Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 10A.275 (2026)

Multicandidate Political Party Expenditures

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subdivision 1.Exceptions.

Notwithstanding other provisions of this chapter, the following expenditures by a party unit, or two or more party units acting together are not considered contributions to or expenditures on behalf of a candidate for the purposes of section 10A.25 or 10A.27 and must not be allocated to candidates under section 10A.20, subdivision 3, paragraph (h):

(1) expenditures on behalf of candidates of that party generally without referring to any of them specifically in a published, posted, or broadcast advertisement;

(2) expenditures for the preparation, display, mailing, or other distribution of an official party sample ballot listing the names of three or more individuals whose names are to appear on the ballot;

(3) expenditures for a telephone call, voice mail, text message, multimedia message, Internet chat message, or email when the communication includes the names of three or more individuals whose names are to appear on the ballot;

(4) expenditures for a booth at a community event, county fair, or state fair that benefits three or more individuals whose names are to appear on the ballot;

(5) expenditures for a political party fundraising effort on behalf of three or more candidates; or

(6) expenditures for party committee staff services that benefit three or more candidates.

Subd. 2.

[Repealed, 1999 c 220 s 51]

Subd. 3.

[Repealed, 1999 c 220 s 51]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1994–2003 · leading case: State, Campaign Fin. & Pub. Disclosure Bd. v. Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, 671 N.W.2d 894 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State, Campaign Fin. & Pub. Disclosure Bd. v. Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, 671 N.W.2d 894 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 41× “Because the plain meaning of Minn.Stat. § 10A.275 (1998) prohibits multicandidate expenditures from being allocated to individual candidates and because the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the board’s position was not substantially justified in…”

Repub. Party of Minnesota v. Pauly, 63 F. Supp. 2d 1008 (D. Minnesota 1999). · cites it 2× “An expenditure by a political party or political party unit, as defined in section 10A.275, subdivision 3, in a race where the political party has a candidate on the ballot is not an independent expenditure.”

Day v. Hayes, 863 F. Supp. 940 (D. Minnesota 1994). · cites it 4× “An expenditure by a political party or political party unit, as defined in section 10A.275, subdivision 3, in a race where the political party has a candidate on the ballot is not an independent expenditure.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.