Mr. Chairman, Honorable Members of this Committee, I work in the inspection Division of the IRS which investigates employee
misconduct and responds to and investigates threats and assaults
perpetrated against IRS employees. I am appearing here in front of
you at great personal risk to my career with the IRS. I have seen
too many times how swift and severe the IRS can be in retaliating
against those who do not conform and agree with its own corporate
mentality and attitude. I have seen how the IRS management attempts
to kill the messenger, but ignores the message. I do not appear here
today to try and hurt this Agency or the majority of dedicated
career government workers who staff the offices, but I have seen the
efforts by the IRS to try and heal itself. The result is but dismal
window dressing to appease you in Congress while they continue with
business as usual. The IRS and the public need and deserve a strong,
independent, fully staffed and fully funded Inspection Division,
able to carry out its investigations without interference, subtle or
otherwise, from within. I do not see how this is possible given the
IRS' current climate.
In the IRS' nationwide all-manager training in the late 80's,
one of the messages delivered was that it is permissible to lie or
mislead the public and/or IRS employees as long as it accomplishes
the goals and mission of the Agency. This information was relayed to
me by a former IRS manager who attended this training session and
could not believe that the IRS was instructing its managers to do
so. He questioned this policy. Coincidentally, his position was
later eliminated.
A 1992 Inspection Division re-organization memo addressed
Regional management structure and other issues regarding the
Inspection Division having at least 1 to 2 excessive levels of
management. The Inspection Executive Committee voted to retain that
same management structure. Coincidentally, the Inspection Executive
Committee is composed of the same people occupying the very
positions that were identified as excessive.
Criminal investigations cannot be worked with the same auditor
mentality and goals as audits are conducted. In criminal
investigations, leads generally dictate where and how long the
investigation and case go on. Applying an artificial time limit to
cases severely stifles the creativity and progress of an
investigation, and sends the wrong message to the investigator to
get the cases closed ASAP. The attitude is "big cases, big problems,
little cases, little problems!" Quantity not quality is the message.
According to Special Agents in the Criminal Investigation Division,
(CID) emphasizes opening the traditional tax cases, the "Mom and
Pop" cases, which are easy "hits" and can be opened and closed
quickly to bolster ClD's average and numbers, rather than investing
time in the large cases which take longer and require more
resources. Big cases are often put off or overlooked in deference to
the small, quick ones.
Mr. Chairman, it has been my observation and experience that
taxpayers are treated as being "guilty until proven innocent." Based
on my experience, this attitude coupled with an arrogant and
indifferent manner in which citizens are sometimes treated, directly
contributes to, and in some instances instigates many of the
threats, assaults, resistance to and lack of cooperation experienced
by IRS employees when dealing with the public. If police officers
displayed this same attitude when interacting with the public, they
would be fired! Why is this attitude tolerated and encouraged by the
IRS?
The Inspection Division s budget is directly controlled by the
IRS. Therefore, by depleting or denying budget dollars, subtle
limits and boundaries are placed on who and what is investigated, as
well as what resources we get. We are dependent upon the very people
and Agency we investigate for our budget resources, and every year
have to go hat in hand to get money. Field Agents feel that there is
too close a relationship-and that we are too cozy with IRS
Management to impartially and effectively investigate internal IRS
matters without interference or pressure. Investigations into
allegations of misconduct by IRS Management are generally not
opened. Only by detaching the Inspection Division's Criminal
Investigative Function from the Internal Audit Division and then
moving our function under the Department of the Treasury's Office of
Inspector General, or under the office of the Under Secretary of the
Treasury for Enforcement, or permanently fencing our budget, will
this pattern be broken. Every other federal law enforcement agency
is hiring and expanding, why is Inspection the only federal law
enforcement agency that is closing field offices and downsizing and
proposing RlF's? A recent Chief Inspector memorandum reports that
FY98 budget funds 1214 Full Time Equivalents, (FTE) yet we are still
planning to close offices and do a RIF to get down to 1150 full
time employees. The IRS is also in contempt of Congress for only
reducing field positions and closing field IRS offices and not
reducing its Management structure. The current restructuring
eliminates field investigator positions only. Only one inspection
Management position has been slated for elimination. There was a
jockeying and gerrymandering of the span of control in order to
retain every Inspection Management position, at the sacrifice and
expense of field investigator positions.
I have observed little or no accountability for misconduct,
mistakes and/or errors, whether innocent or intentional, and seldom
- if ever - does the IRS or the responsible employee ever apologize
to the taxpayer for the errors committed by the IRS. Again, this
displays an attitude of indifference or arrogance to the public it
serves.
During my experience with the IRS I have observed a real lack of
"meet and greet" qualities and people skills among IRS employees, as
well as an arrogant attitude which originated with, and is
perpetuated by, IRS Management down to the field level employees.
Most of the complaints from taxpayers regarding abuse or
misconduct on the part of the IRS employees do not rise to the level
of criminality or egregiousness, the level at which my section would
get involved. Such cases do not usually reach us and are thus
handled by the Management of the involved employee. Union agreements
and concessions by the IRS, create difficulty in disciplining
employees beyond much more than a reprimand and slap on the wrist.
This, too, must be strengthened to have any deterrent effect.
Mr. Chairman, allow me to thank you for inviting me to testify
before you today. As employees we are the "IRS," and unless you get
views and input from the field and do not rely entirely on the views
from 1111 Constitution Avenue, you will not get a true picture of
what needs to be changed. I am grateful that you sought out the
feelings and experience of the street level agents for the
Committee. As I stated earlier, it is not my intent to hurt the IRS
in any way. It is my sincere hope that by informing you of some of
the problems I have had the opportunity to personally observe from
within the IRS, you and your Committee will provide the Agency with
necessary help and motivation to correct them.