Under the terms of the acquisition, Marchon became a wholly owned subsidiary. Marchon operates from its New York-based headquarters as an independent entity within the VSP organization. In 2019, VSP acquired Visionworks, an optical retailer in the U.S. As early as 1999, the IRS had started to look into VSP and its non-profit status. It all came to a head when an article printed in "Optometric Management" revealed the financial information of VSP. The article claimed that VSP reported on its website that in 2002 revenues were $1.86 billion and that it provided eyecare coverage for one in eight persons living in the United States. VSP said that along with this growth, payments to doctors are increasing and systems are being implemented to raise O.D. margins. However, an increasing number of O.D.s claimed that margins were actually cut and administrative requirements made so burdensome that they have or were considering dropping VSP. They wonder why financial and operational decisions that affect optometrists across the country (for example, the WellVision Savings Statement) are made without their input. In 2005, a federal district judge in Sacramento, California found that VSP failed to prove that it is not organized for profit and that it operates primarily for promotion of the greater social welfare, as a 501(c)(4) is supposed to. Instead, the district court found, VSP operates much like a for-profit (with, for example, its executives getting bonuses tied to net income) and primarily for the benefit of its own member/subscribers, not for some greater social good and, thereafter, concluded it was not entitled to tax-exempt status under 501(c)(4). In November 2005, the parties presented cases before a federal district judge. VSP asked to be confirmed as a social welfare organization under 26 U.S.C. §501(c)(4) and asked for return of the 2003 tax payments and an order that the United States issue it a private letter recognizing VSP's 501(c)(4) status. The government asked for summary judgment on the grounds that VSP did not qualify for tax exemption under 501(c)(4). Judge Lawrence Karlton ruled against VSP on December 12, 2005. VSP argued that it qualified for exemption under 501(c)(4) because its operations were primarily for the promotion of social welfare through direct (contracted) services to broad segments of the community as well as through charity work. While Judge Karlton described VSP's charitable work as admirable, he found that VSP failed to establish it operated primarily for the promotion of civic betterments and social improvements within the meaning of the tax regulations.