

71
See 11 C.F.R. § 109.21(d).
72
Knowles, supra note 30.
73
Scherer and Arnsdorf, supra note 32.
74
Allison, supra note 25.
75
See 11 C.F.R. § 109.21(d)(1).

20
 nominating contests. 76 Never PAC has hired several hundred people to collect voter data

and canvass for DeSantis in Iowa, 77 as well as taking on other functions traditionally in

the purview of a candidate’s campaign, including “securing endorsements in early

primary states, sending mailers, organizing on campuses” and even “building crowds for

the governor’s events.” 78 This granular level of involvement in campaign work would

almost certainly require some level of cooperation or consultation with DeSantis’s

campaign or agents to accomplish, and that constitutes coordination with respect to the

expenditures Never PAC has made to hire hundreds of paid field staffers.

57. Moreover, even if some of Never PAC’s on-the-ground operations are being

implemented through use of DeSantis’s public campaign schedule, reports make it clear

that at least in some instances, Never PAC’s staffers are working directly with the

candidate or campaign staff.

58. In one particularly illustrative instance, for example, “employees of the super

PAC . . . working with Mr. DeSantis’s team, sent a flurry of texts and calls to assemble a

crowd” at a campaign event taking place that evening. 79 Never PAC staffers working

with DeSantis’s campaign to arrange a crowd for a “last-minute event” to advance

DeSantis’s campaign effort is the kind of “cooperation” and “consultation” that makes an

expenditure “coordinated” under FECA and Commission regulations, 80 and no super

PAC is permitted to coordinate its expenditures with a federal candidate in this manner.

76
Knowles, supra note 30.
77
Scherer, Apr. 19, supra note 26; Scherer and Dawsey, Jul. 14, supra note 29.
78
Goldmacher, May 24, supra note 27.
79
Id.
80
11 C.F.R. § 109.20(a).

21
59. The DeSantis campaign even confirmed its reliance on Never PAC for organizing voters

in a November 2023 memo to campaign donors. The communication explains that

DeSantis is working “alongside NBD’s impressive ground game,” including an “army” of

supporters Never PAC mobilized, to win the election. The communication thus

demonstrates the campaign’s significant inside knowledge of the super PAC’s future

plans, and the document manifests the campaign’s suggestion that those plans should be

continued “alongside” other efforts. 81

60. Accordingly, based on the foregoing, there is reason to believe that Never PAC,

DeSantis, and the DeSantis campaign have violated 52 U.S.C. §§ 30116(a)(1)(A),

30116(f), and 30118(a) as a result of these prohibited coordinated expenditures.

COUNT II:
NEVER BACK DOWN MADE, AND DESANTIS AND HIS CAMPAIGN KNOWINGLY ACCEPTED,
IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE PROVISION OF GOODS AND SERVICES
IN VIOLATION OF 52 U.S.C. §§ 30116 AND 30118

61. The available information provides reason to believe that Never PAC has also (or in some

cases, alternatively) made in-kind contributions to DeSantis and his campaign through the

provision of discounted and no-cost goods or services, resulting in Never PAC making,

and the DeSantis campaign knowingly accepting, prohibited contributions.

62. Reports indicate that Never PAC has subsidized or underwritten the DeSantis campaign’s

travel costs, including ground and air transportation for DeSantis himself.

63. Specifically, DeSantis has regularly traveled to and from Never PAC-hosted events on

the super PAC’s buses. 82 While Commission regulations permit a candidate to “attend,

81
Donor Memo, supra note 16; see Scherer, Dec. 16, supra note 6 (“[DeSantis campaign manager James]
Uthmeier had written a public memo on behalf of the campaign embracing Fight Right for future television ads and
describing Never Back Down as a field operation.”).
82
See Pfannenstiel supra note 37; Knowles, supra note 30.

22
 speak at, or be a featured guest at a non-Federal fundraising event,” 83 there is no

provision that allows a candidate to also receive extensive, free travel in connection with

such appearances. Never PAC providing transportation for a federal candidate at no cost

to the candidate’s campaign alleviates an expense that the campaign would otherwise

have to bear and is therefore an in-kind contribution prohibited under FECA.

64. Moreover, Never PAC and DeSantis’s campaign have reportedly entered into a joint

lease agreement for DeSantis’s use of a private jet, allowing Never PAC to pay a

substantial portion of the candidate’s air travel costs, which the campaign would

otherwise have had to pay. 84 Reports also indicate that at least through the end of July

2023, Never PAC had made no use of the jet, 85 and that the specific purpose of the

enterprise was not for the campaign and super PAC to have part-time use of a shared

asset, but rather for Never PAC to shoulder a significant portion of DeSantis’s campaign

travel costs. 86 Disclosure reports show that this is precisely what has happened: Through

the end of July 2023, Never PAC had paid approximately $343,000 of the $845,000 in

total disbursements to N2024D LLC, or roughly 40% of a cost—the candidate’s air

travel—that DeSantis’s campaign would otherwise have had to pay. These payments thus

constitute an in-kind contribution by Never PAC to DeSantis’s campaign. 87

83
11 C.F.R. § 300.64(b); see Advisory Op. 2015-09 at 8 (Senate Majority PAC).
84
Scherer and Arnsdorf, supra note 32.
85
Id.
86
Scherer, Dec. 16, supra note 6.
87
The Commission has considered cost-sharing arrangements to be illegal in-kind contributions in the past. In
Advisory Opinion 1985-19 (Thomas J. Vallely for Congress Committee), the Commission concluded that a
corporation and a campaign jointly purchasing a computer system would result in a corporate contribution, as the
campaign would receive a cost-saving benefit “through the joint arrangement that it would not receive if it acted
alone.” Advisory Op. 1985-19 at 2–3.

23
65. It also appears that Never PAC footed some event costs, amounting to in-kind

contributions to the DeSantis campaign. For example, when super PAC employees

worked with the DeSantis campaign to make “texts and calls to assemble a crowd” for a

last-minute campaign event, the super PAC was deploying its resources—in the form of

staff time and communication costs—to offset or underwrite expenses that the DeSantis

campaign would otherwise have had to incur to pull together the event. 88

66. Additionally, in August 2023, Never PAC shared detailed strategy documents, which it

must have paid to procure, with the DeSantis campaign through the mechanism of

publishing those documents on the website of Axiom Strategies, a firm owned by Never

PAC’s chief strategist, Jeff Roe. These documents provided DeSantis, at no charge,

valuable insights and information, including internal polling data, opposition research,

and suggested lines of attack for DeSantis to use in the first debate between Republican

primary candidates. 89 This again is a prohibited contribution, in this case by providing a

candidate’s campaign with highly valuable strategic goods and services at no charge. 90

67. Based on Never PAC’s provision of free and discounted goods and services in the

foregoing instances, there is reason to believe that Never PAC, DeSantis, and his

campaign violated 52 U.S.C. §§ 30116(a)(1)(A), 30116(f), and 30118(a) by making and

knowingly accepting prohibited in-kind contributions.

88
See Goldmacher, May 24, supra note 27.
89
Swan, supra note 39.
90
See, e.g., Compl., MUR 8009 (Protect Ohio Values, et al.), https://campaignlegal.org/sites/default/files/2022-
06/Vance%20POV%20Complaint%20%28Final%29.pdf.

24
 COUNT III:
NEVER BACK DOWN HAS KNOWINGLY ACCEPTED EXCESSIVE AND PROHIBITED
CONTRIBUTIONS IN VIOLATION OF 52 U.S.C. §§ 30116(F) AND 30118(A)

68. Because Never PAC has made and continues to make prohibited contributions to, and

expenditures coordinated with, DeSantis and his campaign, there is reason to believe

Never PAC is engaging in ongoing violations of FECA by accepting excessive and

prohibited contributions.

69. As outlined in the preceding sections, there is ample evidence demonstrating reason to

believe Never PAC is both making in-kind contributions to and coordinating

expenditures with the DeSantis campaign. In so doing, Never PAC is contravening the

“independence” required for it to legally accept unlimited contributions and contributions

from corporations under the decisions in Citizens United and SpeechNOW, as well as

FEC Advisory Opinion 2010-11 (Commonsense Ten). 91

70. The Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United was predicated on the notion that the

“absence of prearrangement and coordination” with candidates relieved the danger of

corruption that would otherwise attend corporate expenditures. Similarly, the D.C. Circuit

in SpeechNow acknowledged that “[t]he independence of independent expenditures was a

central consideration” of the Citizens United decision, and concluded accordingly that

“contributions to groups that make only independent expenditures also cannot corrupt or

create the appearance of corruption.” 92 Yet Never PAC is not such a group, as the

preceding discussion of its coordination with DeSantis makes clear.

71. Likewise, the Commission’s decision in Advisory Opinion 2010-11 (Commonsense Ten)

also involved another organization that stipulated it would “make only independent

91
Citizens United, 558 U.S. 310; SpeechNow.org, 599 F.3d 686; Advisory Op. 2010-11 (Commonsense Ten).
92
SpeechNow.org, 599 F.3d at 693–94.

25
 expenditures,” 93 such that it too does not apply, on its face, to a group like Never PAC

that makes contributions to, or coordinates its expenditures with, a candidate.

72. Because a group like Never PAC lacks the required independence from candidates on

which these decisions were based, the decisions—and the limited exemption for

independent-expenditure-only committees from FECA’s contribution limits and

corporate contribution prohibition—do not apply.

73. Never PAC’s communications in support of DeSantis’s campaign cannot be considered

“independent” expenditures in light of the candidate providing messaging requests or

suggestions through intermediaries. And the super PAC’s spending to underwrite or even

supplant DeSantis’s campaign operations—including, e.g., hiring staff to canvass and

collect voter data for DeSantis, subsidizing or paying DeSantis’s travel costs, and

purchasing polling data and opposition research to prepare DeSantis for a candidate

debate—is a far cry from the independent political activity that Citizens United ruled

could not be prohibited. 94 Decades of Supreme Court precedent establish that

expenditures coordinated with a candidate are equivalent to a direct contribution to a

candidate, 95 and nothing in Citizens United or the court decisions following it altered that

analysis or recognized a corporate right to spend unlimited amounts in coordination with

candidates.

93
Advisory Op. 2010-11 at 3 (Commonsense Ten).
94
Citizens United, 558 U.S. at 364.
95
See Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 46 (1976) (“[C]ontrolled or coordinated expenditures are treated as
contributions rather than expenditures under the Act.”); FEC v. Colo. Republican Fed. Campaign Comm., 533 U.S.
431, 438 (2001) (FECA provides “for a functional, not formal, definition of ‘contribution,’ which includes
‘expenditures made by any person in cooperation, consultation, or concert, with, or at the request or suggestion of, a
candidate, his authorized political committees, or their agents[.]’ Expenditures coordinated with a candidate, that is,
are contributions under the Act.”); McConnell, 540 U.S. at 219 (“Ever since our decision in Buckley, it has been
settled that expenditures by a noncandidate that are ‘controlled by or coordinated with the candidate and his
campaign’ may be treated as indirect contributions subject to FECA’s source and amount limitations.”).

26
74. By subsidizing DeSantis’s campaign expenses, Never PAC is not making “independent

expenditures” as FECA defines that term, or indeed engaging in anything resembling the

independent electoral activity that Citizens United contemplated.

75. Because Never PAC is not a political committee that only makes independent

expenditures, it remains subject to FECA’s contribution limits and the prohibition on

corporate and union contributions. FECA’s aggregate contribution limit for political

committees other than authorized candidate committees is $5,000 per year, and such

committees may not knowingly accept contributions exceeding this amount. Never PAC,

however, has reported accepting more than 170 contributions in excess of FECA’s limits

since its formation earlier this year, in violation of the law.

76. Moreover, FECA prohibits making or knowingly accepting a contribution from a

corporation. Never PAC appears to have accepted multiple contributions from

corporations. 96

77. There is therefore reason to believe each of these corporate and excessive contributions

constitutes a separate violation of FECA’s limits and source prohibitions. 97

COUNT IV:
NEVER BACK DOWN, DESANTIS, AND THE DESANTIS CAMPAIGN FAILED TO REPORT
MAKING/RECEIVING IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS, INCLUDING IN THE FORM OF COORDINATED
EXPENDITURES, IN VIOLATION OF 52 U.S.C. § 30104(B)

78. The available information provides reason to believe Never PAC and DeSantis and his

campaign have failed to report making and accepting, respectively, in-kind contributions

on their required FEC disclosure reports.

96
See, e.g., supra note 9.
97
52 U.S.C. §§ 30116(a)(1)(C), (f), 30118(a).

27
79. As outlined in the preceding sections, there is ample evidence establishing reason to

believe Never PAC made in-kind contributions to DeSantis’s campaign through

coordinated expenditures and directly subsidizing campaign activities. However, Never

PAC has not reported making a single contribution to DeSantis’s campaign. 98

80. Likewise, despite the abundant evidence that DeSantis’s campaign has received in-kind

contributions from Never PAC, the DeSantis campaign has not reported any of these

contributions to the FEC, either. 99

81. The Act requires political committees to report detailed information about each

contribution they make to another political committee and the aggregate of all such

contributions. 100 Similarly, authorized candidate committees receiving contributions from

other political committees must report details about each contribution, itemized by

contributor and including each contribution’s amount, date, and purpose, and the

aggregate amount of all such contributions. 101

82. Because neither Never PAC nor DeSantis’s campaign has reported making or receiving,

respectively, any in-kind contributions, despite their coordinated activities, there is reason

to believe they have violated the Act’s disclosure provisions.

83. In doing so, they have deprived the public and complainants of their statutory right to

know the amounts, dates, and purposes of a candidate’s campaign receipts and

spending—information necessary to enable voters to evaluate candidates for office,

98
See Never Back Down, Inc., 2023 Mid-Year Report (Jul. 31, 2023).
99
See Ron DeSantis for President, 2023 July Quarterly Report (Jul. 15, 2023),
https://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/700/202307159583524700/202307159583524700.pdf.
100
52 U.S.C. § 30104(b)(4)(H)(i), (b)(6)(B)(i); 11 C.F.R. § 104.3(b)(1)(v), (b)(3)(v).
101
52 U.S.C. § 30104(b)(2)(D), (b)(3)(B); 11 C.F.R. § 104.3(a)(3)(iv), (a)(4)(ii).

28
 “make informed decisions[,] and give proper weight to different speakers and

messages.” 102

84. Indeed, because Never PAC has accepted corporate contributions and used that money to

make coordinated expenditures and in-kind contributions to DeSantis’s campaign, both

Never PAC and DeSantis’s campaign have denied the public and complainants of

information regarding the true sources and amounts of contributions to DeSantis’s

campaign—effectively turning Never PAC into a vehicle for funneling contributions

from Never PAC’s corporate contributors into unlawful, undisclosed contributions to

DeSantis’s campaign.

102
Citizens United, 558 U.S. at 369–71.

29
 PRAYER FOR RELIEF

85. Wherefore, the Commission should find reason to believe that Never PAC, DeSantis, and

his campaign have violated 52 U.S.C. § 30101 et seq., and conduct an immediate

investigation under 52 U.S.C. § 30109(a)(2).

86. Further, the Commission should seek appropriate sanctions for any and all violations,

including civil penalties sufficient to deter future violations and an injunction prohibiting

the respondents from any and all violations in the future, and should seek such additional

remedies as are necessary and appropriate to ensure compliance with FECA.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Saurav Ghosh

Campaign Legal Center, by
Saurav Ghosh, Esq.
1101 14th Street NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 736-2200

/s/ Roger G. Wieand

Roger G. Wieand
1101 14th Street NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 736-2200

Saurav Ghosh, Esq.

Campaign Legal Center
1101 14th Street NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20005
Counsel to the Campaign Legal Center

December 18, 2023

30
 VERIFICATION

The complainants listed below hereby verify that the statements made in the attached

Complaint are, upon their information and belief, true.

Sworn pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1001.

For Complainant Campaign Legal Center

Saurav Ghosh, Esq.

I-
Sworn to and subscribed before me this la day of December 2023.

Notary Public

31
 VERIFICATION

The complainants listed below hereby verify that the statements made in the attached

Complaint are, upon their information and belief, true.

Sworn pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1001.

For Complainant Roger G. Wieand

____________________

Roger G. Wieand

Sworn to and subscribed before me this ___

18th day of December 2023.

Courtney Jones 07/11/2027

___________________

Notary Public
State of Texas; County of Harris

Notarized online using audio-video communication

32
EXHIBIT A
 To: Team DeSantis Investors

From: James Uthmeier, Campaign Manager

Date: November 27, 2023

Re: Fundraising Update

As November closes, we thank all the donors and supporters who have made great sacrifices
to support Ron DeSantis in his fight to save our country, win this election, and lead America's
great comeback. We know and appreciate the time and resources you have devoted to our
mission. May God bless all you do for this cause and our country. We have the man for the
moment - someone who has proven he will not only fight the important fights but also deliver
big wins. And we have the team to help him get the job done!

We are pleased to report that we enter the final weeks of the year in very strong form. Ron
DeSantis continues to outwork everyone else in the race. He has already visited 98 of the 99
counties in Iowa and will soon complete the "Full Grassley." He has also
secured endorsements from 41 Iowa state legislators - a record that doubles any other
candidate in the race – over 100 Iowa faith leaders, 26 Iowa sheriffs, and 120 county
chairs. Ron DeSantis continues to inspire the thousands of Iowans that line up each week to

Personal and Confidential 1

 hear him speak, and at every stop we are greeted by more friendly voters proudly proclaiming
their decision to flip from other candidates and commit to Ron DeSantis.

The state of our campaign finances remains strong. Fundraising events continue to exceed
expectations, and our lean budget has produced needed surpluses at the most crucial time in
the race. These resources will become ever important as Ron DeSantis builds momentum in
the coming weeks--facing Gavin Newsom in the much-anticipated November
30th debate hosted by Sean Hannity, preparing for his fourth GOP debate victory in
Tuscaloosa, AL, and crisscrossing the state of Iowa alongside key endorsers Governor Kim
Reynolds and Iowa kingmaker Bob Vander Plaats.

As many of you know, the independent pro-DeSantis outside political organization, Never Back
Down (NBD), boasts an incredible field operation and ground game - the largest Iowa turnout
machine in history. We have accepted many invitations to attend NBD events and look forward
to seeing our campaign, their team, and many volunteers help Ron DeSantis bring home a
victory on Caucus Night. Without question, NBD's robust organization is unrivaled in its ability
to mobilize supporters and get out the vote.

We also welcome the independent efforts of a newly established outside organization, Fight
Right, a pro-DeSantis group that announced they will work closely with NBD and devote full
attention to fighting for Ron DeSantis through powerful TV advertising. As Donald Trump and
Nikki Haley work side-by-side spending tens of millions of dollars to attack Ron DeSantis, Fight
Right's emergence provides welcomed air support.

It is no surprise that Donald Trump has focused the entirety of his attacks on only Ron
DeSantis, recognizing that our candidate is the most formidable challenger equipped to win
Iowa and actually deliver on the former president's outstanding promise. And Nikki Haley's
failure to attack the former president makes evident she is running for something other than the
nomination. The two-front onslaught against us - backed by millions of dollars of heavy false
attacks on the airwaves - has magnified the need for more support for Ron DeSantis on
air. Fight Right's mission could not have come at a better time.

Fight Right has publicly announced their operation features minimal overhead, and 100% of
contributions go direct to TV ads. Ron DeSantis is set to meet with financial supporters of Fight
Right as soon as today. In the final push for the Iowa Caucus victory, this campaign will
proudly fight alongside NBD's impressive ground game, and Fight Right's television team, to
show the people of Iowa that this is a time for choosing, and Ron DeSantis is the candidate that
can WIN! We are blessed to have both an NBD-army and Fight Right-air force out there fighting
for us.

Please keep us in your prayers as we continue the fight for America.

Personal and Confidential 2

EXHIBIT B
 CONFIDENTIAL FRIENDS AND FAMILY UPDATE
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION
JULY 6, 2023
FUNDRAISING
Today we announcedthatwe raised $20 million in its first six weeks, reflecting the growing
enthusiasm for Governor DeSantis’ forward-looking vision for the Great American Comeback. The
campaign's haul is the largest first-quarter fling rom any non-incumbent Republican candidate in more
than a decade. It bests the $18.3 million former president and de facto incumbent Donald Trump's
campaign raised during hsfirst two fundraising quarters as a candidate ($3.8 in Q4 2022 and $14.5 in Q1
2023).
Joe Biden's leftist policies are destroying the country, and Republicans are excited to invest in a winner
ready to lead America’s revival. We are grateful for the investment so many Aiericans have made to get
this countryback on track. The fight to save it will be long and challenging, but we havebuilt an
operationto share the governor's message and mobilize the millions of people who support t. We are
ready to win.
The strong Q2 haul comes after DeSantis recently eclipsed 250 endorsements from state legislators
across the nation and unveiled his plan to stop the invasion and secure the border. The policy rollout was
the first of many the campaign has planned in the weeks and months ahead.
STATE OF THE RACE: THE BALLOT IS VERY FLUID
Early state voters are only softly committed to the candidates they select on a ballot question this far out
—including many Trump supporters. Our focus group participants in the early states even say they don't
plan on making up their mind until trie; met thecandidates or watch them debate. While we know
Trump's floor is ~25%, that leaves %**of tie electoratewillingto consider other viable options.
What has not changed are the carididates who are realistically being courted by the electorate. As it has
beenforthe last year, Trump and DeSantis remain the only viable options for two-thirds of the likely
Republican primary electorate. While Tim Scott has earned a serious look at this stage, his bio is lacking
the fight that our electorate is looking for in the next President. We expect Tim Scott to receive
appropriate scrutiny (n the weeks ahead. We've found low to no interest in Vivek, Burgum, and Nikki
while far ton many voters will not consider Pence and Christie for them to feel remotely viable.
WHERE WE PLAN TO COMPETE
Ron DeSantis is running a campaign to win everywhere. It would be a mistake to take a paid media and
field programoff the table in service of other states, we will not cede New Hampshire. From what we
can tell, pro-DeSantis efforts are currently and will continue to run a robust effort in low, South
Carolina, and New Hampshire, that includes paid media and field.
While Super Tuesday i critically important, we will not dedicate resources to Super Tuesday that slow
our momentum in New Hampshire. We expect to revisit ths investment in the Fall
 CONFIDENTIAL FRIENDS AND FAMILY UPDATE
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION
JULY 6, 2023

‘Governor DeSantis and his message are thriving in town hall style engagements. This format allows him
to speak directly with voters regarding the issues they care about. Town hall events are the best way for
early state voters to get to know Governor DeSantis. The campaign has hosted successful town hall
events in Texas, South Carolina and New Hampshire to date.
We are also planning events that feature cookout styled, backyard activities targeting primary voters in
Towa and New Hampshire.
THE MESSAGE 0)
We will Restore Sanity for the American people. \
BIO: We've found that when voters hear about the Governor's bio principally as a Dad and as a
veteran— they like him and are open to hearing more about in. This is to say nothing of hs
successes on parental rights, his leadership bringing Flo/iga’s economyback during and after
COVID, fighting illegal immigration and ensuring borer security, that he's not just
a fighter, but
most importantly a winner. A major paid media ¢ffort featuring the Governor's bio
(dad/family/veteran) wil help us to convert imrege.ts ballot.
There is more to the Governor's bio tha we even appreciate for example, when in Congress he.
refused to take a congressional pension. Tris and many other examples have yet to even be
explored and will likely be feature of his bio in the Fall.
* Culture: Governor DeSantis s THE leader
of the culture fight in America. We will continue to
burnish his record fightin thi Left who want to come after our kids and take over society via the
“Control Economy” (£S('31d DEI). When radical liberals tried to teach school kids to question
their gender, Ron DeSantis stood up and protected our children. As President he will continue to
fightthose whowant to inappropriately sexualize our children and steal their innocence. He is
THE candide0 ead the culture fight and we need to burnish his record nationally (earl states
and natidhal Eble) to secure this lane.

+ (the Economy: Equally important, we will offer an economic message to disrupt and win
conamy voters. American decline was not an accident. It was a choice. Our elites do not
consider themselves Americans so much as they think of themselves as “citizens of the world.”
Their loyalty is not to a discrete nation, but to the bottom line on a balance sheet. And the
decisions they've made in leading this country over the past few decades has reflected that
worldview — they have governed intheir interests rather than ours.
* China is a Domestic Policy Threat..but not for the reasons you think: China is not to be thought
of as a superpower,butas a desperate power. The chief foreign policy threat to the U.S. s also a
domestic policy threat - 3 desperate China. He will ight size China's control over our
 CONFIDENTIAL FRIENDS AND FAMILY UPDATE
NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION
JULY 6,2023
hemisphere and stop them from spying on our citizens, stealing our technology and displacing
America on the world stage. We do not need them.
THE POLICY
The NO EXCUSES policy agenda will feature bold policy solutions, including:
«The Border: Stop the Invasion (June 2023)
The Economy (uly and August 2023)
«Foreign Policy and China (August 2023)
«Debate (August 2023)
More to come in the Fall of 2023...including woke military, the deep state; School choice and beyond.
THE FIGHT
Ourcampaign will make the contrast between Joe Biden and Kun DeSantis clear — but we won't avoid
Trump's failings when asked. Ourstrategy? Question Asked, Question Answered, then on to how we
beat Joe Biden
While Trump is always the most efficient driver of his own negatives, there are numerous other
persuasion narratives that can and should be exploited on him. Soft Trump voters and America First
conservatives do not look kindly on Trumps record on guns, the deficit and spending, Transgenderism,
‘and his family's his cozy relationship with theSaudi Royal Family.
“THE FORMULA
We will continue to presefitbig; bold ideas that will get people talking in an effort to generate more
earned media. More earned media will result in increased standing on the ballot. We will aggressively
pursue this formulin the next eight weeks as we understand that standing in the polis i directly tied to
‘earned media pro-DeSantis surrogates understand the importance to appear on every possible news
segment.
In the meantime, voters need to become fully awareof the Governor's bio as described above. While
Saturationofcritical states like lowa and South Carolina is critical, we see no reason why more expensive:
markets in New Hampshire should not also be prioritized. The earned media is the cake. The paid media
(early states and national conservative cable) is the icing and keeps the messaging points from the
eared media hits in the voter's face. We are continuing to aggressively fundraise to ensure we can be.
competitive on both fronts.