How about the FEC?
"The FEC concluded that the Clinton campaign and DNC misreported the money that funded the dossier, masking it as "legal services" and "legal and compliance consulting" instead of opposition research"
I'm not sure about that.
The Clinton campaign and DNC reported the expenditures that eventually went to Fusion GPS as "legal services" and in doing so, anticipated attorney-client privilege.
The FEC disagreed and the campaign and DNC entered into a conciliatory agreement "solely for the purpose of settling this manner expeditiously and to avoid further legal costs, Respondent will not concede, but will not contest the Commission's finding ......"
The complaint, which resulted in breaking the attorney-client" privilege claim, said that the Fusion GPS expenditures were "opposition research" and the campaign and DNC said that Fusion GPS research and research into an opposition candidate was done as part of "legal services".
The FEC disagreed with the "legal services claim" and the conciliatory agreement was entered into.
I'm not sure the FEC letter states that their position is that the Steele dossier was "opposition research", and they reached a decision that the Respondent claim of "legal services" was not appropriate.
Calling fabrications "research" does a disservice to actual research.
And I'm not sure the FEC letter regarding the conciliatory agreement over a Sept 2018 complaint explores whether or not the Steele dossier, discredited as unproven rumors and bar talk, can be considered as legitimate research.