Good morning Mr. Chairman and Members of the Finance Committee.

I am presently a GS 12 Revenue Officer, which is also identified as a Field Collection Officer, with the Internal Revenue Service. I have worked as a Revenue Officer for over 35 years, having begun my career with the IRS when John Kennedy was President.

I am here this morning to cite numerous incidents that I have observed in the course of my career as a Collection Officer with the IRS. I hope to use these examples to assist you and the Committee in making our Agency a better place, and ensure greater fairness for the American people.

Over the last few months, you have heard a great deal about "browsing" of taxpayers' files. Allow me to focus on this problem for a moment and describe to you specific situations that I have personally witnessed in the IRS workplace which I once considered commonplace:

• Tax data being accessed by IRS employees to check on prospective boyfriends;

• Tax data being accessed by IRS employees to check ex-husbands for increasing income in order to receive increased child support payments;

• Tax data being accessed on people with whom IRS employees were having some kind of personal disagreement;

• Tax data being accessed on locally prominent or newsworthy individuals, public figures - even team coaches;

• Tax data being accessed out of simple curiosity about a friend, a relative or an employee's neighbor;

• Tax data being accessed on individuals who are perceived as critical of the IRS, such as tax protestors or, as in one case, a person who had simply written a Letter to the Editor.

The following inquiries, which I consider to be "institutional" misuse of taxpayer information, are cases in which the IRS has tacitly sanctioned looking up data on citizens but who are not the subject of any investigation being conducted:

• Tax data being accessed on relatives and acquaintances of the subject taxpayer, such as cases where the taxpayer is suspected of using friends and relatives to hide income or assets;

• Tax data being accessed on potential witnesses in government tax cases;

• Tax data being accessed on jurors sitting on government tax cases.

Senators, there is no excuse for this type of action!

Until recent years, the agency had an almost casual attitude about privacy and misuse of taxpayer records. It has tightened up now to the point that good employees, who never think of browsing or gaining illicit accesses, are fearful that they may be subjected to investigation for an innocent error.

I have witnessed other serious abuses by the IRS. While these are separate incidents, they are indicative of a pervasive disregard of law and regulations designed to achieve production goals for either management or the individual agent.

One particular incident that occurred in 1994 shows how at least some managers figure they can get away with almost anything. A listening device was discovered to exist in our IRS Office. Its ostensible purpose was a public address system, the users -- managers and secretaries -- had installed a receiving capability as well. With the receiving capability in place, they could press a button and overhear conversations taking place in the employee break room. While I have no personal knowledge of the existence of similar devices, I understand from others that some indeed existed in conference rooms used by taxpayers and their representatives. A co-worker and I found the device in the break room and learned how it worked. Learning of our discovery, higher level officials immediately had the devices removed and have attempted a reprisal by initiating an investigation of those who brought the matter to light.

Another incident involved what would be called fraud if perpetrated by any other institution, and I still cannot believe it was done in the face of my objections. This was the Case of a Fake Tax Lien. While I made the matter known to superiors, they did not even seem to want to hear about it.

When a taxpayer gets a notice of tax due from the IRS, a lien on the taxpayer's property may arise under the Internal Revenue Code. To be effective against third party purchasers and lenders, a Notice of Lien must be filed in the local courthouse. The public accepts that the IRS files only legitimate notices, but in this case a Notice of Lien was filed by the IRS when there was no assessment and therefore no legitimate lien. Mr. Chairman, there must be an assessment of tax due in order to file a lien -- that is the law!

And if that wasn't bad enough, the IRS asserted its seemingly correct lien against a third party -- and that third party, a bank, had no way of knowing that the lien was not legitimate. The amount involved was not large, only a few thousand dollars, but the Collection employees were motivated to close the case rather than take the correct and legal action and lift the false lien. In this case the Service acted illegally by collecting money from the taxpayer and quietly closing the case.

I believe this incident is indicative of a systemic problem plaguing the Agency -- its original mission of collecting tax revenues has now become incidental to the production of statistics. A case that is written off as uncollectible, a Form 53, is counted as a closed case just the same as if it were fully collected. When I started with the IRS in the early 1960's, warning flags went up if uncollectible accounts amounted to more than 15%. I have now seen months in which over 60% of case closures were "53' d" -- closed as uncollectible.

Senators, I have voluntarily come before you today to relay to you some of the deep concerns I have regarding the current mind-set of the IRS. I have been in a position to watch the gradual changes taking place among the IRS management and Agency attitudes. These are not positive changes and I am very concerned about the Service's future road. Although my comments today may appear negative and anti-Agency, it is my sincerest hope that they will help bring about just the opposite result. I hope you will come to the aid of the IRS with the positive and forthright oversight it so badly needs. The IRS needs help, it needs careful attention it cannot possibly provide itself. The help must come from the outside -- through effective and forthright oversight of an ailing system.

It is my deepest hope that this hearing will initiate these badly needed steps.