Sunday, May 19, 2013
The IRS Scandal, Day 10
- ABC News: Republicans Informed of IRS Investigation Last Year
- Conglomerate: The IRS Scandal: Does It Fit With The IRS Weltanschauung?, by David Zaring (Pennsylvania)
- Fox News: Republicans: IRS Scandal Shows Agency 'Rotten at the Core,' Needs Major Reform
- Fox News op-ed; Watergate 2.0 -- Why the IRS Scandal Is Far Worse, by Mike Kibbe(Freedom Works)
- The Hill: Complaints of IRS targeting by Religious Groups on the Rise
- The Hill: Dem: Ex-IRS Chief Lied to Congress
- The Hill: Ways and Means Chairman: 'We Need to Dig a Lot Deeper' on IRS Scandal
- Houston Chronicle: Inside the Scandal: How the IRS’ Nonprofit Division Got So Dysfunctional
- L.A. Times: How the IRS Spun Out of Control
- New York Times: Confusion and Staff Troubles Rife at IRS Office in Ohio
- New York Times: Government's Worst Face
- New York Times op-ed; Hard of Hearings, by Gail Collins
- NPR: Nonconservative Groups Say IRS Scrutinized Them, Too
- Politico: 5 Fixes for the IRS
- Politico: Jack Lew Learned of IRS probe in March
- Politico: Jindal: IRS Officials Deserve Prison
- Politico: Ousted IRS Chief Steven Miller Defiant as GOP Attacks
- USA Today: Planted Question Gambit Backfires on IRS Officials
- Wall Street Journal: Former IRS Division Chief Predicts Wave of Departures
- Wall Street Journal: Question to IRS Official Was Planted
- Wall Street Journal: The Odd Case of the Planted IRS Question
- Washington Post: ‘Who’s Going to Jail’ Over IRS Scandal? Probably Nobody
- Weekly Standard: Ideological Revenue Service
Prior TaxProf Blog coverage:
- IRS Admits to Targeting Conservative Groups in 2012 Election (May 10, 2013)
- WaPo and WSJ Agree: IRS Targeting of Conservatives Is Appalling (May 11, 2013)
- Schmalbeck on the IRS 'Targeting' of Conservative Groups (May 12, 2013)
- The Deepening IRS Scandal (May 13, 2013)
- The IRS Scandal, Day 5 (May 14, 2013)
- Jon Stewart and Vic Fleischer on the IRS Scandal (May 14, 2013)
- Inspector General: Ineffective IRS Management Allowed Agents to Target Conservative Groups (May 14, 2013)
- The IRS Scandal, Day 6 (May 15, 2013)
- Ellen Aprill, The TIGTA Report on the IRS Scandal: Questions About the IRS and About the Report (May 15, 2013)
- Phillip Hackney, The TIGTA Report on the IRS Scandal: Be on the Lookout for False Partisan Witchunts (May 15, 2013)
- The IRS Scandal, Day 7 (May 16, 2013)
- The IRS Scandal, Day 8 (May 17, 2013)
- The IRS Scandal, Day 9 (May 18, 2013)
https://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2013/05/the-irs-.html
Comments
They are europe-style parasites: IRS employees are represented by the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU). They almost always support Democrats.
It is not mandatory to join or remain in the union.
Posted by: Elmer Stoup | May 20, 2013 7:00:48 AM
Besides being Obama donors, I wonder if any of these IRS people are AFSCME or SEIU members? Public employee unions are the Democrat's shock troops, so this too could be why they conveniently hamstrung pro-small-government while rubberstamping union and "progressive" groups.
Posted by: They are europe-style parasites | May 19, 2013 1:29:14 PM
I mean, shouldn't a tax lawyer have asked about the relevant CFR that would tell how the IRS factors a groups prayers or book list?
And basically point out the potential that these questions seem a wee bit out of line and therefore please provide me with the, since you said these were all public documents, a sample letter sent to a progressive organization. And again, please certify that these questions are IRS policy, signed by every layer of management in your office?
I mean, every in the IRS is not denying that this was anything other than local officials. Well, if the applicants had demanded supervisory oversight, that claim would not stand.
Posted by: joeinva | May 19, 2013 11:08:16 AM
repeating earlier comment:
I don't understand how these tea party groups wound up paying and/or doing so much in response to these questions. If the govt agency I normally dealt with sent me such an intrusive, politically charged series of questions, my next response would've been to go over the head of the bureaucrat in question. Possibly CCing the IRS inspector general and relevant House oversight people. I would've declined to answer the questions until the IRS showed actual guidelines and or relevance of each question, directly from the CFR or other official documents.
I mean, the actions of the IRS personnel are despicable and undoubtedly extends to the top. But any attorney who took these questions seriously was probably just lining his pocket.
I also like the warnings about perjury and what not. A simple reply would've been, "no, why don't you, under perjury, and under threat of other anti discrimination (i.e., 1983) laws detail that these questions are necessary and proper and in the regular course of conduct, etc. etc." And of course, cc:ing everyone between the bureaucrat in question and my local sympathetic congressman. Here's a chance for the IRS to explain why they're asking what they're asking and if there's any wrong answer, like what books or prayers are you concerned about?
But, I guess the IRS is a different government agency to deal with. There are usually rules and regulations and guidelines for action, not just rogue agents making it up as they go along. You know, oversight.
Posted by: joeinva | May 19, 2013 11:03:35 AM
JoeinVa makes an important point. Lawyers were exploiting these c4 clients in the intervening years. Some lawyers promote a culture of fear so that clients keep paying and paying. People with no experience running a c4 are especially vulnerable to exorbitant and ever rising legal bills.
Try this. Ask the same question to a CPA and to a 501/527 specialist lawyer. The CPA will simply solve your problem; the lawyer will spend a year telling you what else you need to do to build a case against the person who created your problem.
Posted by: Lenny Leonard | May 22, 2013 10:30:44 AM