TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION

 

 

 

Fiscal Year 2009 Statutory Audit of Compliance With Legal Guidelines Restricting the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results

 

 

 

June 30, 2009

 

Reference Number:  2009-30-091

 

 

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.

 

Phone Number   |  202-622-6500

Email Address   |  inquiries@tigta.treas.gov

Web Site           |  http://www.tigta.gov

 

June 30, 2009

 

 

MEMORANDUM FOR DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR OPERATIONS SUPPORT

 

FROM:                            Michael R. Phillips /s/ Michael R. Phillips

                                         Deputy Inspector General for Audit

 

SUBJECT:                    Final Audit Report – Fiscal Year 2009 Statutory Audit of Compliance With Legal Guidelines Restricting the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results (Audit # 200930023)

 

This report presents the results of our review to determine whether the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) complied with restrictions on the use of enforcement statistics to evaluate employees as set forth in the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (RRA 98) Section 1204.[1]  The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration is required under Internal Revenue Code Section 7803(d)(1)(2000) to annually evaluate the IRS’ compliance with the provisions of RRA 98 Section 1204.

Impact on the Taxpayer

The RRA 98 requires the IRS to ensure that managers do not evaluate enforcement employees[2] using any record of tax enforcement results (ROTER) or base employee successes on meeting production goals and quotas.  Based on the results of our sample, we believe the IRS’ efforts to enforce the employee evaluation requirements under Section 1204 are generally effective and are helping to protect the rights of taxpayers.  However, in our last two audits, the IRS has not achieved full compliance with Section 1204, and this heightens our concern that the IRS is moving in a direction away from achieving full compliance with Section 1204 and ensuring the rights of all taxpayers are protected in the future.

Synopsis

RRA 98 Section 1204(a) prohibits the IRS from using any ROTER to evaluate employees or to impose or suggest production quotas or goals.  Section 1204(b) requires employees to be evaluated using the fair and equitable treatment of taxpayers as a performance standard.  Section 1204(c) requires each appropriate supervisor to certify quarterly whether tax enforcement results were used in a prohibited manner.

To evaluate compliance with RRA 98 Section 1204, we selected a judgmental sample of 10 cities in which at least 4 IRS organizations subject to Section 1204 requirements were located.  We selected 7 first-line managers from the different business organizations and 3 employees from each of the managers for a total of 69 managers and 207 employees.[3]  In addition, we selected 10 second-level managers having supervisory responsibilities over the first-line managers selected for review.  We evaluated Fiscal Year 2008 performance evaluation documents (including mid-year and annual performance reviews and award documentation) for each selected employee to determine whether ROTERs were used when evaluating the employees’ performance.

Full compliance with RRA 98 Section 1204 was not achieved during Fiscal Year 2008.

The IRS did not achieve full compliance with Section 1204(a) requirements.  We identified violations of RRA 98 Section 1204(a) in 7 (1 percent) of the 601 performance evaluation documents reviewed.  In all seven violations, we found documentation that managers included ROTERs in the employees’ evaluation, evaluated employees on the fair and equitable treatment of taxpayers, and prepared quarterly self‑certifications showing that ROTERs were not used to evaluate employees.

Recommendation

The Deputy Commissioner for Operations Support should ensure that Section 1204 violations are reviewed with the managers and they are provided remedial training, using the appropriate internal guidelines, to address their understanding of ROTERs.  In addition, the Deputy Commissioner should strengthen the IRS’ efforts to achieve full compliance with RRA 98 Section 1204 procedures by ensuring that all managers are aware of and use internal guidelines when preparing and reviewing performance evaluations. 

Response

IRS management disagreed with six of the seven potential violations identified and did not agree with the recommendation.  Regarding the one violation they agreed to, IRS management responded that the violation was addressed with the manager.  Also, management responded that IRS employees are trained in the latest Section 1204 requirements throughout the year, and they use these training opportunities to raise manager awareness and understanding of the requirement.  Management’s complete response to the draft report is included as Appendix VI.

Office of Audit Comment

IRS management disagreed that the ROTERs we identified in employee self-assessments violate RRA 98 Section 1204(a).  However, our position is that a self-assessment containing ROTERs violates RRA 98 Section 1204(a) when the self-assessment is adopted by a manager in the evaluation.  Furthermore, when ROTERS appear in managerial self-assessments, they raise an inference that Section 1204(a) has been violated.  Self-assessments are a fundamental part of the evaluation process for managers and executives, who complete self-assessments and provide them to their managers for consideration when preparing their annual appraisals.  In our experience, the self‑assessments are usually associated with the annual appraisals.  Quite often, self-assessments are attached to and, in effect, become part of the annual appraisals.

Copies of this report are also being sent to the IRS managers affected by the report recommendation.  Please contact me at (202) 622-6510 if you have questions or Margaret E. Begg, Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Compliance and Enforcement Operations), at (202) 622-8510.

 

 Table of Contents

 

Background

Results of Review

First-Line Managers Appropriately Completed Their Quarterly Self-Certifications

The Internal Revenue Service Is Not in Full Compliance With the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results Procedures

Recommendation 1:

Appendices

Appendix I – Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology

Appendix II – Major Contributors to This Report

Appendix III – Report Distribution List

Appendix IV – Prior Audit Reports

Appendix V – Manager’s Quarterly Self-Certification – No Violations (Form 1204-M)

Appendix VI – Management’s Response to the Draft Report

 

Abbreviations

 

FY

Fiscal Year

IRS

Internal Revenue Service

ROTER

Record of Tax Enforcement Results

RRA 98

Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998

TIGTA

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration

  

Background

 

On July 22, 1998, the President signed the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (RRA 98) into law.[4]  RRA 98 Section 1204 restricts the use of enforcement statistics.  Specifically, RRA 98 Section 1204(a) prohibits the IRS from using any record of tax enforcement results (ROTER) to evaluate employees or to impose or suggest production quotas or goals.

RRA 98 Section 1204 prohibits the IRS from using ROTERs or production goals or quotas to evaluate employees.

The IRS defines ROTERs as data, statistics, compilations of information, or other numerical or quantitative recording of the tax enforcement results reached in one or more cases.  A ROTER does not include evaluating an individual case to determine if an employee exercised appropriate judgment in pursuing enforcement of the tax laws.  Examples of ROTERs include the amount of dollars collected or assessed, the number of fraud referrals made, and the number of seizures conducted.

RRA 98 Section 1204(b) requires employees to be evaluated using the fair and equitable treatment of taxpayers as a performance standard.  The IRS refers to this standard as the retention standard.  The standard requires employees to administer the tax laws fairly and equitably; protect all taxpayers’ rights; and treat each taxpayer ethically with honesty, integrity, and respect.  This provision of the law was enacted to provide assurance that employee performance is focused on providing quality service to taxpayers instead of achieving enforcement results.

RRA 98 Section 1204(c) requires each appropriate supervisor to perform a self-certification quarterly.  In the self-certification, the appropriate supervisor attests to whether ROTERs or production quotas or goals were used in a prohibited manner.  The IRS defines an appropriate supervisor as the highest ranking executive in a distinct organizational unit who supervises directly or indirectly one or more Section 1204 enforcement employees.[5]  IRS procedures require each level of management, beginning with first-line managers of Section 1204(a) employees, to self-certify that they have not used ROTERs in a manner prohibited by RRA 98 Section 1204(a).  The appropriate supervisor then prepares a consolidated office certification covering the entire organizational unit.

The IRS business organizations, including the Office of the Chief, Appeals; the Office of the Chief, Criminal Investigation Division; the Large and Mid-Size Business Division; the Small Business/Self-Employed Division; the Office of the National Taxpayer Advocate; the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division; and the Wage and Investment Division, are responsible for Section 1204 program implementation within their respective areas.  Section 1204 Program Managers and Coordinators in each business organization are available to provide guidance to managers regarding Section 1204 issues, including the certification process.

Figure 1 depicts the ratio of Section 1204 and Non-Section 1204 managers in the subject business organizations as of September 30, 2008.  The Section 1204 managers either supervised a Section 1204 employee or provided guidance or direction for Section 1204 activities.

Figure 1:  Number of Section 1204 and Non-Section 1204 Managers by Business Organization (as of September 30, 2008)

Figure 1 was removed due to its size.  To see Figure 1, please go to the Adobe PDF version of the report on the TIGTA Public Web Page.

 

Internal Revenue Code Section 7803(d)(1) (2000) requires the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) to determine annually whether the IRS is in compliance with restrictions on the use of enforcement statistics under RRA 98 Section 1204.  We have previously performed 10 annual reviews to meet this requirement.  The audit reports are listed in Appendix IV.

This review was performed at the IRS National Headquarters in Washington, D.C., in the Office of the Chief Financial Officer; the Office of the Chief, Appeals; the Office of the Chief, Criminal Investigation Division; the Office of the National Taxpayer Advocate; the Large and Mid-Size Business Division; the Small Business/Self-Employed Division; the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division; and the Wage and Investment Division during the period October 2008 through March 2009.  Onsite reviews were performed at the IRS field offices in Brooklyn, New York; Cincinnati and Cleveland, Ohio; Indianapolis, Indiana; Laguna Niguel and San Diego, California; Las Vegas, Nevada; Newark, New Jersey; Saint Louis, Missouri; and San Antonio, Texas.  We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective.  We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective.  Detailed information on our audit objective, scope, and methodology is presented in Appendix I.  Major contributors to the report are listed in Appendix II.

  

Results of Review

 

First-Line Managers Appropriately Completed Their Quarterly Self-Certifications

All 69[6] of the first-line managers we sampled were in compliance with the provisions of RRA 98 Section 1204(c) and completed the required self-certifications on the use of tax enforcement results for the second and fourth quarters of Fiscal Year (FY) 2008.  Each manager certified that ROTERs or production goals or quotas were not used when evaluating employees.  Appendix V reflects the Manager’s Quarterly Self-Certification – No Violations (Form 1204-M) that managers use quarterly to self-certify that there are no violations of RRA 98 Section 1204(a) and (b).

RRA 98 Section 1204(c) requires appropriate supervisors to certify quarterly, in writing, to the IRS Commissioner whether ROTERs and production quotas or goals were used in a prohibited manner.  Therefore, managers who evaluate Section 1204 employees are required to certify in writing that they did not:

  • Use ROTERs to evaluate employees or to impose or suggest production quotas or goals for employees in any performance evaluations, including appraisals, awards, or promotion justifications, written or reviewed by the manager.
  • Verbally communicate to employees that ROTERs affected their evaluations.
  • Verbally or in writing use ROTERs to impose or suggest production quotas or goals for employees or for work unit activities (e.g., through program guidance or business and program reviews).

Per the Internal Revenue Manual, the business organization and function Section 1204 Program Managers and their respective Section 1204 Coordinators should monitor the quarterly certification process throughout their organizations/functions.  The Section 1204 Program Managers and Section 1204 Coordinators are responsible for providing guidance to managers regarding Section 1204 issues.

Through the quarterly certification process, managers are reminded of their responsibilities under RRA 98 Section 1204 not to evaluate their employees on the basis of ROTERs or production quotas or goals.  The quarterly certification process helps to ensure that managers are aware of the IRS’ commitment to administer the tax laws fairly and to protect the rights of taxpayers.

The Internal Revenue Service Is Not in Full Compliance With the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results Procedures

In FY 2008, the IRS did not achieve full compliance with RRA 98 Section 1204(a) due to violations in 7 (1 percent) of 601 employee or manager performance-related documents reviewed.  The IRS’ performance in FY 2007 was also not in full compliance and we reported 7[7] (1 percent) of 660 ROTER violations in performance evaluation documents reviewed.  In the past 2 fiscal years, our audit results have identified that the IRS is moving in a direction away from achieving full compliance with Section 1204 procedures.  We previously reported that sampled managers provided documentation verifying that their employees were evaluated on the fair and equitable treatment of taxpayers.  However, we are still concerned that IRS employees do not fully understand the IRS terms used to identify if taxpayers are receiving fair and equitable treatment.

To evaluate the IRS’ compliance with Sections 1204(a) and 1204(b), we selected a judgmental sample of 69 first-line managers and 207 employees in 10 cities.[8]  The sites selected had at least four business organizations with Section 1204 first-line managers.  We selected seven managers and three of the manager’s employees at each site and reviewed their performance evaluation documents.  We also reviewed performance documentation for 10 second-line managers.  We evaluated 601 FY 2008 performance-related documents, including mid-year and annual performance reviews, workload reviews, and award documentation for each employee, to determine whether ROTERs were used when evaluating the employees’ performance.

ROTERs were used in a few evaluative documents

Our review of a judgmental sample of 601 performance-related documents for 286 managers and employees showed 7 (1 percent) instances in which ROTERs were used to evaluate employees.  The ROTERs were found in employee self-assessments and annual performance reviews in the Office of the Chief, Criminal Investigation Division; the Large and Mid-Size Business Division; and the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division.  We discussed the violations with the managers and they were not aware that they had included ROTERs in their performance evaluation documents.  The managers provided their intentions and additional context for using the statistics in the performance evaluations and judgment for how the IRS pursued the enforcement of tax laws.  However, none of the additional context and intentions was included in the performance evaluation documents.  In most cases, however, the additional information would not have eliminated the violation.  Also, when we asked the managers if they used Section 1204 internal guidelines when writing performance evaluation documents, they stated that they did not always use them.

We also researched the TIGTA Performance and Results Information System[9] for any related Section 1204 complaints during the period October 1, 2007, through September 30, 2008, and found two investigations and nine complaints.  However, no Section 1204 violations were identified based on the investigations or complaints.

Based on the results of our review, the IRS’ efforts to ensure that managers are not using ROTERs or production goals or quotas to evaluate employees are generally effective and are helping to protect the rights of taxpayers.  Because the IRS continues to identify and report ROTER violations through its managerial self-certification process, it developed a mandatory briefing to be completed by all Section 1204 employees by March 21, 2008.  Our review found that the IRS mandatory Section 1204 training was conducted from February 11, 2008, to April 4, 2008, and that 96 percent of the Section 1204 employees completed the training.

Some employees did not understand the meaning of the retention standard and did not receive training

The first-line managers we sampled documented that they had evaluated employees on the retention standard.  By law, RRA 98 Section 1204(b), IRS employees are to be evaluated on the retention standard.  The standard applies to all executives, managers, and other employees.

On June 16, 1999, the IRS established a retention standard method to ensure that employee performance is focused on providing quality service to taxpayers instead of on achieving enforcement results.  In most instances, Block 9 of the Bargaining Unit Performance Appraisal and Recognition Election (Form 6850-BU) or the Non-Bargaining Unit Performance Appraisal (Form 6850-NBU) was checked, indicating that the employees were evaluated on this standard.  Figure 2 presents an excerpt from the two Forms 6850 pertaining to the retention standard.

Figure 2:  Forms 6850 Retention Standard Rating

Figure 2 was removed due to its size.  To see Figure 2, please go to the Adobe PDF version of the report on the TIGTA Public Web Page.

We interviewed 34 of the judgmentally selected employees to determine if they understood the terminology “retention standard” and 23 of the 34 employees to determine if they received training on the retention standard.  Six of the 34 (18 percent) did not understand the term “retention standard” and 2 (9 percent) of the 23 had not received training on the retention standard.  We are not making a recommendation to address the concerns at this time because IRS management agreed in their response to a prior TIGTA audit[10] to make changes to the appropriate Forms 6850 and define the standard.  The implementation date for the changes is October 1, 2009.  In our opinion, this repeat finding indicates that the IRS is moving away from full compliance with Section 1204 procedures.

Recommendation

Recommendation 1:  The Deputy Commissioner for Operations Support should ensure that Section 1204 violations are reviewed with the managers and they are provided remedial training using the appropriate internal guidelines to address their understanding of ROTERs.  In addition, the Deputy Commissioner should strengthen the IRS’ efforts to achieve full compliance with RRA 98 Section 1204 procedures by ensuring that managers are aware of and use internal guidelines when preparing and reviewing performance evaluations. 

Management’s Response:  IRS management disagreed with six of the seven potential violations identified and did not agree with the recommendation.  Regarding the one violation they agreed to, IRS management responded that the violation was addressed with the manager.  Also, IRS management responded that IRS employees are trained in the latest Section 1204 requirements throughout the year, and they use these training opportunities to raise manager awareness and understanding of the requirement. 

Office of Audit Comment:  IRS management disagreed that the ROTERs we identified in employee self-assessments violate RRA 98 Section 1204(a).  However, our position is that a self-assessment containing ROTERs violates RRA 98 Section 1204(a) when the self-assessment is adopted by a manager in the evaluation.  Furthermore, when ROTERS appear in managerial self-assessments, they raise an inference that Section 1204(a) has been violated.  Self-assessments are a fundamental part of the evaluation process for managers and executives, who complete self-assessments and provide them to their managers for consideration when preparing their annual appraisals.  In our experience, the self‑assessments are usually associated with the annual appraisals.  Quite often, self-assessments are attached to and, in effect, become part of the annual appraisals. 

 

Appendix I

 

Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology

 

The overall objective of this review was to determine whether the IRS complied with restrictions on the use of enforcement statistics to evaluate employees as set forth in RRA 98 Section 1204.[11]  To accomplish this objective, we:

I.                    Determined whether a sample of IRS first-line managers complied with the provisions of RRA 98 Sections 1204(a) and 1204(b) when evaluating their Section 1204 employees’[12] performance.

A.     Identified the Office of the Chief, Appeals; the Office of the Chief, Criminal Investigation Division; the Large and Mid-Size Business Division; the Small Business/Self-Employed Division; the Office of the Taxpayer Advocate; the Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division; and the Wage and Investment Division office locations in various cities and the number of Section 1204 first-line managers located in each business organization.

We judgmentally selected 10 cities for this year’s audit:

·           Brooklyn, New York.

·           Cincinnati and Cleveland, Ohio.

·           Indianapolis, Indiana.

·           Laguna Niguel and San Diego, California.

·           Las Vegas, Nevada.

·           Newark, New Jersey.

·           Saint Louis, Missouri.

·           San Antonio, Texas.

We selected sites that had at least 4 business organizations with Section 1204 first-line managers and considered geographic coverage and prior audit coverage when selecting the 10 audit sites.

B.     Selected a judgmental sample of seven first-line managers per city and three Section 1204 employees for each manager in our sample.  This provided a total of 69 managers and 207[13] employees for review.  We used FY 2008 data to select the audit sites for the sample.  The audit team focused on the cities that had at least 15 Section 1204 managers in at least 4 business organizations.  The audit sites were judgmentally selected based on the number of first-line Section 1204 managers located at a site and the business organizations represented, prior audit coverage in FYs 2004 through 2008,[14] geographical location of potential cities for travel considerations, and sites where the IRS internal review team identified problems.

C.     Obtained and reviewed FY 2008 performance evaluation documentation (including mid-year and annual performance reviews and award documentation) for each employee selected to determine whether the use of ROTERs or production goals or quotas was documented and whether employees were evaluated appropriately on the fair and equitable treatment of taxpayers.

D.     Interviewed a judgmental sample of 34 employees concerning the use of ROTERs and their understanding of the retention standard.  We selected the employees based on available employees in the office the day of our visit who agreed to speak with us.  Because the IRS had advised us that the number of Section 1204 employees changes frequently based on the duties performed, we were not able to pre-determine the total number of employees per business unit.  We selected three to six employees per site. 

E.      Reviewed TIGTA’s Performance and Results Information System[15] for complaints regarding the violation of Section 1204.

F.      Obtained TIGTA Counsel’s opinion on seven cases identified and referred as having potential legal violations of RRA 98 Section 1204.

II.                 Determined whether the selected first-line managers complied with RRA 98 Section 1204(c) by certifying by letter whether or not ROTERs were used in a manner prohibited by RRA 98 Section 1204(a).

A.     Obtained FY 2008 second and fourth quarter self-certifications for the selected first-line managers.  We reviewed the self-certifications for compliance with IRS procedures and the identification of any use of ROTERs or production quotas or goals.

 

Appendix II

 

Major Contributors to This Report

 

Margaret Begg, Assistant Inspector General for Audit (Compliance and Enforcement Operations)

Marybeth Schumann, Director

Deborah Drain, Audit Manager

James O’Hara, Audit Manager

Gwendolyn Green, Lead Auditor

Carol Gerkens, Senior Auditor

Cindy Harris, Senior Auditor

Rebecca Kaplan, Auditor

Andrea McDuffie, Auditor

Sylvia Sloan-Copeland, Auditor

Ali Vaezazizi, Auditor

Erlinda Foye, Management Assistant

 

Appendix III

 

Report Distribution List

 

Commissioner  C

Office of the Commissioner – Attn:  Chief of Staff  C

Commissioner, Large and Mid-Size Business Division  SE:LM

Commissioner, Small Business/Self-Employed Division  SE:S

Commissioner, Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division  SE:T

Commissioner, Wage and Investment Division  SE:W

Chief, Appeals  AP

Chief, Criminal Investigation Division  SE:CI

Chief Financial Officer  OS:CFO

National Taxpayer Advocate  TA

Director, Communications, Liaison, and Disclosure, Small Business/Self-Employed Division  SE:S:CLD

Director, Strategy and Finance, Wage and Investment Division  SE:W:S

Chief, Performance Improvement, Wage and Investment Division  SE:W:S:PI

Chief Counsel  CC

Director, Office of Legislative Affairs  CL:LA

Director, Office of Program Evaluation and Risk Analysis  RAS:O

Office of Internal Control  OS:CFO:CPIC:IC

Audit Liaisons:

Commissioner, Large and Mid-Size Business Division  SE:LM

Commissioner, Small Business/Self-Employed Division  SE:S

Commissioner, Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division  SE:T

Commissioner, Wage and Investment Division  SE:W

Chief, Appeals  AP:TP:SS

Chief, Criminal Investigation Division  SE:CI

Chief Financial Officer  OS:CFO

National Taxpayer Advocate  TA

 

Appendix IV

 

Prior Audit Reports

 

The TIGTA has previously performed 10 audits in this subject area.  The audit reports were:

Fiscal Year 2008 Statutory Audit of Compliance With Legal Guidelines Restricting the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results (Reference Number 2008-40-108, dated April 17, 2008).

Fiscal Year 2007 Statutory Audit of Compliance With Legal Guidelines Restricting the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results (Reference Number 2007-40-055, dated March 20, 2007).

Fiscal Year 2006 Statutory Audit of Compliance With Legal Guidelines Restricting the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results (Reference Number 2006-40-095, dated June 6, 2006).

Fiscal Year 2005 Statutory Audit of Compliance With Legal Guidelines Restricting the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results (Reference Number 2005-40-157, dated September 21, 2005).

Fiscal Year 2004 Statutory Audit of Compliance With Legal Guidelines Restricting the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results (Reference Number 2004-40-066, dated March 19, 2004).

Fiscal Year 2003 Statutory Audit of Compliance With Legal Guidelines Restricting the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results (Reference Number 2003-40-090, dated March 27, 2003).

Compliance With Regulations Restricting the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results Shows Improvement (Reference Number 2002-40-163, dated September 11, 2002).

Compliance With the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 Section 1204 Has Not Yet Been Achieved (Reference Number 2001-10-178, dated September 27, 2001).

Further Improvements Are Needed in Processes That Control and Report Misuse of Enforcement Statistics (Reference Number 2000-10-118, dated September 18, 2000).

The Internal Revenue Service Should Continue Its Efforts to Achieve Full Compliance with Restrictions on the Use of Enforcement Statistics (Reference Number 1999-10-073, dated September 29, 1999).

 

Appendix V

 

Manager’s Quarterly Self-Certification – No Violations (Form 1204-M)

 

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

 

Appendix VI

 

Management’s Response to the Draft Report

 

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


[1] Pub. L. No. 105-206, 112 Stat. 685 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 2 U.S.C., 5 U.S.C. app., 16 U.S.C., 19 U.S.C., 22 U.S.C., 23 U.S.C., 26 U.S.C., 31 U.S.C., 38 U.S.C., and 49 U.S.C.).

[2] An enforcement (Section 1204) employee is an employee or any first-line manager of an employee who exercises judgment in recommending or determining whether or how the IRS should pursue enforcement of the tax laws or who provides direction/guidance for Section 1204 program activities.

[3] We sampled 70 front-line managers; however, 1 manager did not have responsibility for enforcement employees.  The IRS did not require the manager to prepare the self-certification; therefore, one manager and three employees were eliminated from our sample.

[4] Pub. L. No. 105-206, 112 Stat. 685 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 2 U.S.C., 5 U.S.C. app., 16 U.S.C., 19 U.S.C., 22 U.S.C., 23 U.S.C., 26 U.S.C., 31 U.S.C., 38 U.S.C., and 49 U.S.C.).

[5] An enforcement (Section 1204) employee is an employee or any first-line manager of an employee who exercises judgment in recommending or determining whether or how the IRS should pursue enforcement of the tax laws or who provides direction/guidance for Section 1204 program activities.

[6] We judgmentally sampled 70 front-line managers; however, 1 manager did not have responsibility for enforcement employees.  The IRS did not require the manager to prepare the self-certification; therefore, one manager and three employees were eliminated from our sample.

[7] The violations of RRA 98 Section 1204 (a) identified in the FY 2008 evaluation documents were found in different cities from the violations in FY 2007.

[8] See Appendix I for details of the IRS offices and cities selected for review.

[9] The Performance and Results Information System provides the TIGTA the managerial ability to account for and track all leads developed by the TIGTA, all complaints received from external sources, and all investigations initiated as a result of internal and external allegations.

[10] Fiscal Year 2008 Statutory Audit of Compliance With Legal Guidelines Restricting the Use of Records of Tax Enforcement Results (Reference Number 2008-40-108, dated April 17, 2008).

[11] Pub. L. No. 105-206, 112 Stat. 685 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 2 U.S.C., 5 U.S.C. app., 16 U.S.C., 19 U.S.C., 22 U.S.C., 23 U.S.C., 26 U.S.C., 31 U.S.C., 38 U.S.C., and 49 U.S.C.).

[12] An enforcement (Section 1204) employee is an employee or any first-line manager of an employee who exercises judgment in recommending or determining whether or how the IRS should pursue enforcement of the tax laws or who provides direction/guidance for Section 1204 program activities.

[13] We sampled 70 front-line managers; however, 1 manager did not have responsibility for enforcement employees.  The IRS did not require the manager to prepare the self-certification; therefore, one manager and three employees were eliminated from our sample.

[14] Reviewed locations visited during prior audits to ensure locations selected were not duplicated.

[15] The Performance and Results Information System provides the TIGTA the managerial ability to account for and track all leads developed by the TIGTA, all complaints received from external sources, and all investigations initiated as a result of internal and external allegations.