Fiscal Year 2003 Statutory Review of Restrictions on Directly Contacting Taxpayers

 

June 2003

 

Reference Number:  2003-40-131

 

 

This report has cleared the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration disclosure review process and information determined to be restricted from public release has been redacted from this document.

 

June 16, 2003

 

 

MEMORANDUM FOR COMMISSIONER EVERSON

 

FROM:     Gordon C. Milbourn III /s/ Gordon C. Milbourn III

                 Acting Deputy Inspector General for Audit

 

SUBJECT:     Final Audit Report – Fiscal Year 2003 Statutory Review of Restrictions on Directly Contacting Taxpayers (Audit # 200340002)

 

This report presents the results of our review to determine if the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is in compliance with legal guidelines dealing with directly contacting taxpayers and their representatives set forth in Internal Revenue Code Section (I.R.C. §) 7521(b)(2) and (c) (1986). 

In summary, we could not determine if the IRS fully complied with I.R.C. § 7521(b)(2) and (c) requirements when directly contacting taxpayers and their representatives.  This is the fifth year in which we have reported our inability to give an opinion on the IRS’ compliance with the restrictions of I.R.C § 7521(b)(2) and (c).

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration is required under I.R.C. § 7803(d)(1)(A)(ii) (Supp. IV 1998) to annually evaluate the IRS’ compliance with the direct contact provisions of the law.  IRS management information systems do not separately record or monitor direct contact requirements, and the Congress has not explicitly required the IRS to do so.  Even though the IRS does not monitor its employees’ compliance with the direct contact provisions, the IRS has existing Internal Revenue Manual citations that adequately address the requirements.  Furthermore, we do not recommend the creation of a separate tracking system.  Accordingly, we are making no recommendations in this report.

Management’s Response:  IRS management stated again that they have no plans to create a separate tracking system to monitor compliance with the direct contact provisions.  IRS management noted they took correct administrative actions when two employees were identified as having violated the direct contact provisions.  The IRS’ response stated that because of their compliance with the statute and the resources expended to address this issue, they were asking us to work with them to have this mandatory audit requirement reconsidered.  Management’s complete response to the draft report is included as Appendix IV.

Copies of this report are also being sent to the IRS managers who are affected by the report results.  Please contact me at (202) 622-6510 if you have questions or Michael R. Phillips, Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Wage and Investment Income Programs), at (202) 927-0597.

 

Table of Contents

Background

Compliance With Statutory Requirements for Restrictions on Directly Contacting Taxpayers Cannot Be Determined

Appendix I – Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Appendix II – Major Contributors to This Report

Appendix III – Report Distribution List

Appendix IV – Management’s Response to the Draft Report

 

Background

The Taxpayer Bill of Rights created a number of safeguards to protect taxpayers being interviewed by an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) employee as part of an examination or collection action.  Specifically, IRS employees are required to:

·        Stop a taxpayer interview (unless the interview is required by court order) whenever a taxpayer requests to consult with a representative (someone who is permitted to represent taxpayers before the IRS).

·        Obtain their immediate supervisor’s approval to contact the taxpayer instead of the representative if the representative is responsible for unreasonably delaying the completion of an examination or collection action.

The provisions were created to protect the rights of taxpayers who are interviewed by an IRS employee as part of an examination or collection action.  A taxpayer can file a civil suit against the IRS if an IRS employee intentionally disregards these provisions by denying a taxpayer the right to appropriate representation. 

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) is required under Internal Revenue Code Section (I.R.C. §) 7803(d)(1)(A)(ii) (Supp. IV 1998) to annually evaluate the IRS’ compliance with the direct contact provisions of I.R.C. § 7521(b)(2) and (c) (1986).

This review was conducted in the IRS National Headquarters, the Small Business/Self-Employed Division, and the Office of the National Taxpayer Advocate, during the period February through April 2003.  The audit was conducted in accordance with Government Auditing Standards.  Detailed information on our audit objective, scope, and methodology is presented in Appendix I.  Major contributors to the report are listed in Appendix II.

Compliance With Statutory Requirements for Restrictions on Directly Contacting Taxpayers Cannot Be Determined

We could not determine whether IRS employees followed proper procedures to stop an interview if the taxpayer requested to consult with a representative.  Neither the IRS nor TIGTA could readily identify cases where the taxpayer requested a representative or the IRS contacted the taxpayer directly and bypassed the representative.

Current IRS management information systems do not separately record or monitor cases where taxpayers had requested to consult with a representative or where IRS employees bypassed taxpayer representatives and contacted the taxpayers directly.  In addition, there is no legal requirement for the IRS to develop a separate system that records or monitors cases involving these two procedures.  Even though the IRS does not monitor its employees’ compliance with the direct contact provisions, the IRS has existing Internal Revenue Manual citations that adequately address both procedures.

Taxpayer complaints that allege IRS employees bypassed their representatives and contacted them directly are tracked by the TIGTA Office of Investigations (OI).  TIGTA OI received and closed five direct contact complaints between March 2002 and March 2003.  Our review of the complaint results showed three of five IRS employees did not violate the direct contact provisions of the I.R.C.  TIGTA OI referred two of five complaints to the IRS.  TIGTA OI and IRS determined two IRS employees violated the direct contact provisions, and IRS has taken administrative action.

We do not recommend the creation of a separate tracking system and are making no recommendations in this report.  This is the fifth year in which we have reported our inability to give an opinion on the IRS’ compliance with the I.R.C. restrictions on direct contact. 

Management’s Response:  IRS management has no plans to create a separate tracking system to monitor compliance with the direct contact provisions.  IRS management noted they took correct administrative actions when two employees were identified as having violated the direct contact provisions.  The IRS’ response stated that because of their compliance with the statute and the resources expended to address this issue, they were asking us to work with them to have this mandatory audit requirement reconsidered.  Management’s complete response to the draft report is included as Appendix IV.

 

Appendix I

 

Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology

 

The overall objective of this review was to determine if the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is in compliance with legal guidelines dealing with directly contacting taxpayers and their representatives set forth in Internal Revenue Code Section (I.R.C. §) 7521(b)(2) and (c) (1986).  To accomplish this objective, we:

I.                    Interviewed an executive in the Small Business/Self-Employed (SB/SE) Division to determine if the IRS has implemented or plans to implement a system to track cases where taxpayers have requested to consult with a representative or where an IRS employee bypassed a representative.

II.                 Interviewed an SB/SE Division analyst and researched the Internal Revenue Manual to determine whether instructions have been established to ensure IRS employees comply with the direct contact provisions of the law.

III.               Interviewed various IRS and Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) personnel responsible for the Taxpayer Advocate Management Information System (TAMIS), the Executive Control Management System (ECMS), and the Performance and Results Information System (PARIS) to determine if there is a system or plans for a system to track taxpayer complaints relating to violations of the direct contact provisions of the law.

A.     Identified five direct contact complaints received and closed by the TIGTA Office of Investigations during the period March 2002 to March 2003.

B.     Obtained and reviewed the complaint files to determine their validity and what actions were taken by the IRS as a result of the complaints.

 

Appendix II

 

Major Contributors to This Report

 

Michael R. Phillips, Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Wage and Investment Income Programs)

Augusta R. Cook, Director

Paula W. Johnson, Audit Manager

Lynn Faulkner, Senior Auditor

John Hawkins, Senior Auditor

Jean Bell, Auditor

Sandra Hinton, Auditor

 

Appendix III

 

Report Distribution List

 

Deputy Commissioner for Service and Enforcement  N:DC

Commissioner, Large and Mid-Size Division  LM

Commissioner, Small Business/Self-Employed Division  S

Commissioner, Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division  T

Commissioner, Wage and Investment Division  W

Director, Compliance, Small Business/Self-Employed Division  S:C

Director, Compliance, Wage and Investment Division  W:CP

Director, Strategy and Finance  W:S

National Taxpayer Advocate  TA

Chief, Customer Liaison  S:COM

Chief Counsel  CC

National Taxpayer Advocate  TA

Director, Legislative Affairs  CL:LA

Director, Office of Program Evaluation and Risk Analysis  N:ADC:R:O

Office of Management Controls  N:CFO:AR:M

Audit Liaisons:

            Executive Assistant, Director, Communications and Liaison  CL

Director, Compliance, Small Business/Self-Employed Division  S:C

Director, Compliance, Wage and Investment Division  W:CP

 

Appendix IV

 

Management’s Response to the Draft Report

 

The response was removed due to its size.  To see the complete response, please go to the Adobe PDF version of the report on the TIGTA Public Web Page.