The registration and subsequent LD-2 reports contain  the following elements, if applicable:  the name of the organization, lobbying firm, or self-employed  individual that is lobbying on that client’s behalf; a list of individuals who acted as lobbyists on behalf of the client  during the reporting period; whether any lobbyists served as covered executive branch or  legislative branch covered officials in the previous 20 years;  the name of and further information about the client, including a  general description of its business or activities;  information on the specific lobbying issue areas and corresponding  general issue codes used to describe lobbying activities; any foreign entities that have an interest in the client; whether the client is a state or local government; information on which federal agencies and houses of Congress the  lobbyist contacted on behalf of the client during the reporting period;  the amount of income related to lobbying activities received from the  client (or expenses for organizations with in-house lobbyists) during  the quarter rounded to the nearest $10,000; and a list of constituent organizations that contribute more than $5,000 for  lobbying in a quarter and actively participate in planning, supervising,  or controlling lobbying activities, if the client is a coalition or  association. The LDA, as amended, also requires lobbyists to report certain  contributions semiannually in the LD-203 report. Documentation to Support Some LD-2 Report Elements Varied, but Most Newly Registered Lobbyists Met Disclosure Reporting Requirements

		Lobbyists Provided Documentation for Most LD-2 Reports, but Documentation for Some Report Elements Did Not Match Their Disclosure Reports

As in our prior reviews, most lobbyists reporting $5,000 or more in income  or expenses were able to provide documentation to varying degrees for  the reporting elements in their disclosure reports. Based on our  analysis, we estimate that a minimum of 15 percent of all LD-2 reports did  not properly disclose one or more previously held covered positions  compared to 11 percent for 2011 and 9 percent for 2010. Lobbyists for an estimated 85 percent (85 of 100) of LD-2 reports filed  year-end 2011 or midyear 2012 LD-203 contribution reports for all  lobbyists and lobbying firms listed on the report as required. We estimate that overall, a minimum of 6 percent of reports  failed to disclose one or more contributions. This is a match rate of 90 percent of registrations, which is  consistent with our prior reviews. Most lobbyists we interviewed rated the terms associated with LD-2  reporting requirements as “very easy” or “somewhat easy” to understand  with regard to meeting their reporting requirements. U.S. Attorney’s Office Actions to Enforce the LDA

		The Office’s Authorities, Processes, and Resources to Enforce LDA Compliance

The Office stated that it has sufficient authority and resources to enforce  compliance with LDA requirements, including imposing civil or criminal  penalties for noncompliance. Noncompliance of LDA reporting  requirements refers to the lobbying firm’s failure to file its quarterly LD-2  disclosure reports and semiannual LD-203 reports on certain political  contributions by the filing deadline. Officials reported that for the 2012 reporting period, the Office sent  demand letters, made phone contacts or sent emails to eight registrants  on the chronic offenders list. Four of the registrants filed the outstanding reports or  terminated their registration after being contacted by an Assistant U.S.  Attorney. Additionally, in September 2012, the Office reached settlement  agreements with two of the registrants from the chronic offenders list. One firm agreed to pay $50,000 and the other $30,000 in civil penalties  for repeatedly failing to file disclosure reports. As of March 2013, both  firms have paid the fines in full and complied fully with their outstanding  and ongoing reporting requirements. As of March 5, 2013, the two registrants have not responded to  the demand letters. Agency Comments

We provided a draft of this report to the Attorney General for review and  comment. The Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia  responded on behalf of the Attorney General that the Department of  Justice had no comments. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Consistent with the audit mandates in the Honest Leadership and Open  Government Act (HLOGA), our objectives were to determine the extent to which lobbyists are able to demonstrate  compliance with the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 as amended  (LDA) by providing documentation to support information contained on  registrations and reports filed under the LDA;  identify challenges and potential improvements to compliance, if any;  and describe the resources and authorities available to the U.S. Attorney’s  Office for the District of Columbia (the Office) and the efforts the  Office has made to improve enforcement of the LDA. We  used the House database for sampling LD-2 reports from the third and  fourth quarters of calendar year 2011and the first and second quarters of  calendar year 2012, as well as for sampling year-end 2011 and midyear  2012 political contributions (LD-203) reports and finally for matching  quarterly registrations with filed reports.
Why GAO Did This Study

HLOGA requires lobbyists to file quarterly lobbying disclosure reports and semiannual reports on certain political contributions. HLOGA also requires that GAO annually (1) audit the extent to which lobbyists can demonstrate compliance with disclosure requirements, (2) identify challenges to compliance that lobbyists report, and (3) describe the resources and authorities available to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia and the efforts the Office has made to improve its enforcement of the LDA, as amended. This is GAO's sixth report under the mandate.
GAO reviewed a stratified random sample of 100 quarterly disclosure LD-2 reports filed for the third and fourth quarters of calendar year 2011 and the first and second quarters of calendar year 2012. GAO also reviewed two random samples totaling 160 LD-203 reports from year-end 2011 and midyear 2012. This methodology allowed GAO to generalize to the population of 49,286 disclosure reports with $5,000 or more in lobbying activity and 31,894 reports of federal political campaign contributions. GAO also met with officials from the Office to obtain updated statuses on the Office's efforts to focus resources on lobbyists who fail to comply.
GAO provided a draft of this report to the Attorney General for review and comment. The Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia responded on behalf of the Attorney General that the Department of Justice had no comments on the draft of this report.

What GAO Found

Most lobbyists were able to provide documentation to demonstrate compliance with the disclosure requirements of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (LDA), as amended by the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (HLOGA). For lobbying disclosure reports (LD-2), GAO estimates that
97 percent could provide documentation to support reported income and expenses;
74 percent of the reported income and expenses were properly rounded to the nearest $10,000;
85 percent filed year-end 2011 or midyear 2012 federal political campaign (LD-203) reports as required; and
a minimum of 15 percent of all LD-2 reports did not properly disclose formerly held covered positions as required. The LDA defines several types of covered positions, including members of Congress and their staff and certain executive branch officials.
These findings are consistent with reviews from prior years.
For LD-203 reports, GAO estimates that a minimum of 6 percent of all LD-203 reports omitted one or more reportable political contributions that were documented in the Federal Election Commission (FEC) database. Twenty-eight lobbyists in GAO's sample, compared to17 last year, stated that they planned to amend their lobbying registration (LD-1) or LD-2 report following GAO's review to correct one or more data elements. Of these, 19 lobbyists had filed an amended report as of March 2013.
The majority of newly registered lobbyists filed LD-2 reports as required. Lobbyists are required to file LD-2 reports for the quarter in which they first register. GAO could identify corresponding reports on file for lobbying activity for 90 percent of registrants, which is similar to last year's findings.
Most lobbyists in our sample rated the terms associated with LD-2 reporting as "very easy" or "somewhat easy" to understand with regard to meeting their reporting requirements. However, a few cited challenges to complying with the LDA, as amended, such as differentiating between lobbying and non-lobbying activities.
The U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia (the Office) stated that it has sufficient authority and resources to enforce compliance with LDA requirements, including imposing civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance. Officials reported that during the 2012 reporting period, the Office took steps to pursue legal action, made phone contacts, or sent emails to eight registrants that had been repeatedly referred for failure to file required disclosure reports. Four of the registrants filed the outstanding reports or terminated their registration after being contacted by an Assistant U.S. Attorney. Additionally, in September 2012, the Office reached settlement agreements with two of the registrants for $50,000 and $30,000 in civil penalties. As of March 2013, both firms have paid their fines in full and complied with their ongoing reporting requirements. In February 2013, the Office sent demand letters to the two other registrants who, as of March 2013, have not responded.