Monday, March 17, 2014
TIGTA: The IRS Does Not Follow Procedures in 48% of Taxpayer Bankruptcy Cases
The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration has released Bankruptcy Procedures Designed to Protect Taxpayer Rights and the Government’s Interest Were Not Always Followed (2014-40-013):
Impact on Taxpayers
The bankruptcy automatic stay provision prohibits the IRS from taking certain collection actions against a debtor (taxpayer) as soon as it learns, or is notified by a U.S. bankruptcy court, that a bankruptcy petition has been filed. Similarly, the debtor may be granted a discharge, which remains after the case is closed and is a permanent injunction order prohibiting the IRS from taking any form of collection action against the debtor personally with respect to discharged debts. If the IRS does not observe the automatic stay or the discharge injunction, taxpayers’ rights could potentially be violated and the IRS could be sued for damages.
Why TIGTA Did the Audit
In Fiscal Year 2012, IRS data showed that the Field Insolvency function received 306,920 bankruptcy cases on taxpayers owing approximately $2.5 billion in taxes, penalties, and interest. This audit was initiated to determine whether the function has effective controls and procedures in place to take appropriate and timely actions to protect the Government’s interest and taxpayers’ rights during bankruptcy proceedings.
What TIGTA Found
Field Insolvency function specialists frequently did not follow required procedures when working bankruptcy cases. Although TIGTA did not identify any violations of taxpayers’ rights and/or failure to protect the Government’s interest during this review, there is a higher risk that this could occur when procedures are not followed.
TIGTA’s review of three random samples of closed bankruptcy cases showed that specialists did not always follow established procedures in 17 (57 percent) of 30 Chapter 7 cases, 15 (50 percent) of 30 Chapter 11 cases, and 13 (43 percent) of 30 Chapter 13 cases reviewed. Specifically, specialists did not always timely or properly conduct the initial case analysis, follow up on scheduled case actions within a reasonable time, or timely or properly close cases.
TIGTA also reviewed a random sample of 30 bankruptcy cases with Automated Proof of Claim flag conditions (errors that need to be resolved by a specialist). Specialists did not timely or properly resolve the flag conditions in 12 (40 percent) of 30 cases.
Is this supposed to be a surprise? The only surprise here is that its only 48%, I suspect its 100%
Posted by: CGB | Mar 17, 2014 9:42:15 AM