U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

94–426 2016

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE OPERATIONS AND 

THE 2014 TAX RETURN FILING SEASON 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

MAY 7, 2014

Serial No. 113–OS8 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means 

( 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
ii 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS 

DAVE CAMP, Michigan, Chairman 

SAM JOHNSON, Texas 

KEVIN BRADY, Texas 

PAUL RYAN, Wisconsin 

DEVIN NUNES, California 

PATRICK J. TIBERI, Ohio 

DAVID G. REICHERT, Washington 

CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, JR., Louisiana 

PETER J. ROSKAM, Illinois 

JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania 

TOM PRICE, Georgia 

VERN BUCHANAN, Florida 

ADRIAN SMITH, Nebraska 

AARON SCHOCK, Illinois 

LYNN JENKINS, Kansas 

ERIK PAULSEN, Minnesota 

KENNY MARCHANT, Texas 

DIANE BLACK, Tennessee 

TOM REED, New York 

TODD YOUNG, Indiana 

MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania 

TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas 

JIM RENACCI, Ohio 

SANDER M. LEVIN, Michigan 

CHARLES B. RANGEL, New York 

JIM MCDERMOTT, Washington 

JOHN LEWIS, Georgia 

RICHARD E. NEAL, Massachusetts 

XAVIER BECERRA, California 

LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas 

MIKE THOMPSON, California 

JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut 

EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon 

RON KIND, Wisconsin 

BILL PASCRELL, JR., New Jersey 

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York 

ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania 

DANNY DAVIS, Illinois 

LINDA SA ́ NCHEZ, California 

JENNIFER M. SAFAVIAN, Staff Director and General Counsel 

JANICE MAYS, Minority Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT 

CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, JR., Louisiana, Chairman 

DIANE BLACK, Tennessee 

LYNN JENKINS, Kansas 

KENNY MARCHANT, Texas 

TOM REED, New York 

ERIK PAULSEN, Minnesota 

MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania 

JOHN LEWIS, Georgia 

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York 

DANNY DAVIS, Illinois 

LINDA SA ́ NCHEZ, California 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
iii 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Advisory of May 7, 2014 announcing the hearing ................................................ 2 

WITNESS 

The Honorable John Koskinen, Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service, Testimony ................................................................................................................... 7 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Richard N. Brown .................................................................................................... 45 

H&R Block ................................................................................................................ 49 

RAC COALITION .................................................................................................... 62 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

Questions for the Record ......................................................................................... 67 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING

joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
(1) 

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE OPERATIONS 

AND THE 2014 TAX RETURN FILING SEASON 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 7, 2014 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:30 a.m., in Room 

1100, Longworth House Office Building, the Honorable Charles 

Boustany [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

[The advisory of the hearing follows:] 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
2 

HEARING ADVISORY 

Boustany Announces Hearing on Internal Revenue Service Operations and the 2014 Tax Return Filing Season 

1100 Longworth House Office Building at 10:30 AM 

Washington, April 30, 2014 

Congressman Charles W. Boustany, Jr., M.D., (R–LA), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight of the Committee on Ways and Means, today announced 

that the Subcommittee will hold a hearing on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) 

and the 2014 tax return filing season. The hearing will take place on Wednesday, May 7, 2014, in Room 1100 of the Longworth house Office Building, beginning at 10:30 A.M. 

The Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, the Honorable John Koskinen, 

will be the only witness at the hearing. However, any individual or organization not 

scheduled for an oral appearance may submit a written statement for consideration 

by the Committee and for inclusion into the printed record of the hearing. 

BACKGROUND: 

In fiscal year 2013, the IRS collected over $2.8 trillion in taxes, processed 145.9 

million individual tax returns, and issued $364.3 billion in refunds. With the 2014 

tax return filing season concluded, the Subcommittee will review IRS performance 

with a focus on taxpayer service, taxpayer rights, and refund administration. 

In conjunction with the review of the current tax return filing season, the Subcommittee will review IRS operations in general. Specifically, the Subcommittee will 

consider: (1) efforts to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse, including identity theft, (2) 

the agency’s implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), (3) fairness in examinations and tax administration, and (4) whether the agency is pursuing all necessary reforms to address the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration’s 

(TIGTA) findings that the IRS targeted certain groups on the basis of name and policy position. 

In announcing the hearing, Chairman Boustany said, ‘‘The IRS has a long way 

to go in restoring public trust after the unprecedented targeting scandal. 

Beyond that, I am concerned about the agency’s ability to effectively deter 

waste, fraud, and identity theft, as well as its new role in the President’s 

troubled health care law, and the billions of taxpayer dollars it must administer in the Exchanges. The agency is obligated to spend its nearly $12 

billion budget wisely, and the Subcommittee is committed to ensuring the 

IRS is putting these taxpayer dollars to efficient and effective use. The 

Subcommittee looks forward to discussing these and other important 

issues with Commissioner Koskinen.’’ 

FOCUS OF THE HEARING: 

The hearing will focus on the 2014 filing season and other issues facing the IRS, 

including efforts to prevent waste, fraud, and abuse, implementation of the ACA, 

promoting fairness in examinations and tax administration, and changes at the 

agency to address the findings of targeting by TIGTA and Congressional investigations. 

DETAILS FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS: 

Please Note: Any person(s) and/or organization(s) wishing to submit written comments for the hearing record must follow the appropriate link on the hearing page 

of the Committee website and complete the informational forms. From the ComVerDate Sep 11 2014 10:21 Jul 01, 2016 Jkt 094426 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 I:\WAYS\OUT\94426.XXX 94426

joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
3 

mittee homepage, http://waysandmeans.house.gov, select ‘‘Hearings.’’ Select the hearing for which you would like to submit, and click on the link entitled, ‘‘Click here 

to provide a submission for the record.’’ Once you have followed the online instructions, submit all requested information. ATTACH your submission as a Word document, in compliance with the formatting requirements listed below, by the close 

of business on Wednesday, May 21, 2014. Finally, please note that due to the 

change in House mail policy, the U.S. Capitol Police will refuse sealed-package deliveries to all House Office Buildings. For questions, or if you encounter technical 

problems, please call (202) 225–3625 or (202) 225–5522. 

FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS: 

The Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official hearing 

record. As always, submissions will be included in the record according to the discretion of the Committee. The Committee will not alter the content of your submission, 

but we reserve the right to format it according to our guidelines. Any submission 

provided to the Committee by a witness, any supplementary materials submitted for 

the printed record, and any written comments in response to a request for written 

comments must conform to the guidelines listed below. Any submission or supplementary item not in compliance with these guidelines will not be printed, but will 

be maintained in the Committee files for review and use by the Committee. 

1. All submissions and supplementary materials must be provided in Word format and MUST 

NOT exceed a total of 10 pages, including attachments. Witnesses and submitters are advised 

that the Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official hearing record. 

2. Copies of whole documents submitted as exhibit material will not be accepted for printing. 

Instead, exhibit material should be referenced and quoted or paraphrased. All exhibit material 

not meeting these specifications will be maintained in the Committee files for review and use 

by the Committee. 

3. All submissions must include a list of all clients, persons and/or organizations on whose 

behalf the witness appears. A supplemental sheet must accompany each submission listing the 

name, company, address, telephone, and fax numbers of each witness. 

The Committee seeks to make its facilities accessible to persons with disabilities. 

If you are in need of special accommodations, please call 202–225–1721 or 202–226– 

3411 TTD/TTY in advance of the event (four business days notice is requested). 

Questions with regard to special accommodation needs in general (including availability of Committee materials in alternative formats) may be directed to the Committee as noted above. 

Note: All Committee advisories and news releases are available on the World 

Wide Web at http://www.waysandmeans.house.gov

f 

/. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. In the interest of time, we are going to 

go ahead and get started. We are still waiting on the ranking member Mr. Lewis. He should be here shortly. The subcommittee will 

now come to order, and good morning to everyone. Welcome to the 

subcommittee on oversight’s hearing on the Internal Revenue’s operation budget and filing season. 

This filing season, millions of taxpayers across America have 

struggled to meet their tax filing obligations. Doing so has become 

harder over time as the Tax Code grows in complexity, forcing taxpayers to spend over $6 billion and $160 billion every single year 

to comply with its filing requirements. At the IRS, hard-working 

public servants also bear the weight of America’s outdated Tax 

Code. 

Despite these challenges and another late start to the filing season, the IRS appears to have carried out the 2014 filing season 

with success. Initial reports suggest the 2014 filing season was free 

of problems that have marred previous filing seasons. As of early 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
4 

April, the Service processed over 98 million returns, issued 80 million refunds, responded to nearly 40 million calls with lower wait 

times, and all of these are improvements over last year. 

Members of subcommittee and I congratulate Commissioner 

Koskinen and the thousands of dedicated career IRS employees on 

a successful filing season. We thank them for their hard work 

under difficult circumstances. In IRS offices across the country, 

public servants work hard to administer the Nation’s tax laws fairly and accurately. This is not an easy task, and we thank them for 

their service 

However, these successes have occurred against the backdrop of 

the ongoing investigation into the agency’s targeting of conservative groups applying for tax-exempt status. As the agency works 

to recover from the scandal, these kinds of successes will help the 

agency regain the trust of the American people. It is still a long 

road, and how the IRS responds to the ongoing investigation will 

affect the pace of recovery for better or worse. But I have to say, 

we still have serious concerns with regard to the integrity of the 

agency based on three findings so far in this investigation. 

First, Lois Lerner defied internal IRS controls to target certain 

taxpayers. This is a serious concern. On April 9th, the committee 

sent a letter referring former executive—or Exempt Organization 

Division Director Lois Lerner to the Attorney General Holder for 

potentially engaging in criminal wrongdoing in her capacity as EO 

director. One of these actions, in particular, has serious implications for the IRS as it rebuilds. The committee uncovered evidence 

that shows Ms. Lerner acted in defiance of internal controls developed to ensure that no single IRS employee could target an organization for adverse determination or exam. Ms. Lerner was not only 

familiar with these internal controls, they were policies she created 

and touted publicly as a way of commending her agency’s impartiality. 

The evidence shows that Ms. Lerner knowingly bypassed these 

controls, reached into her division, and directed that specific organizations be subjected to audit. And yet, as official IRS reports declare—an official IRS report declared, quote, ‘‘we have not found 

evidence of intentional wrongdoing by IRS personnel,’’ end quote. 

Given the evidence the committee has uncovered—given the evidence the committee has uncovered so far, this is to the contrary, 

and I call on the IRS to review the agency’s internal controls to ensure that this type of targeting can never happen again. 

Second, donors whose names were inappropriately requested by 

the IRS were audited. Equally troubling is new evidence uncovered 

by the committee that shows the IRS’ exam function may have 

been used for political purposes. It is well known that the IRS improperly requested donor information from scores of conservative 

groups. For months, this committee has asked the IRS what it did 

with these improperly obtained lists and whether those lists were 

used to target individual donors to right leaning groups. Recently, 

the committee uncovered new information indicating that after 

groups provided the information to the IRS, nearly 1 in 10 donors 

were subject to audit, and the abuse of discretion in audit selection 

must be identified and stopped. 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
5 

Because of failures in IRS policy exploited by Lois Lerner and 

the possible targeting of conservative donors, I have requested that 

the Government Accountability Office undertake a thorough review 

of the policies and procedures for audit selection by the IRS’ small 

business and self-employed division. Last year, I made a similar request that GAO audit the Exempt Organizations Division. I understand that audit is already under way. 

And Commissioner Koskinen, I call on you to give GAO your unqualified cooperation to the—with these audits so we can shed sunshine on this to begin to restore the public confidence in the IRS. 

Third, the IRS has denied some applicants for exempt status 

their right to an independent appeal. Through the committee’s investigation, we have also found the IRS was, until recently, denying certain applicants with tax-exempt status their right to an 

independent appeal process as guaranteed by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998. Ordinarily, if an applicant for exempt status is denied, the applicant can appeal to an independent 

appeals division. This was mandated by the 1998 IRS Restructuring Act. However, if Washington, D.C., selected an applicant for 

additional review, an adverse determination was not appealable. 

The most a disappointed applicant could actually do was protest to 

the very same officials who denied the group in the first place. 

Noteworthy is that all of the applicants were subject to extra scrutiny based on the name ‘‘Tea Party’’ or ‘‘policy objective’’ to ‘‘Make 

America a Better Place to Live.’’ These groups had their appeal 

rights taken away. 

This practice would never have come to light but for the committee’s thorough oversight of the agency, and as a consequence, the 

IRS has now pledged to change its practice, and I know, Commissioner, we discussed some of this yesterday. We are gratified by 

this change, but I call on the IRS, Mr. Commissioner, today, to ensure that all applicants who were denied their right to a fair independent appeal process receive one. Some of these are left sort of 

in limbo on this, and we hope they will be given due consideration 

with a fair appeals process. 

The IRS cannot be an agency in which one senior executive can 

easily circumvent policies designed to safeguard taxpayers’ due 

process rights. It cannot be an agency in which taxpayers are denied their right to an appeal based on the location of their file, and 

it cannot be an agency that audits taxpayers based on improperly 

obtained information. 

Commissioner Koskinen, I do appreciate your hard work under 

difficult circumstances, but this subcommittee cannot simply take 

the IRS’ assurances at face value. The IRS’ problems must be addressed through frank and serious conversations, so I look forward 

to discussing these matters and more during today’s hearing. And 

again, I applaud the commissioner and the IRS for the good work 

during the 2014 filing season, and I hope the agency will continue 

with this success and continue all the work that it is going to take 

to rebuild the trust of the American people. 

With that, I now am very pleased to yield to my dear friend and 

distinguished ranking member Mr. Lewis. 

Mr. LEWIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
6 

Mr. Chairman, I want to apologize to you and other Members of 

the Committee for being a little late here. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. No need for apologies. 

Mr. LEWIS. Well, thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this important hearing. 

Mr. Commissioner, thank you for joining us today and congratulations to you and the IRS staff on a successful filing season. Over 

the past year, the IRS has dealt with many serious challenges. I 

commend you for taking the time to get out into the field to visit 

and connect directly with IRS staff across the country. Your 

thoughtful work and outreach has restored the morale of thousands 

of IRS employees, and I speak for many when I thank you for your 

efforts to tackle the serious challenges facing the agency. 

As we all know, many issues remain. Chief among them is the 

need to increase the IRS budget. Last month, the Government Accountability office released a report that makes it clear that reducing the IRS budget has cut thousands of staff and hurt taxpayers. 

The agency sorely needs adequate resources in order to provide our 

taxpayers with the service they expect and deserve. 

When you can’t get an answer on the telephone for 20 minutes, 

taxpayers hang up. When you don’t get an answer to your letter 

for 30 or 60 or even 90 days, you get aggravation. Taxpayers deserve better. There are hard-working Americans who need a functioning IRS and want to have faith in our government. 

For the very first time, the Affordable Care Act has opened the 

doors for millions of Americans to access for healthcare. This will 

mean more work for the IRS, and we need to make sure that the 

agency has all of the necessary resources to do their part in a fair 

and transparent manner. The administration had requested $12.5 

billion for the IRS fiscal year 2015 budget. Although that may seem 

like a lot, the IRS is getting less funding today than they did in 

2009, and even if they were fully funded, which we know is unlikely, the GAO estimates this would only bring the IRS back up 

to 2012 staff levels. 

It is important to highlight that providing the IRS with the necessary resources also helps crack down on identity theft and tax 

cheats. Last year, the IRS examination on individual tax returns 

declined 5 percent and collection activity declined 3.3 percent— 

rather, 33 percent. That is a great deal. When we don’t fund the 

IRS enforcement effort, we essentially endorse an unfair playing 

field and reduce compliance across the board. 

Mr. Chairman, I am hopeful that this committee, with us working together, we can find a way to work together and with the commissioner to provide the IRS with adequate resources and to make 

the IRS the best Federal agency in our government. 

Again, Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding today’s hearing, and 

I look forward to working together, as I stated before, in a bipartisan manner for the good of our country and the good of all of our 

taxpayers. Thank you, and I yield back. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. I thank the gentleman for his comments. 

Now, it is my pleasure to welcome our one witness for this hearing today, the Honorable John Koskinen, Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service. 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
7 

Commissioner Koskinen, thank you for your time today. We welcome the opportunity to discuss a whole host of issues, the state 

of the IRS with you today, how you see things going forward. The 

committee has certainly received your written statement, which 

will be made part of the formal hearing record, and as is customary, we will give you 5 minutes to make an opening statement 

to deliver your oral remarks, and then we will go forward with 

questioning. 

So, sir, you may begin. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN KOSKINEN, COMMISSIONER, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ranking Member Lewis, members of subcommittee, thank you 

for the opportunity to discuss the 2014 filing season and our actions to reduce improper payments. The IRS, as noted, delivered 

another successful filing season this year, rising to the challenges 

posed by an incredibly tight budget. 

Through April 25th, the IRS received more than 134 million individual income tax returns, of which 87 percent were file electronically. We will have processed nearly 150 million individual returns 

and sent out well over 100 million refunds when we close the books 

on this filing season next fall. This is a tremendous accomplishment that does not happen automatically or by accident, but as the 

chairman noted, as a result of the efforts of our highly experienced, 

capable, and dedicated workforce. 

During this filing season, we were able to improve our phone 

service somewhat, despite our funding limitations. This was done 

in large part to the diligent efforts of our employees as well as our 

improved ability to provide information to taxpayers on our Web 

site, IRS.gov, and the lack of major tax legislation in 2013. 

Because of the dropoff in call volume, we maintained a level of 

phone service during the filing season of about 71 percent, which 

is better than last year’s average of 60.5 percent but still an unacceptable level of service since it means that about 30 percent of 

calls did not go through. 

Furthermore, now that filing season is over and we no longer 

have extra seasonal employees, we will have fewer people on the 

phones, and we expect wait times to increase significantly between 

now and the end of September. For all of this fiscal year, we expect 

our level of phone service to drop below 70 percent and end up closer to last year’s number. 

Looking beyond the filing season, we are concerned that levels of 

service and enforcement will continue to decline as a result of 

budget constraints. Our funding for this year was set at $11.29 billion, more than $850 million below our fiscal 2010 level, and $500 

million below our presequestration level. We have 10,000 fewer employees today than we did in 2010, even as our responsibilities 

have continued to expand. 

Turning to improper payments, one of our major areas of focus, 

it remains the fight against refund fraud, especially fraud caused 

by identity theft. I am pleased to report that over the last couple 

of years, the IRS has made important progress in this area. In 

2013, we suspended or rejected 5.7 million suspicious returns 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
8 

worth more than $17.8 billion in refunds. Through April 18th of 

this year, more than 3 million suspicious returns have been 

stopped. 

We have also opened more than 500 new investigations into identity theft and refund fraud screens thus far in fiscal 2014, bringing 

the total number of active cases to more than 1,800. We will remain vigilant, given the propensity of fraudsters to adapt to changing circumstances and to develop new and more complicated 

schemes. Even with the progress we have made thus far, I have recently asked our senior leadership team to reevaluate everything 

we are doing in this area and to consider additional steps we could 

take to prevent refund fraud, especially that caused by identity 

theft. 

Another way we are working to reduce improper payments is by 

improving compliance with regard to refundable tax credits, especially the earned income tax credit program. Our programs that 

focus on EITC combine to protect approximately $4 billion annually. Even so, we continue to be concerned that the improper payment rate for EITC remains unacceptably high. We now have a 

working group assessing our past and current efforts in this area 

and exploring new possibilities for improving compliance. 

Congress can help us on both refund fraud and EITC by enacting 

several proposals in this year’s budget for the IRS. One would accelerate the due dates of third-party information returns, which 

would allow us to match up those documents against income tax 

returns earlier in the tax filing process and to more quickly spot 

errors and potential fraud. Another proposal would provide the IRS 

with greater flexibility to address correctable errors, which would 

allow us to automatically fix more errors on returns than we can 

do now, thus avoiding costly audits or allowing errors to go uncorrected. 

We also urge Congress to enact our proposal to explicitly authorize the IRS to regulate paid tax return preparers. Given that more 

than half of the returns claiming an EITC refund credit are done 

by paid preparers, this proposal would be an important addition to 

our efforts to improve compliance in this area. 

Even with these legislative changes, which would be very helpful, 

the biggest challenge to our efforts to reduce improper payments 

remains our ongoing lack of adequate resources. Without sufficient 

funding, our ability to proceed with any new initiatives in this area 

will be constrained, and it will be increasingly difficult even to 

maintain current levels of service and enforcement. 

This concludes my opening statement. I will be happy to take 

your questions. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. Thank you, Commissioner. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Koskinen follows:] 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
9 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 127 here 94426.001
10 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 128 here 94426.002
11 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 129 here 94426.003
12 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 130 here 94426.004
13 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 131 here 94426.005
14 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 132 here 94426.006
15 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 133 here 94426.007
16 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 134 here 94426.008
17 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 135 here 94426.009
18 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 136 here 94426.010
19 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 137 here 94426.011
20 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 138 here 94426.012
21 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 139 here 94426.013
22 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 140 here 94426.014
23 

f 

Chairman BOUSTANY. I want to cover some of the information 

and concerns we have with regard to the investigation to start 

with. I know we had a wide-ranging conversation yesterday, and I 

do appreciate talking about all of the issues, but the committee’s 

investigation of targeting has yielded a number of insights into opVerDate Sep 11 2014 10:21 Jul 01, 2016 Jkt 094426 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 I:\WAYS\OUT\94426.XXX 94426

joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 141 here 94426.015
24 

erations during that timeframe of the Exempt Organizations Division, and the committee found that EO has been run in a manner 

that was inconsistent with the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act 

of 1998, as mentioned in my opening. 

The act calls for an independent appeals function that would ensure taxpayers’ due process rights. And during the course of the investigation, we found that some groups whose applications were 

sent to IRS headquarters in Washington automatically lost their 

right to an independent appeal. 

Commissioner, isn’t it true that the groups that TIGTA said were 

targeted on the basis of their name or policy position were sent to 

Washington, D.C., for review? In other words, bypassed the determinations process in Cincinnati, went straight up to, I think it was 

EO Technical for review; is that true? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Yes. I am not sure whether all of them went 

but certainly a number of—significant number went to Washington 

to that Technical review process. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. Right. Did any of those groups that were 

referred to EO Technical, did they lose their right to an independent appeal as a result—for an adverse determination? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Yes. It is my understanding that in lieu of an 

appeal, as you noted, they were referred—they did have a right to 

appeal, but it was to a set of 3 IRS executives, not the appeals 

process. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. Right. And so can you give us your commitment, because part of this oversight activity is to understand 

where there were breakdowns. Can you give your commitment to 

these groups that were treated unfairly in this independent appeals 

process, will they be given an opportunity to have due process? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Yes. We have changed the process. Anyone that 

comes to Washington—well, retain their appeal rights that they 

would have had if they were in Cincinnati, and anyone who would 

like to avail themselves of that appeal process will have it open to 

them. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. Okay. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. And going forward, everyone who is given a 

proposed denial will have the right to appeal. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. And I appreciate that reform, and that 

is going prospectively forward. What about those who are caught 

in this problem? Will they be given due process? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Yes. Anyone who was caught in that process, 

would like to come back through and appeal their—the decision. 

There were relatively few denials. The biggest problem in the process was the lengthy, far too lengthy time that people were stuck 

in the process, but the handful of those that were denied, if they 

did not have their appeal right out of the Washington, they can 

come, and we would give them that. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. I thank you for that answer. Now I am 

going to give you a sampling of some kinds of statements Congress 

has heard from key IRS officials over the past couple of years. At 

a hearing before the House Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government in 

March of 2012, former Commissioner Shulman said, and I quote, 

‘‘we have the safeguards built into this process so that no one perVerDate Sep 11 2014 10:21 Jul 01, 2016 Jkt 094426 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 I:\WAYS\OUT\94426.XXX 94426

joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
25 

son can decide to examine an organization based on political activities. You can’t just get a case, go off in a corner, and run with your 

own agenda,’’ end quote. 

Then, separately, as we embarked on the investigation, Joseph 

Grant, the former IRS commissioner for TEGE, Lois Lerner’s 

former boss, was asked by our staff in a transcribed interview if 

it would be appropriate for an IRS manager to refer a specific taxpayer to Exams, and he said, and I quote, ‘‘I believe it would not 

be appropriate to intervene on their own,’’ end quote. 

So, Commissioner, the IRS has long insisted, and we have gotten 

numerous documentation through letters and responses that our 

subcommittee has received, IRS has long insisted that Americans 

should not worry about political targeting at your agency because 

the IRS has layers of internal protections to guard against it. 

But in the course of our investigation, however, we found that 

Lois Lerner acted in defiance of these internal protections to select 

groups—in order to select groups for adverse determination or 

audit. She was doing all of this while IRS officials were assuring 

Congress it wasn’t happening. But those assurances ring hollow 

now, and you have got the responsibility of restoring the trust. 

How will you assure the American people that no one IRS employee is going to decide whether or not they are audited and that 

there are safeguards in place? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. I think it is a critical issue. As I said in the 

past, every taxpayer deserves the right to assume that they will be 

treated fairly, no matter what their political beliefs, what organization they belong to, who they voted for in the last election. 

As I said, if you hear from us, you are hearing from us because 

of something in your application or in your return, and anybody 

else with a similar issue would be treated similarly. So there are— 

and we have reviewed and we look forward to the GAO, and we 

are delighted to cooperate with the GAO reviews of the entire examination process, the controls that are in place. They are significant controls. No situation and no system self executes, so one of 

the reasons I have been out to all 25 of the major offices, I have 

talked to over 10,000 IRS employees is to encourage employees to 

understand that we need the benefit of their advice and their insights, their suggestions for improvements, but we also need to 

hear from them when they think something isn’t going the way it 

ought to go. We need to have that information flow easily from the 

bottom up. 

I also, as you know, am a great support of inspectors general. I 

once chaired the cross-agency Council of Inspectors General for 3 

years, and when I was in the private sector, I had the same view 

that internal auditors, as I tell employees, and inspectors general 

are management’s best friends because they find problems before 

they get bigger. 

So we have to be open to all flows of information and concerns. 

I have said in the past and I truly believe it, that when we hear 

from Members of Congress, if we hear from one Member, it is probably about an anecdotal issue. If we hear from several Members of 

the Congress, that means there is an issue that we should investigate, so I think the process that I hope will reassure Americans 

is that not only do we have a structure in place, but we are trying 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
26 

to build a culture that will accept and be welcoming to people who 

say there is a problem you need to look into. Whether that information comes from frontline employees, managers in the middle, 

whether it comes from Members of Congress and their constituents, 

whether it comes from GAO or the IG, we have to be open to that 

and be prepared to respond. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. And then my final line of questioning. I 

want to address this issue that received some media attention recently with regard to bonuses of IRS employees. 

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration recently 

published an audit report on bonuses awarded to IRS employees 

who had tax compliance issues themselves. Of course, every agency, most employers have employers—or have employees who owe 

taxes or may be late in paying their taxes or errors and those kinds 

of things, but unlike other employers, the IRS has the ability to 

look into employee tax compliance. It is a special ability, so to 

speak, because you are—you are bringing in employees who deal 

with very, very personal tax matters, and a highest level of integrity is necessary in all of this. 

So, in fact, I know it is a condition for employment. It is something that—reviews are done several times a year, but the recent 

TIGTA audit found that in 2011, the IRS awarded 1,100 IRS employees more than $1 million in cash awards, over 10,000 hours of 

time off, and 69 quality step increases, despite the fact that these 

employees all had a substantial record of noncompliance with the 

tax laws, and these were not just employees who paid late or had 

some issue or they were disputing an issue. These were actually 

employees who were actually disciplined for their tax delinquency, 

disciplined by the agency. 

I understand that these bonuses were awarded before you became commissioner. I know we are dealing with something in the 

past, but can you explain the steps you are taking to make sure 

that IRS employees don’t get performance awards if they are disciplined for nonpayment of taxes? I think the American people deserve an explanation, and they also deserve to know what steps are 

going to be taken to put a halt to this egregious behavior. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. I think it is an important issue. We take tax 

compliance, obviously, very seriously. I think it is fair to say that 

if we are encouraging others to pay their taxes, we should ensure 

that IRS employees are paying theirs. The compliance rate at the 

IRS is over 99 percent, so we have less than a 1 percent noncompliance rate, which is higher than the rest of the Federal Government 

and Congress and certainly much higher than the public, but that 

is not the standard. We ought to have the public confident that IRS 

employees are held to the highest standard. 

As you say, when IRS employees join the agency, they sign up 

to that. We monitor all 90,000 employees to make sure that they 

are compliant. We have a separate disciplinary proceeding. You are 

subject to termination if you have a willful violation of the Tax 

Code, and all of that we take seriously. 

As the IG noted, there is no policy across the government or in 

the IRS that conjoins performance issues with disciplinary issues. 

We have a program that says for senior executives, if you are behind in your taxes, you are not compliant, you are not eligible for 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
27 

an award. We are now—timing turns out to be good. We are in the 

middle of negotiations, near the end of them with the union about 

a new 5-year agreement. Under the union agreement, we did not 

take—it was not allowed, we are not allowed to take into consideration tax compliance. We are developing a policy that we will be 

sharing with the union this week. They have indicated they understand the issue and are willing to negotiate that with us, and I expect we will have that included in the contract so that going forward, if someone has been disciplined for failure to comply with the 

Tax Code, they will be ineligible for a performance award. I would 

note again, these are performance awards, so when the pool is established, generally 30 to 35 percent of the employees do not get 

an award. It is not an automatic bonus. So even if you are in the 

pool, it doesn’t mean you will get one, but I do think it is important 

for the public to be confident that we take this very seriously. 

As I say, we just can quote—conclude by reminding everyone 

that we are over 99 percent compliant to begin with, but our view 

is that, in fact, as you say, while—people need to be committed 

that employees will not be eligible for an award if they are not 

compliant with—if they have been disciplined for not being compliant with the Tax Code. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. And I would agree with you. There are 

a lot of hard-working people at the IRS. They do their jobs day in 

and day out. They pay their taxes. Compliance level is high overall. 

But when you have employees who have actually been disciplined 

for tax related matters and yet they receive performance awards, 

that is problematic. And so I am glad to see that you are taking 

steps to address this. And we will follow up with you and follow 

it closely, but I appreciate your answer on this. 

And now I am pleased to yield to ranking member, Mr. Lewis. 

Mr. LEWIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Commissioner, thank you for your testimony. 

Now, Mr. Commissioner, I am deeply concerned about the lack 

of adequate funding for the IRS. Your workload is getting heavier. 

The issues you are facing are becoming more and more complex, 

but your appropriations keep getting smaller. I said it before and 

I will say it again this morning, you can only get out what you put 

in, and you cannot get blood out of a turnip. 

Identity theft is an important national concern. Tax preparation 

for low-income, elderly, and disabled taxpayers is on the chopping 

block, and as a constant increased workload, how would the IRS be 

able to even to begin to address the real needs of taxpayers? How 

will your staff be trained and prepared for the challenges and work 

ahead? Are you being stood up for failure, for disaster? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. While we have a very can-do agency of—full of 

employees dedicated to the mission who will, I think, go down 

swinging doing their best with the resources, but I am very concerned. As I have said in the past, I spent 20 years in the private 

sector managing large failed enterprises. I have never dealt with 

an organization, even major ones in bankruptcy, that is so consistently understaffed across the board. We don’t have enough people 

in any division of the organization, and it is not just a few. Everyone, from counsel on across, is down 10 to 15 percent. We have 

4,500 fewer revenue agents and revenue officers than we had 4 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
28 

years ago. We have 350 fewer criminal investigative officers than 

we had 4 years. The head of Criminal Investigation is—projection 

is that he will lose 150 more agents every year. 

So, it is—as you say, we are doing more and more, I think, with 

less and less. There comes a point at which you hit the wall, and 

the wall isn’t because we don’t have good employees, and it is not 

because they are not working hard. It is a wall that you hit because you simply don’t have the resources. So this coming year, we 

are very concerned. We have a statutory obligation to implement 

the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act and the Affordable Care 

Act, and we will do that, but to the extent that our resources remain constrained, the way we will have to fund that is out of declining taxpayer services and taxpayer enforcement. 

Mr. LEWIS. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. 

Mr. Commissioner, I have a letter here from a group of civil 

rights organizations, consumer groups, including the NAACP, the 

National Council of La Raza, the Consumer Federation of America, 

and the National Consumer Law Center. They are opposed to a 

proposal to require the use of a private collection agency to collect 

taxes. This is an issue on which this subcommittee worked greatly, 

spent so much time in the past. We listened to examples, a call 

from private debt collectors, and discussed 130 years of this committee oversight on this issue. It was clear that the best interest 

of taxpayers was not being upheld and that the collection of Federal income tax is a core government function. It is the mission and 

purpose of the IRS. 

Do you have any views on whether we should have—any feeling 

or thoughts whether we should have private groups collecting 

taxes? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. While having spent 20 years in the private sector. I am a big believer in the private sector. My concern is—about 

private debt collection for taxes is we have done that a couple of 

times in the IRS, in 1996 and in 2006, and part of the problem is 

that it has a huge expense to it beyond the debt collection because 

the IRS does have to monitor very carefully the work of people that 

are not their employees. And private debt collectors are limited because they do not have enforcement authority, so they cannot apply 

liens or levies when they go out to collect, so almost by definition 

they are going to be less effective than they would be if they had 

the tools of the IRS available. 

So, the experience in the 1996 experience and 2006 was that it 

was an inefficient way for the government to collect taxes, that you 

would be much better off if you hired a few more revenue agents 

and officers to proceed. In fact, the analysis of 2006 is we actually 

ended up losing money because of the information technology 

changes we had to make and the amount of monitoring we had to 

do to try to make sure the taxpayers were not abused in the process. 

An additional problem now that it was not then is, over the last 

year, one of the major tax scams that we have been trying to warn 

the public about have been people calling up saying they represent 

the IRS and demanding that people either make immediate payments to them or provide them personal information. We normally 

don’t contact people by phone to begin with. We send you notices 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
29 

and letters, so as I have said, as I have traveled across the country, 

if you are surprised to be hearing from us on the phone, you are 

probably not hearing from us, which means that it is going to be 

an additional burden for private debt collectors, if they are retained, to convince the taxpayer that they are legitimate on the 

phone, and they won’t have other means of actually dealing with 

the taxpayers. 

So I think it is going to be an inefficient way to proceed, and it 

does have problems that we all worried about, which is how do we 

monitor what the conversations are that those people are having 

with taxpayers. Our employees are held personally accountable. If 

there is an issue, taxpayers can complain to us, they can complain 

to the taxpayer advocate. They can write Congressmen and Senators and will respond. For employees that are not our employees, 

it is a more complicated oversight problem. 

Mr. LEWIS. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Commissioner. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. I thank the gentleman. 

We are now—we are also joined today by Sam Johnson, who is 

a subcommittee chairman, and I am going to break precedent and 

allow him 5 minutes for questioning. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, thank you. 

Thank you, members. 

Welcome, Mr. Commissioner. It is good to see you again. 

In your prepared testimony for your confirmation hearing before 

the Senate, you said public trust in the IRS is most important, 

their most important asset. I couldn’t agree more. 

Unfortunately, it seems, each week goes by, we learn yet another 

problem at the IRS which further undermines Americans’ trust in 

the agency. For example, just last month, we learned from the 

Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration that the IRS 

rewarded tax—IRS workers with tax problems with bonuses and 

other awards, such as time off, and that is outrageous, and you 

have more or less talked to that. But let me start off by asking, 

is the IRS right now still paying out bonuses and other awards to 

those who owe back taxes, yes or no? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Right now, we are not paying bonuses to anyone because we are between the bonus period, and as I said, we 

are negotiating—about to negotiate with the union to make clear, 

assuming we can negotiate that out with them, but they have expressed an interest in it that, going forward, anyone disciplined for 

not paying taxes will not be eligible for a performance award. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Okay. Now, for the record, do you agree that the 

IRS workers who owe taxes should not be getting performance-related awards, and you just said no. Is that in your regulations now? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. No. In other words, there is—the IG appropriately noted there are no regulations that the IRS or across the 

government that did not—would cause someone not to get a performance award if they were not compliant. We have that process 

for senior executives. We are about to negotiate with the union 

about making sure that that rule applies to all IRS employees, and 

I am—— 

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, then will it be in law? 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
30 

Mr. KOSKINEN. It will actually be in the contract, and it will 

be in our regulations and policies. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Good. 

Now, according to the IG, examples of workers with tax related 

problems include, quote, willful understatement of tax liability over 

multiple tax years. As you well know, the IRS Restructuring and 

Reform Act of 1998 includes the so-called deadly IRS sins for IRS 

workers. One of those sins is a willful understatement of Federal 

tax liability. According to the 1998 Act, the commission—commissioner, you, shall fire a worker for this, but instead what happened 

is that all the IRS rewarded the workers. It is hard for my constituents and folks across the country to understand how this could 

happen. Do you agree that this was wrong for the IRS to do that? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. As I said, we take it very seriously, and I think 

that going forward—I can’t look backwards. I don’t know what the 

decisions were. 

Mr. JOHNSON. I hear you. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. But going forward, if you have willfully not 

paid your taxes, you are subject to termination, and we have terminated employees for that. We have a separate disciplinary review, 

but clearly, going forward, it is our policy, and we hope to be able 

to negotiate with the union about this, that you will not be eligible 

for a performance award if you have willfully violated—not been in 

compliance. 

Mr. JOHNSON. But you would fire them if you caught them 

doing that? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Pardon? 

Mr. JOHNSON. You would fire them if you caught them doing 

that. Is that true? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. We have the ability to fire every—you know, 

there is a wide range of situations in which people find themselves, 

but the indication, if it is someone for several years willfully underreported, they would in fact be terminated. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Finally, you come with a reputation as Mr. Fixit. I appreciate that. And you certainly have your hands full, so I 

will close by saying I have introduced a bill, No Bonuses for Tax 

Delinquent IRS Employees Act, to help you restore the public trust 

in the IRS. It is a simple and commonsense bill, prohibits the commissioner from paying out bonuses and other performance-related 

awards to workers who owe back taxes. So we are going to try to 

help you. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. As always, legislation is kind of a blunt instrument. That bill, for instance, says even if you have an installment 

program, which many taxpayers take advantage of when they have 

difficulties, and we have low-paid employees, like everybody else 

who aren’t tax experts, that legislation as drafted would say even 

if you are in effect compliant, you are on an installment plan, you 

would not be eligible for a performance award. I am not sure that 

those nuances can ever be built in successfully to statute, and as 

I said, I think you will be satisfied, I hope, with our union negotiations that the policies we have are appropriate and that the public 

can be satisfied. If you are disciplined for not being compliant with 

taxes, you are not eligible for a performance award. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, sir. 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
31 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. I thank the gentleman. 

By the way, Commissioner, I am going to send a letter to you regarding the Foreign Account Compliance Tax Act with a number 

of questions because I—we are not going to have the time to get 

into detail on that here today, but I wanted to give you notice. I 

will be sending you a letter with a number of questions and look 

forward to your response. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. I will be happy to do that, and I will do my best 

to respond promptly. As you know, I have a strong view that when 

I hear from a Member of Congress, A, I should read the letter personally, and B, we should get back to you quickly. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. I appreciate that. 

All right. Ms. Sa ́nchez, you have 5 minutes. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for this hearing 

today. 

And thank you, Commissioner Koskinen. It is good to see you 

again. I want to begin by commending you for the hard working 

and—the hard-working Federal employees of the IRS for a successful tax filing season on what we know is a very challenging and 

inadequate budget for everything that you are being asked to do. 

I know that working for the IRS is oftentimes a thankless job, and 

I want to take an opportunity to thank you and the dedicated men 

and women who are working hard to try to process claims, get information to taxpayers and make the process as painless as possible. 

I know that you have been asked to do more and more with less 

and less, and if I am not mistaken, your current budget is under 

the sequester level budget. Is that correct? Mr. KOSKINEN. That is correct. We are about $500 million 

below where we were before the sequester. We are the only major 

agency that is operating, in effect, at the post-sequester level rather than at the pre-sequester level. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. I think it is important for people to bear that in 

mind when they ask you to do more and more with less and less. 

Because of that cut in funding to your agency, I know that IRS 

was forced to make many service cuts, and you know, the constituents that I represent, very, you know, hard-working American families, many of them low income or elderly, they are doing their best 

to file complete and accurate tax returns, but I don’t think that we 

can—we are doing them a big—we are doing them a tremendous 

disservice when we slash the budget of the IRS and take some tools 

out of their toolbox in order to help them complete their returns 

in an accurate way. 

I was hoping that you could perhaps speak directly to how the 

budget cuts at the IRS hurt all of our constituents in terms of the 

services that they are able to get from the agency. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Well, as I noted, to begin with, I have been surprised. One of the surprises that I have had is how much time, energy, and resources we devote to trying to help taxpayers, trying 

to make it easier for them to pay, figure out what they owe, respond to their questions, so the most immediate problem and concern I have heard from employees, as I have talked to over 10,000 

IRS employees in the 25 offices I have visited, their major concern 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
32 

is that not that they are overworked, although they probably are, 

it is that they don’t have enough resources to provide taxpayers the 

services that our employees think the taxpayers deserve. 

So, even at 71 percent as a level of service, as I noted, that 

means 30 percent of the calls aren’t going through, and then that 

builds because if you call and can’t get through, then you call 

again. So now we have got two calls for the price of one. This year, 

also, in addition, for the first time, we had to tell people we could 

not answer complicated tax questions, and they are relatively simple complicated tax questions. We had to tell people they either 

had to go to the Web site, which we are trying to improve, or get 

private—you know, hire somebody to help them. 

Our employees are concerned because I have heard from several 

of them in call centers saying, But we know how to answer those 

questions, and I had to explain, but it takes longer, and the longer 

we take with that person, the more people are sitting in the queue. 

So, we have had to do that. We don’t prepare. We used to, in our 

taxpayer assistance centers, for people who would walk in, we 

would help them prepare their returns. We don’t do that anymore 

because we don’t have the resources. 

On the enforcement side, as I have said, not facetiously, I don’t know who got our $500 million of sequester funds, but I am sure 

they are not going to give back the government the $2 billion to 

$3 billion we would have given had we had those funds. In our request for 2015, to just hire another 1,200 people, we think we 

would provide the government $2.1 billion more, which would be 

more than the entire budget increase we are talking about. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. So, if the money were well spent on the enforcement end, you could make up that money and then some in terms 

of lost revenue that currently we are not able to get because nobody is looking at this. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. That is right. Our estimate is that we historically, and nobody is—the argument is whether it is four or six or 

eight times the amount of investment, but the government, we are 

the only agency where if you give us money, we give you more 

money back, and whether it is four times as much, six times as 

much depends on the issue, but we are the revenue arm of the government. We collect over 90 percent of the money that runs the organization. 

So when we have fewer enforcement agents, fewer criminal investigative divisions, it means we are collecting fewer dollars. And 

when I talk to revenue agents and officers, those that are left, 

across the country, their concern as well is it is not theoretic. They 

know that there are returns that owe us money that they can’t pursue because we simply don’t have enough people. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Right. Really quickly, because my time is almost 

up. I want to—you and I have discussed EITC—EITC payments 

and the issue of correctable error authority. I just would like you 

to quickly, if you can, summarize for the committee how narrowly 

tailored authority could help the IRS process EITC claims more effectively. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. What we have now is what is called math authority, so if your columns don’t add up, we can make a correction 

and send you a notice and say we have adjusted to make sure the 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
33 

columns add up. Correctable error authority would allow us, when 

we have independent verification of information that is wrong on 

your return, would allow us to correct it. So if you say, particularly 

in the EITC program, I have three children, and we have independent information that you have got one, we would, with correctable error authority, be able to make that correction, send you the 

notice. You wouldn’t lose any appeal rights. If you really thought 

we had made an error, you could call us up, if you get through, but 

send us the information and we could make an adjustment, but 

what happens now is we, in many returns, see that there are errors that we could correct, but the limitation we have is we have 

to audit you before we can make that correction. If we had correctable error authority for the obvious errors, beyond math authority, 

we would make those corrections, advise the taxpayer, send a 

smaller refund, give them an explanation, they could then appeal 

to us if they disagreed, but we estimate that there are several billion dollars out there that, again, because of resources, we can’t 

audit our way out of it, improper payments are being made, and 

I think it is a wonderful program, but as I made it clear to people, 

we need to attack the problem of the rate of improper payments 

and the amount of improper payments. 

Ms. SA ́ NCHEZ. Thank you so much for your time. 

I appreciate your thoughtfulness. 

I yield back. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. Thank you. Ms. Jenkins. 

Ms. JENKINS. Thank you, Mr. Chair, thank you for holding this 

hearing. 

Commissioner, thank you for being here. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Thank you. 

Ms. JENKINS. Commissioner, you suggested that resource constraints affect the ability of the IRS to stop fraud and provide customer service, but the committee understands that the IRS allows 

employees to spend a total of more than 500,000 hours a year on 

union activity on the taxpayers’ dime. Were you aware that taxpayers were paying for union activity on official time? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Yes. Actually, taxpayers pay for union activity 

across the government. Wherever there are employee unions, part 

of the organizational structure of the entire government is that 

union representatives represent employees, and they do that while 

they are working, and that is, in effect, on government time. 

Ms. JENKINS. But wouldn’t you agree that some of those 

500,000 hours might have been better spent stopping fraud. For example, how many phone calls do you think the IRS could answer 

with 500,000 hours of worker time? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. That is a little hard to know, but then you 

would have to ask what would happen to labor-management relationships, the operation of the agency if employees didn’t have the 

ability to deal with their unions when they have problems and 

issues. As I say, one of the issues, and I have talked to the union 

about that, is sometimes employees are nervous about reporting a 

problem directly for fear that, you know, their manager won’t like 

that, and I have encouraged them, A, I have a separate mailbox, 

they can call me—or contact me, not call me, but email me directly, 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
34 

but the union performs a very valuable role for us as an intermediary in that area. 

So, as I say, it is a little like saying, well, if I didn’t pay anybody 

any awards or if I didn’t pay them any pay increases, I would have 

more money for something else, you would, but you would have to 

look at the negative implications of what happened when you 

moved that money. And all I can tell you is, at the budget levels 

we are, even if I didn’t—if I got rid of the union and had those 

500,000 hours, I still wouldn’t get back to the level of customer 

service we think is appropriate, and I would have changed significantly the way the organization operates. 

Ms. JENKINS. It just seems like with limited choices, we have 

to—or limited resources, we have to make good choices in government. And this seems like maybe a less than optimal use of taxpayer dollars. And my main concern isn’t with your relations necessarily with your employees but looking out for the hard-working 

taxpayers that I represent, and I am just sad for them that they 

are having to underwrite that cost. 

The Affordable Care Act’s premium tax credit subsidy will be 

based on folks’ income estimates, and these estimates will often use 

the prior year’s tax returns. Taxpayers will eventually have to reconcile the premium subsidies that they received with amounts that 

they are eligible to receive based on their actual income. So in 

many cases, whether it is due to a salary increase, a move across 

State lines, or another change in their individual situation, they 

could find themselves owing thousands of dollars back to the IRS. 

So I am just curious, first of all, do you believe that the taxpayers fully understand this risk, and can you explain to us how 

your agency will handle the reconciliation process? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. All right. On the first issue, we are concerned 

that taxpayers need to understand that. We have already started 

publicizing the issue. In my—every city I have been to, I have 

talked with the press and said one of the issues we hope taxpayers 

will be aware of, if their situation changed for the better—they get 

a promotion, they get a pay increase, their wife gets a job—something happens and they earn more, they need to call back the exchange and adjust their premium tax credit so they don’t owe us 

a refund. 

We will continue to do that through the year to try to make sure 

that we get taxpayers as much information about this as possible 

so that they are not surprised when, fortunately, would be a good 

event on their part if they made more money than they assumed 

when they first calculated the credit, but we are anxious for them 

to make those adjustments as they go forward. So we will do the 

best we can to publicize that. We thought and talked with some 

about perhaps even providing frequently asked questions and answers for Members of the Congress so they could share that information with their constituents. We have got YouTube video. We 

have got a Web site that does it. 

Secondly, the way the reconciliation will happen is in the filing 

season, which is why we have a major challenge to make sure next 

year’s filing season is at least as good as this, because everyone is 

making an estimate. In fact, we all do when we make an estimate 

for our W-2s, about what they earn. We provided information about 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
35 

the income for 2012, but the premium credit will be based on what 

you actually earned in 2014. 

So we will, when you file, you will have a form you will fill out, 

and we will make the adjustment. If you have got too small a credit, you underestimated because you wanted to be careful or some 

change in your financial circumstances, we will owe you a refund 

for that, in other words, the additional credit. If you withheld too 

much, which is the concern we are concerned about with you, you 

will then have an additional tax owing, and our hope is to minimize that to the extent we can by providing as much public information as we can. 

Ms. JENKINS. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. Mr. Marchant. 

Mr. MARCHANT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Commissioner, just recently, I sent you a letter and would like 

to compliment you. You gave me a very prompt reply, which has 

not been the case with the last three of your predecessors, and we 

had a very good visit last week, and I appreciate it. 

The issue, as I explained to you in my office that day, is that 

there are still a number of groups out there that have not received 

a final determination on their 501(c)(4) request. We are approaching the political season again, and all of these groups are involved 

in primaries. They are involved in educating the public about candidates. They are involved in educating them on getting out to 

vote, et cetera, and I just wonder if there is being any progress 

made on clearing up the backlog of those groups that continue to 

not have a determination. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. We are sensitive to that. We are trying to proceed. Of the more or less 145 backlogged organizations a year ago 

when the issue was raised, 90 percent of those have been cleared 

through, so we are down to a relatively small number. Some are 

suing us, so you know, it depends on what the process of litigation 

is. As you know, we did have a streamlined proposal Acting Commissioner Werfel put in place last summer that any organization 

that made a commitment that it was going to spend no more than 

40 percent of its resources on political activity would automatically 

be approved, and about 40 to 45 organizations immediately accepted that process. 

So there are a handful left. We are doing our best; although if 

they are in litigation, it is harder for us to try to resolve those because my sense on all of these is whether we are voting up or 

down, whether we are saying you are approved or denied, what we 

need to do is be as quick as we can, as prompt as we can, and so, 

going forward, that is our commitment. We are trying to redo the 

501(c)(3) area, again, to make sure that one way or the other, you 

get an answer as quickly as we can. And so, as you and I have 

talked, we will review, and I have asked people to review to make 

sure that we are doing everything we can to resolve issues that are 

pending. 

Mr. MARCHANT. In this letter that you sent me, and I made it 

available to my constituents so they could see the response, it was 

indicated that if a lawsuit was pending, that that could be a factor 

in the determination. Is that still the case? 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
36 

Mr. KOSKINEN. If you have got a lawsuit pending and you are 

suing us, then you know, you can always settle that. We settle litigation without forcing everybody to go to trial. In fact, a lot of 

these we would be delighted to settle. Litigation is a complicated, 

expensive way to resolve any issue. So the fact that you have sued 

us doesn’t necessarily mean you can’t actually negotiate with us to 

settle the case. 

Mr. MARCHANT. So to be clear, can you issue a determination 

letter if you are in active litigation? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Well, that gets more complicated. If you have 

actually sued us and it is in litigation, then you know, we are sort 

of caught in the litigation process back and forth and there are 

issues that if we could have resolved them we would have. And so 

if you are suing us, then it makes it much more difficult while the 

lawsuit is going on to actually then issue independently that determination. 

But it is a case-by-case issue. There probably are some where the 

issues in the lawsuit are separate from, the determination process 

in which we could do that, and I have asked people to take a look 

to make sure that we are not holding things up unnecessarily. As 

you and I discussed I think there are probably some people who are 

happy to sue us because it keeps the issue alive longer. We have 

actually I think reached out as much as we could to organizations 

trying to resolve issues as quickly as we could. 

Mr. MARCHANT. We also—I use the same rule that you do. If 

I receive any mail from a constituent about a subject, sometimes 

it is an isolated situation and it is anecdotal and I treat it that 

way. But, when I receive half of my emails on a particular subject, 

then I actually take that one much more seriously and I think that 

it does represent a greater slice of what my constituents are thinking. 

And I can, without duplicating what other members have said up 

here today, this issue of bonuses to IRS employees that have delinquent taxes, is a big issue in our constituencies and in your negotiations with the labor unions, it is something that needs to be resolved, it needs to be addressed. There may be legislation, there 

may be a law passed before that gets done. 

But thank you for your time. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. I thank the gentleman. 

We will go to Mr. Davis next. 

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and Commissioner, thank you for being here. And I appreciate the work that 

you have done. 

Everything that I have read, seen or heard suggests that we 

have had a pretty smooth tax filing system and experience this 

year, notwithstanding any shortages that there may have been relative to man or woman power. So let me compliment you and the 

agency on that. 

I also detect from people I speak with, news reports that I get 

and what I read, that there has already begun, even though your 

tenure has been quite brief, a different level of confidence that people feel in the agency and that their experiences and problems are 

being resolved far more quickly than what they may have experiVerDate Sep 11 2014 10:21 Jul 01, 2016 Jkt 094426 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 I:\WAYS\OUT\94426.XXX 94426

joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
37 

enced in the past, and I want to compliment you and the agency 

on that. 

I want to follow up a little bit on a question that was raised by 

Representative Sanchez. It is my understanding that maybe 70 to 

80 percent of the individuals who are entitled to make use of the 

Earned Income Tax Credit are doing so. Because of the fact that 

there is such a large number of individuals who could in fact and 

do qualify, many of them live in my Congressional District, which 

has lots of low income people, are there any ways that we can 

think of that might increase utilization of that opportunity? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. It is a major challenge. As I say, we have both 

sides of the question. On the one hand we want to make sure the 

payments are properly made to the right people for the right 

amount and on the other hand we want to make sure that everybody eligible participates. So we do again a significant amount of 

outreach. I was in Baltimore at the start of filing day. There is an 

EIT awareness day that we hold across the country in January. 

Part of the challenge is that, and it is probably a good sign for 

the program, about one-third of the people every year rotate in and 

out of the program, which means they are in the program, they 

earn enough that they no longer need that subsidy. So part of the 

challenge is, if it were a stable population, we could probably make 

bigger inroads. Right now about 80 percent of the eligible people 

participate. But with a third of them rolling over, it means we have 

got to keep 20 to 25 percent new people coming in just to sustain 

ourselves. 

So we are again spending a reasonable amount of time and effort 

trying to give visibility to the program, publicize it through our 

local sites, work cooperatively with people in communities. But it 

is a significant challenge to make sure that everybody eligible is 

aware of the program and participates. 

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much. 

And of course we know that next year the Internal Revenue 

Service is going to have some additional responsibility for assisting 

taxpayers with the Affordable Care Act. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Correct. 

Mr. DAVIS. How have you been preparing for that? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Well, we are preparing for it—well first, we 

have a fairly significant technological challenge to adjust all of our 

systems to be able to absorb the data and process it appropriately 

in terms of matching what people thought they were eligible for in 

terms of an advanced premium credit and what they actually were 

entitled to. 

So the technology challenge in our budget for this year was $300 

million of technology work. We got zero dollars for it, so we have 

had to in effect postpone another $300 million worth of work. So 

I meet every two weeks with the interagency, across-agency group 

of IT people, policy people, operating people, to make sure we are 

on schedule to be able to implement. 

As I said earlier, we also are anxious to provide as much information to the public as we can about eligibility, about making sure 

that they are not over—as their income gets better that they don’t 

in effect get too large a premium credit so they will owe more taxes 

when they file as we go forward. 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
38 

So, we are doing the best we can. Our concern is we estimate we 

are going to get 11 million more calls during the filing season next 

year about the Affordable Care Act, on top of the normal calls we 

get, and that is a major concern for us going forward. We are trying to make sure our website is as user friendly as we can between 

now and then so that people will be comfortable, they can go to the 

website, get simple answers to their questions so they don’t have 

to call us to the extent that we can avoid that. 

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much. 

And I know that my time has run out but could I get a response 

in writing for this question. 2006 data suggests that there was a 

big gap of $67 billion unreported of corporate income and I would 

like to know how we are trying to figure out ways to recapture and 

collect some of that money. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. I would be happy to provide that information. 

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Reed. 

Mr. REED. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Commissioner, for being here today, and thank 

you for the hard work you are doing in regards to the IRS and 

overseeing the IRS and I appreciate it. I am glad to see the results 

of this tax season and your testimony and the stuff we read over 

last night in preparation for today. 

And I know my colleagues have asked about issues that are just 

important to me as it is to them, but I wanted to narrow down on 

a kind of a narrow issue that impacts my district and that deals 

with Native American sovereignty in particular. 

I represent the western portion of New York. We have long heritage of the Seneca Nation being part of our area, and what I am 

concerned with is I have been getting reports from not just that nation, as well as other nations of a general sense or concern about 

the IRS’ operation when it comes to challenging tribal general welfare programs, many of which are nearly identical to programs provided by Federal and State governments. There is a sense that the 

IRS may be unfairly targeting these Native American nations, but 

is also not respecting tribal sovereignty, and that is something that 

I want to bring to your attention. 

And I know in 2012, December 2012, the IRS issued guidance on 

the application of the general welfare exclusion to Indian nations 

and their citizens and that was viewed as a very positive development. But the guidance still remains in draft form and is deficient 

in several important respects in my opinion and in the view of 

many Native American tribes across America. 

So my question, Mr. Commissioner, is this: What can Native 

American nations expect of you as the new Commissioner and the 

agency you run with respect to these issues and the fundamental 

relationship between the IRS and tribal nations of America? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. I think it is an important issue. Obviously as 

you said I think it is critical for us to respect the sovereignty of 

tribal nations, to treat them appropriately, respectfully. I am concerned across the board whenever things take too long, and so I 

can commit to you that if we have got a draft regulation that has 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
39 

been out since December of 2012, that we need to get that finalized 

and I will commit to you. 

It is a joint effort when we do regulations with the Treasury Department and the IRS tax policy, it is the domain of the Treasury 

Department, but I have been trying to make it clear, I have actually asked for a list of everything that has been around for more 

than a year just to see if we can’t expedite it. My experience has 

been in the private sector and my private life as well, everybody’s, 

is that you are much better off giving people an answer even if it 

is ‘‘no’’ early than ‘‘yes’’ late, because by the time you get around 

to it late they are aggravated enough and disappointed enough that 

it doesn’t get you much credit. 

So on the outstanding regulation, I am committed we will look 

at that and get it put into final as quickly as we can. 

Mr. REED. Well, I greatly appreciate it, and I greatly appreciate 

your comment about respecting the sovereignty of the tribal nations, and I think that is something that is critical to the future 

relationship with the nation and I am glad you shared that belief 

as I do. So I appreciate the work there. 

I wanted to ask just a general operations points of view, and we 

have had this conversation before and I am a big believer in 

metrics and asking for, okay, you want more money, you want 

more staff, okay, what are you going to do with that type of thing. 

But one thing I was looking at in preparation, last night for your 

testimony today is, we have a lot of effort up here on this committee to engage in comprehensive tax reform, and I wanted to 

know from you as the Commissioner have you looked at what a revised simplified complete rewrite of the code would bring in regards 

to the relief on your resources, be it staffing, funding levels; that 

if you had a code, you know, the chairman has put out a draft, we 

put out a draft after 21⁄2 years of work, that really in my opinion 

goes a long way to simplify that code, how much of that simplicity 

have you ever thought about, and if you haven’t, I would ask you 

to consider it, would that mean in relief to your agency when it 

comes to funding and staffing requests that you are putting forward to us. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. I don’t have a number for you. As you know, 

I am a big believer in tax simplification because I do think the 

most important impact would be it would make it a lot easier for 

taxpayers to figure out what they owe and compliance I think 

would go up and we would certainly spend a lot less time and 

money across the country and across the economy filling out tax returns. 

It clearly would make our life simpler, particularly in taxpayer 

service on the call centers. If you had a relatively simple straightforward Tax Code, we would get a lot fewer calls. It wouldn’t mean 

we wouldn’t get any because there will always be issues about filing status, heads of household, other issues. But, a significant part 

of the calls are related to the complexity of the code. So we would 

be able to without many additional resources significantly improve 

our level of service on that end. 

On the enforcement end, again, to the extent it was if compliance 

went up you would expect we would have somewhat lowered enforcement needs, but there again, no matter what it is, because it 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
40 

is not going to be a simple one line form, my expectation is that 

a lot of our enforcement activities against people who are actually 

are consciously trying to cut corners, and whatever the rules are 

they will keep trying to cut the corners. But, again, I think that 

the willing-to-pay as we say who are trying to figure out the right 

amount would in fact be able to do it much more quickly. 

Mr. REED. I know my time has expired, and I so appreciate you 

saying that, and maybe we can work offline having a further conversation about it, what simplicity would mean to you in regards 

to that deficiency of the agency, and that is where I think there is 

a lot of common ground. If we all agree that simplicity will result 

in less need for resources, there will still be a need for that resource but a less need for that resource, be it staff or financial resources, where it is a win-win situation in my opinion, and I look 

forward to working with you on that, and any information you have 

in regards to that from your day-to-day operations would be helpful. 

So, with that I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. I thank the gentleman. 

Mr. Kelly. 

Mr. KELLY. Thank you, chairman. 

Mr. Koskinen, good to see you again, and as Sam Johnson said, 

you are the fix it guy. But I think Mr. Reed just hit on the issue. 

It is the code. It is the code. That is the problem. The problem isn’t 

that you don’t have enough people, you don’t have enough money, 

the problem is the code is far too big to work with. 

You mentioned fraud, people out there are who are sending letters to people, to taxpayers, and they are unwittingly spending 

money in, and the reason they are doing it is because they are 

scared to death. 

Here is the problem. Of all the things you are talking about, if 

we cannot restore faith and confidence in this model Government 

that we have, of the general public, everything we talk about is 

just chatter, just idle chatter. 

We talk about revenue. We need more revenues. Do we? So let’s 

make it really hard on the people who produce the revenues. Let’s 

make it so damn difficult for them that they are afraid to do their 

own tax return; not because they don’t want to pay their fair share, 

but they are scared to death that somebody is going to come in and 

hold them accountable for a mistake they didn’t mean to make but 

happened. 

And I got to tell you coming from the private sector as you had, 

you can be Mr. Fix it everywhere you want, but until this code gets 

fixed, there ain’t no fix. There is no way that anybody can look at 

our current situation and feel that somehow they can trust and 

have confidence in what we are doing with them. It is just as impossible, it just can’t be done. 

I know you are talking about giving credentials to people, now, 

what is the term, and this is a town that works on all these acronyms, the PTIN. These are the preparers tax identification numbers. In order to get that number you have to make a fee of $63 

and take 15 hours of continuing education courses and that was 

shot down. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. That was shot down. 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
41 

Mr. KELLY. Yes. Okay, so now, now what are we doing? What 

is the IRS doing now? Is this a suggestion, about having this PTIN 

or having the people who have the credentials to do these things? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. No. What happens is the court said we could 

ask people to register so we would at least know who was out there 

holding themselves out as a preparer, and this year we have about 

667,000 of them out there, PTINs, as they are called, but we have 

no other ability to supervise them. So they could be totally incompetent, which a few of them are. Most preparers are well-educated. 

They do a good job. 

Our concern is a lot of people—as somebody once said, hairdressers are regulated in all 50 States, tax preparers are regulated 

in four, and you ought to be as at least concerned about who is 

doing your tax preparation as who is giving you a haircut. 

Mr. KELLY. No, and I get that. Again, it goes back to what? A 

code that is so complicated that the average person is scared to 

death to do it themselves. Now, I got to tell you, the problem isn’t 

that—they don’t trust any of us, by the way. You know, approval 

ratings are not very high and we are all getting painted with the 

same brush. And I got to tell you, I serve with a lot of really outstanding people, on both sides of the aisle, by the way and I don’t 

know that we talk about ourselves as strong Republicans or strong 

Democrats, but we talk about ourselves as strong Americans trying 

to protect something that was given to us. This is a long, long process of people passing on to the next generation something that 

makes a lot of sense and is the envy of the world. 

This particular agency though, for as many good people as you 

have, you are getting painted with the same brush. And I got to 

tell you, being from the private sector, if I got a letter in the mail 

and the outside of the envelope had the IRS address, I was scared 

to death to open it, because it was never good news. 

And we talk about improper payments. Improper payments 

would also be defined not only underpayment or nonpayment but 

also overpayment. Right? I mean, so if we are using that definition. 

I think what we are trying to get to, and, again, as Tommy talked 

about, and I think this is critical, if we don’t get this Tax Code reformed, if we don’t get it to the point where people can actually 

read it and understand it, if we don’t get it to the point where they 

have confidence that the people who are enforcing that code are on 

their side and not on the other side, then America loses and continues to lose and the gap keeps widening between what the American people have faith and confidence in and what they have been 

subject to. 

That is your toughest job. I know you are a turnaround guy and 

you are a fix it guy, but, man, you are working with a pretty tough 

operation right now to get through it. I had a flat tire on the way 

here yesterday. I got out the owner’s manual. Hell, it took me almost 20 minutes just to find the section about changing the spare 

tire to find out where the tools were and I would have paid somebody else to do it at the time but there was nobody available. So 

we are having the same problem with people when they do their 

tax returns. 

Mr. Chairman, we are doing a lot of good things here, but the 

one thing we better decide on really quickly is these are American 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
42 

problems. This is not a Republican issue or a Democrat issue or a 

libertarian issue or an independent issue. We are talking about 

revenues that supply all the vital monies that we need and you 

know who we are holding hostage and making the trouble maker 

in this? The taxpayer. 

There is something wrong with the model where we continue to 

do that. I got to tell you there is an old saying, is about don’t worry 

about the mule, just load the wagon. The mule is starting to 

unhitch himself. He is going to walk away from it because there 

is just no upside to what we are doing. 

Thanks for what you are doing. Good luck and we will keep doing 

everything we can to make it easier for you to do your job and 

make it easier for the American people to actually put their head 

on the pillow at night and know it is not the Government they 

have to worry about or the IRS coming in their place or some other 

agency that can destroy their personal life with just a little bit of 

an investigation. 

So, thanks for what you are doing. I yield back. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. I thank the gentleman. 

Ms. Black. 

Ms. BLACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for this 

hearing. 

This certainly is a very important issue. I do want to just tag a 

little bit on what my colleague said about trust, and certainly that 

is something that I think right now the American people have had, 

broken trust. And I appreciate what you are doing, the efforts that 

you are making to reestablish that trust in the IRS. 

In your opening comments you made a statement that you are 

making important progress in identity theft, and that, of course, is 

so, so important and we look at that from so many different 

realms, not just within the IRS but with a lot of other issues, and 

banking and even medicine, and identities are being stolen. 

Most recently we have started getting information, not particularly in the State of Tennessee but as I look at several of the States 

and territories that are affected by this and victims of fraudulent 

tax filings and stolen identities within State medical associations. 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Yes. 

Ms. BLACK. And it seems to me that this is really, as I look at 

the number of States, it is a growing issue and I think that certainly it is one that we have got to look at very quickly, because 

these are physician databases and being uncertain about just 

where they are getting the information from, how many people that 

are within this database are also potentially a victim for potential 

theft, ID theft, and some stolen refunds I understand are occurring 

right now. 

So my question is actually three parts on asking you about 

whether you will make this a priority, how you seek to resolve this 

and how you think you might be able to prevent it and whether 

as you look at this will you look at it as a national issue or because 

this seems to be regional will you be addressing it more regionally? 

How will you let the public know about this, whether this will 

be a public release that the people can be aware of and watching 

out for. And then, finally, the concern of the Federal identification 

numbers, such as the Medicare’s national provider ID or the DE 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
43 

registration numbers for those prescribers of controlled substances. 

Will you take a look to see is this the cause that is occurring? 

So let me go back to the three. Will you make this a priority? 

Number two, how do you propose to resolve it? And then looking 

forward, how would you prevent it? 

Mr. KOSKINEN. Well, it clearly is a priority. It became an explosion in 2010 to 2012, it overwhelmed law enforcement as well as 

the IRS, and we have made great progress. It is a high priority. 

We have 3,000 people who spend no time on anything other than 

worrying about refund fraud. We have very sophisticated modelers 

who are developing our ability to look for schemes as they come 

through the system. As I noted, we stopped three million suspicious 

returns in this filing season that didn’t get through our filters. 

As somebody said, because as I noted, I pulled everybody together and said we are making progress but we have got to take 

a fresh look at what else can we do to fight this battle. I want to 

see if we can change the rules of the game a little, so we are not 

fighting in their ballpark, we move it to our ballpark, which is why 

I have asked for some of the legislative changes we have got. 

But as somebody said, we have eliminated a lot of the amateurs 

who were doing this one or three or five returns. We are now dealing with organized criminals and crime and some nefarious tax 

preparers. The organized crime people are filing hundreds of these 

and as we develop filters they are just reverse engineering and figuring out what goes through, what doesn’t go through, and they 

can pretty much figure out where we are and so we are again trying to figure out how to change that. 

One of the things that will help will be to get W-2 information 

earlier. We are a victim of our own success. It used to be the refunds went out in August. Now the technology is such we will say 

we will give you a refund in 21 days. So we gave 90 million refunds 

out before the end of the filing season on April 15th, most of those 

before the third party information got to us. Now, we have sophisticated filters. W-2s won’t solve the problem by themselves, but they 

are very critical. 

We are looking at all sorts of E-authentication methods so that 

in effect we circumvent Social Security numbers. Because part of 

the problem with preparers, with medical services, as you note, 

everybody’s Medicare card is their Social Security number, and so 

there are file cabinets around the country full of Social Security 

numbers. 

Hackers have now discovered if I could hack into a tax preparer’s 

databases I have got all of their clients. More important just their 

name and Social Security number, I have got all of their returns 

so I can prepare a false return that looks a lot better than the one 

I just make up as we go. 

So it is an ongoing battle. I think that we are holding our own, 

I would say. I am not sure which is better than we were doing a 

couple of years ago where we looked like we were overwhelmed. 

We have programs going on with financial institutions, with prisons, where it first started, with law enforcement. We have task 

forces with hundreds and State and local law enforcement agencies. 

When people get arrested we suddenly discover they have got all 

sorts of Social Security numbers or debit cards. 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
44 

You know, one of our problems is how to deal with debit cards. 

When we send out the refund, the debit cards can all go—you 

know, somebody can go get debit cards in a grocery store. You just 

pull them off the rack. And they are harder for us to track. They 

are virtually untraceable. 

So it is a complicated problem. There is no higher priority for us 

both to stop the fraud and the refund fraud, but also to deal with 

taxpayers. There is nothing more I think anxiety producing for a 

taxpayer than to suddenly file their return and get it rejected because somebody already filed with their Social Security number. 

So there, as I have noted, we actually used to take almost a year 

to resolve those. We are now down to 120 days in resolving them. 

Our backlog has gone from over 600,000 to about 98,000. But we 

are trying to do better there as well because we understand the 

burden on the taxpayer. 

Ms. BLACK. Thank you. 

And Mr. Chairman, if I may, I have another question about minors’ Social Security numbers being stolen and how that is being 

handled. I will put that in a letter form and send it to you. I would 

really like to hear back from you on that issue as well. That is a 

really important issue we have to make sure we are addressing. 

Thank you. 

Chairman BOUSTANY. I thank the gentlelady. 

Commissioner, thank you for being here. Thank you for the status report on a whole host of activities. We want to continue to 

work with you to reform, make improvements, rebuild trust and 

right size the budget on all this. So we appreciate you appearing 

before us today. 

Please be advised members will submit written questions as has 

been stated to be answered in writing. All of that will be made part 

of the formal record as will be your formal statement. 

With that, the committee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:57 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARING
(45) 

[Submissions for the Record follow:] 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Richard N. Brown 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 154 here 94426.028
46 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 155 here 94426.029
47 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 156 here 94426.030
48 

f 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 157 here 94426.031
49 

H&R Block 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 158 here 94426.032
50 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 159 here 94426.033
51 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 160 here 94426.034
52 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 161 here 94426.035
53 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 162 here 94426.036
54 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 163 here 94426.037
55 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 164 here 94426.038
56 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 165 here 94426.039
57 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 166 here 94426.040
58 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 167 here 94426.041
59 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 168 here 94426.042
60 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 169 here 94426.043
61 

f 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 170 here 94426.044
62 

RAC COALITION 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 171 here 94426.045
63 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 172 here 94426.046
64 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 173 here 94426.047
65 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 174 here 94426.048
66 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 175 here 94426.049
67 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

Questions for the Record 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 142 here 94426.016
68 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 143 here 94426.017
69 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 144 here 94426.018
70 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 145 here 94426.019
71 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 146 here 94426.020
72 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 147 here 94426.021
73 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 148 here 94426.022
74 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 149 here 94426.023
75 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 150 here 94426.024
76 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 151 here 94426.025
77 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 152 here 94426.026
78 

Æ 


joloto on DSKB35BYQ1 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 153 here 94426.027