H5510 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 31, 2012 

Service has determined that an imminent threat is posed against the life of 

the President of the United States, and 

he has to certify the same to the Secretary of the Treasury. And the Attorney General has the same kind of 

power in child exploitation cases. Both 

are Cabinet-level officials. 

I offered an amendment to remove 

the provisions extending this type of 

judicial authority to the U.S. Marshals 

Service. Upon the failure of that 

amendment, I then offered an amendment to continue limiting the authority to issue administrative subpoenas 

to Cabinet officials to ensure that this 

extraordinary judicial power is used 

discreetly and only in circumstances 

where it is absolutely warranted. Those 

amendments were defeated; and, therefore, this bill gives more power to the 

Marshals Service in cases where there 

is no proven need for the power, more 

power than the Secret Service has 

when faced with an imminent threat to 

the President of the United States. 

Despite serious constitutional issues 

and these other problems, this bill was 

introduced on June 29 and was marked 

up in committee 12 days later, on July 

10, which was the very next day that 

Congress was in session. Clearly these 

provisions need more consideration. 

For these reasons, I urge that we defeat H.R. 6063. 

I reserve the balance of my time. 

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I 

have no further requests for time on 

this side and reserve the balance of my 

time. 

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, 

I yield such time as she may consume 

to the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. 

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ), a cosponsor of 

the bill. 

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. 

Speaker, I rise today in support of the 

Child Protection Act of 2012, which I 

am honored to cosponsor with my good 

friend from Texas, Chairman LAMAR

SMITH. Chairman SMITH and I are 

proof-positive of what bipartisan working relationships can accomplish, especially because we both agree that protecting the safety and well-being of our 

Nation’s children is our highest priority. That’s why I am so pleased that 

this bill, which was reported favorably 

out of committee on voice vote, is before us today. This is an opportunity to 

make a real difference in the lives of 

children nationwide, thousands of 

whom are plagued by abuse, terror, and 

assaults that we cannot even imagine. 

In 2008, I was honored to sponsor the 

PROTECT Our Children Act of 2008, 

which provides the safety net and resources the law enforcement agents 

who fight child sexual predators so desperately need. This commonsense bill 

builds on the progress that we started 

in PROTECT to ensure that law enforcement can combat one of the fastest-growing crimes in the United 

States, child pornography. 

We must ensure that investigators 

have every available resource to track 

down predators and protect our children. This bill ensures that paperwork 

does not stand in the way of protecting 

our kids. 

Mr. Speaker, I have learned far too 

much about the world of child pornography since I first took on this cause 4 

years ago. There are many aspects of it 

that are disturbing beyond words to describe, like the fact that in a survey of 

convicted offenders, more than 83 percent of them had images of children 

younger than 12 years old, and almost 

20 percent of them had images of babies 

and toddlers who were less than 3 years 

old. And let’s remember that these 

aren’t just images of naked children. 

These are crime scene photographs and 

videos taken of children being beaten, 

raped, and abused beyond our worst 

nightmares for the sexual pleasure of 

the person looking at the photo or 

video. 

Let’s also remember that these are 

children who are often being victimized 

by someone in their circle of trust, 

someone who was supposed to protect 

them, and someone who, instead, chose 

to do them harm. These children only 

have the law to protect them because 

their protectors failed them and caused 

them harm. 

While it’s not often that we have an 

opportunity to pass a bill here that 

quite literally means the difference between life or death, this is one of those 

times. That’s why, as a Member of Congress, I know that I, as well as Chairman SMITH and the Members of Congress here today fighting to protect the 

children of this country, will stand 

strong and continue to press forward 

on their behalf. 

I am proud and honored to be the 

lead Democratic sponsor of this bill, 

and I am thankful to my friend Chairman SMITH for his continued leadership 

and support on this crucial cause. 

While the chairman listed some of 

the organizations that are supporting 

this bill, I will add some others. This 

bill is supported by the Rape, Abuse, 

and Incest National Network; the National Council of Jewish Women; Men 

Can Stop Rape; and the Florida Council 

Against Sexual Violence, among the 

other worthy and proud organizations 

that Chairman SMITH listed. 

We are grateful to all of these organizations for their endorsement of this 

bill and for their continued support for 

all victims of sexual assault and abuse. 

I urge all of my colleagues to join us in 

supporting this critical legislation. 

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I 

yield back the balance of my time as 

well. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

question is on the motion offered by 

the gentleman from Texas (Mr. SMITH) 

that the House suspend the rules and 

pass the bill, H.R. 6063. 

The question was taken. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the 

opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being 

in the affirmative, the ayes have it. 

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I 

object to the vote on the ground that a 

quorum is not present and make the 

point of order that a quorum is not 

present. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. 

The point of no quorum is considered 

withdrawn. 

f 

STOPPING TAX OFFENDERS AND 

PROSECUTING IDENTITY THEFT 

ACT OF 2012 

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I 

move to suspend the rules and pass the 

bill (H.R. 4362) to provide effective 

criminal prosecutions for certain identity thefts, and for other purposes. 

The Clerk read the title of the bill. 

The text of the bill is as follows: 

H.R. 4362 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in 

Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Stopping 

Tax Offenders and Prosecuting Identity 

Theft Act of 2012’’ or the ‘‘STOP Identity 

Theft Act of 2012’’. 

SEC. 2. USE OF DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE RESOURCES WITH REGARD TO TAX RETURN IDENTITY THEFT. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Attorney General 

should make use of all existing resources of 

the Department of Justice, including any appropriate task forces, to bring more perpetrators of tax return identity theft to justice. 

(b) CONSIDERATIONS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.—In carrying out this section, the Attorney General should take into account the 

following: 

(1) The need to concentrate efforts in those 

areas of the country where the crime is most 

frequently reported. 

(2) The need to coordinate with State and 

local authorities for the most efficient use of 

their laws and resources to prosecute and 

prevent the crime. 

(3) The need to protect vulnerable groups, 

such as veterans, seniors, and minors (especially foster children) from becoming victims or otherwise used in the offense. 

SEC. 3. VICTIMS OF IDENTITY THEFT MAY INCLUDE ORGANIZATIONS. 

Section 1028(d)(7) of title 18, United States 

Code, is amended by striking ‘‘specific individual’’ and inserting ‘‘specific person’’. 

SEC. 4. TAX FRAUD AS A PREDICATE FOR AGGRAVATED IDENTITY THEFT. 

Section 1028A(c) of title 18, United States 

Code, is amended— 

(1) in paragraph (10), by striking ‘‘or’’; 

(2) in paragraph (11), by striking the period 

at the end and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

(3) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(12) section 7206 or 7207 of the Internal 

Revenue Code of 1986.’’. 

SEC. 5. REPORTING REQUIREMENT. 

(a) GENERALLY.—Beginning with the first 

report made more than 9 months after the 

date of the enactment of this Act under section 1116 of title 31, United States Code, the 

Attorney General shall include in such report the information described in subsection 

(b) of this section as to progress in implementing this Act and the amendments made 

by this Act. 

(b) CONTENTS.—The information referred to 

in subsection (a) is as follows: 

(1) Information readily available to the Department of Justice about trends in the incidence of tax return identity theft. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
July 31, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5511 

(2) The effectiveness of statutory tools, including those provided by this Act, in aiding 

the Department of Justice in the prosecution 

of tax return identity theft. 

(3) Recommendations on additional statutory tools that would aid in removing barriers to effective prosecution of tax return 

identity theft. 

(4) The status on implementing the recommendations of the Department’s March 

2010 Audit Report 10–21 entitled ‘‘The Department of Justice’s Efforts to Combat Identity 

Theft’’. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 

Texas (Mr. SMITH) and the gentleman 

from Virginia (Mr. SCOTT) each will 

control 20 minutes. 

The Chair recognizes the gentleman 

from Texas. 

GENERAL LEAVE

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I 

ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within 

which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 4362 currently under consideration. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there 

objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas? 

There was no objection. 

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I 

yield myself such time as I may consume. 

I am pleased to be an original cosponsor of H.R. 4362, the Stopping Tax Offenders and Prosecuting Identity Theft 

Act of 2012, with my good friend and 

colleague, the distinguished gentlewoman from Florida, DEBBIE

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. This is a bipartisan bill that strengthens criminal 

penalties for tax return identity 

thieves. 

Tax fraud is a very real problem, and 

Congress should do all it can to protect 

citizens from this costly crime. Tax 

fraud through identity theft is a rapidly growing criminal enterprise in the 

United States. Criminals use stolen 

identities to steal income tax refunds 

from unsuspecting victims and from 

the Federal Government. 

With nothing more than stolen identity information—Social Security 

numbers and their corresponding 

names and birth dates—criminals have 

electronically filed thousands of false 

tax returns and have received hundreds 

of millions of dollars in wrongful refunds. 

The thieves deceive the Internal Revenue Service and file a return before 

the legitimate taxpayer files. The 

criminals then receive the refund, 

sometimes by check but often through 

a convenient but hard-to-trace prepaid 

debit card. The criminals then wait for 

the mail to deliver the cards and 

checks at abandoned addresses. According to reports in the media, postal 

workers have been harassed, robbed, 

and, in one case, murdered as they 

have made their rounds with their mail 

truck full of debit cards and master 

keys to mailboxes. 

Tax thieves victimize innocent taxpayers in a number of ways. These 

thieves will file fake returns under a 

false name or claim someone who is no 

longer living as a dependent on their 

own forms. Often, the fraud is not detected until an individual files a tax return that is rejected by the IRS because someone else has already falsely 

filed and claimed their return. 

The IRS has detected 940,000 fake returns for 2010 alone, from which identity thieves would have received $6.5 

billion in refunds. And those are just 

the ones they caught early. It is estimated by the IRS that they missed an 

additional 1.5 million returns with possibly fraudulent refunds worth more 

than $5.2 billion. The number of these 

cases has increased by approximately 

300 percent every year since 2008. 

H.R. 4362 is a bipartisan bill that 

strengthens criminal penalties for tax 

return identity thieves. It adds tax return fraud to the list of predicate offenses for aggravated identity theft 

and expands the definition of an ‘‘identity theft victim’’ to include businesses 

and charitable organizations. 

H.R. 4362 also improves coordination 

between the Justice Department and 

State and local law enforcement officials in order to better protect groups 

that are most vulnerable to tax fraud 

from becoming future victims. The 

changes to Federal law proposed by 

H.R. 4362 are important to keep pace 

with this ever-increasing crime. 

Tax identity theft costs American 

families and taxpayers millions of dollars each year. It also results in confusion and needless worry, as taxpayers 

must work to correct the ID problem 

created by the false filers. It is critical 

that we take further steps to reduce 

the number of people who are victimized by this crime. 

Again, I want to thank Congresswoman DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ

for her great work on this issue, and I 

urge my colleagues to join me in support of H.R. 4362. 

I reserve the balance of my time. 

b 2020 

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, 

I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in opposition to H.R. 4362. 

It amends the Federal aggravated identity theft statute to add tax fraud to 

the list of predicate offenses. The penalty for aggravated identity theft is a 

mandatory term of imprisonment of 2 

years or, for a terrorism offense, 5 

years. This bill would, therefore, subject more people to mandatory minimum sentences and, therefore, to all 

of the problems that have been repeatedly shown to be associated with mandatory minimum sentences. 

Fraud and identity theft are a serious and growing problem. But what we 

do to address the problems of fraud and 

identity theft should be measured and 

effective. While I appreciate the sentiments and efforts behind H.R. 4362, I 

cannot support an effort that seeks to 

stop one injustice by applying another. 

Because of the mandatory minimum 

sentences included in H.R. 4362, this 

bill is not an appropriate or effective 

solution to the problem of identity 

theft. 

I’m not saying someone who commits 

these crimes should not be sentenced 

to 2 or 5 years, or even more. But it is 

inappropriate and unjust for Congress 

to sentence an offender based solely on 

the name of the crime, years before 

any of the facts or circumstances of 

the case, or their role in the particular 

case and the character of the defendant, are known and taken into account. 

Mandatory minimum sentences have 

been studied extensively, and have 

been found to distort rational sentencing systems, to discriminate 

against minorities, to waste the taxpayers’ money, and often to violate 

common sense. Even if everyone involved in the case, from the arresting 

officer, the prosecutor, the judge, and 

even the victim, after all of the facts 

and circumstances of the case are presented at trial by the prosecution and 

defense, if they all conclude that the 

mandatory minimum sentence would 

be an unjust sentence for a particular 

defendant in a particular case, it must 

still be imposed. Mandatory minimum 

sentences, based merely on the name of 

the crime, remove the sentencing discretion and rationality from the judge, 

and often require him to impose sentences that violate common sense. This 

is what brings about the result such as 

girlfriends who end up with much more 

time than their crack-dealing boyfriends, and often have to serve terms 

of 10–20 years or more, teenagers having consensual sex with their 

girlfriends getting 10 years, or a recent 

case of Marissa Alexander in Florida, a 

mother of three and a graduate student, who was sentenced to a mandatory minimum of 20 years for discharging a gun to warn off an abusive 

husband during a dispute. A warning 

shot. Ironically, if she had intentionally shot and killed him under 

those circumstances, the maximum 

penalty for voluntary manslaughter in 

that State is 15 years. If you want to 

know how those mandatory minimums 

pass, just watch this bill. 

I offered an amendment at the committee markup of the bill which would 

have provided a maximum sentence of 

4 years and 10 years instead of the 2 or 

5, respectively. That way, offenders 

whose conduct warranted it could be 

sentenced to higher amounts of time, if 

it was appropriate, but for those whose 

conduct did not, such as bit players 

and those who play a minor role in a 

minor offense, the judge could arrive at 

a proper sentence. It is the height of 

legislative arrogance, in my view, for 

Congress to conclude that it has a better perspective to arrive at an appropriate sentence in advance, knowing 

nothing about the facts and circumstances of the case, than a judge 

charged with that responsibility who 

has heard all of the facts and circumstances of the case. 

In addition, Mr. Speaker, the Department of Justice has recently expressed 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
H5512 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 31, 2012 

concerns with the bill which indicate 

that we should have had a legislative 

hearing on the bill to hear from stakeholders and those who have concerns 

about the legislation. Even though I 

support the intent of the sponsors to do 

more to address identity theft, for the 

reasons stated, the 2 and 5 year mandatory minimum sentences make this bill 

indefensible, and I cannot support it. 

I reserve the balance of my time. 

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I 

continue to reserve the balance of my 

time. 

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, 

I yield such time as she may consume 

to the gentlelady from Florida (Ms. 

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ), the sponsor of 

the legislation. 

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. 

Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4362, the Stopping Tax Offenders and Prosecuting 

Identity Theft Act of 2012, or simply 

the STOP Identity Theft Act. 

Many of you have seen the recent 

headlines calling attention to the escalating nationwide epidemic of tax return identity theft. An unsuspecting 

taxpayer goes to file their tax return 

only to be told by the Internal Revenue 

Service that someone else has already 

filed and claimed their hard-earned tax 

refund. 

This happened to one of my constituents, Joan Rubenstein, who was a 64- 

year-old teacher. When her accountant 

filed her 2010 tax return in April of last 

year, he was told by the IRS that she 

had already filed. Joan followed advice 

and filed a police report and reached 

out to the IRS. But after 10 months, 

she still had not received her refund. 

Only after working with my district office were we able secure her refund, 

which she desperately needed to assist 

her daughter with her student loan 

payments. 

For her 2011 tax return, Joan was informed by the IRS taxpayer advocates 

office that she was okay to proceed 

with filing her return this year. Yet, 

shockingly, Joan’s accountant filed 

only to learn that she was once again a 

victim of tax return identity theft for 

a second year in a row. 

No one should have to go through the 

trauma of having their hard-earned tax 

refund stolen, and certainly not 2 years 

in a row. And Joan is not alone. This 

case, unfortunately, is not an anomaly. 

My office has been inundated with constituents who have also had their tax 

refunds stolen, and I know this is a 

rampant problem in Chairman SMITH’s 

district, and his home State of Texas 

as well. The amount of theft that goes 

on with this type of case is really astronomical. 

It’s stories like Joan’s that prompted 

me to file this legislation that is before 

us on the floor today. The crime of tax 

return identity theft has quickly 

emerged over the last few years, and 

Congress must act to quickly address 

this epidemic. Tax return identity 

theft wreaks emotional and financial 

havoc on hardworking taxpayers like 

Joan and costs the Federal Government billions of dollars. 

In 2011 alone, Mr. Speaker, the IRS 

reported that—listen to these numbers—851,602 tax returns and $5.8 billion 

were associated with fraudulent tax returns involving identity theft. That’s a 

280 percent increase since just 2010. 

These tax return identity thieves 

hide behind a veil of technology by 

stealing Social Security numbers and 

filing false electronic returns where 

the payoffs are almost instantaneous. 

Right now, more thieves and criminal 

organizations are turning to this lucrative, low-risk, high-reward crime because law enforcement lacks the kind 

of stiff criminal penalties afforded 

many other forms of identity theft. Essentially, because of the small likelihood of getting caught, and the very 

minimal current penalty, it makes 

sense for these thieves to roll the dice 

because the chances of getting caught 

and actually doing any time at all is 

very low. 

In this instance, technology has simply outstripped the enforcement tools 

that are currently on the books. Basically, this crime is worth it for the 

criminals who are committing it, and 

we need to make sure that it is not 

worth it any more so they don’t have 

incentive to continue and they move 

on to the next thing, and then we can 

go after them for that. 

We must protect the thousands of 

taxpayers like Joan who fall victim to 

this crime, many of whom belong to 

vulnerable groups like seniors, veterans, and even minors. The STOP 

Identity Theft Act brings together several measures to strengthen criminal 

penalties and increase the prosecution 

rate of tax return identity thieves. 

H.R. 4362 will add tax return fraud to 

the list of predicate offenses for aggravated identity theft. The aggravated 

identity theft statute was created in 

2004 to fight identity theft crimes committed to facilitate other types of felonies. However, at the time, the problem 

of tax return identity theft was very 

new, and it wasn’t included as part of 

the predicate offenses under aggravated identity theft. 

Today, it has become an urgent nationwide problem, and we must give 

law enforcement the additional tools 

needed to combat this crime. Each of 

the last two administrations have 

called for adding tax fraud to the predicate offenses under aggravated identity 

theft. With this change, the STOP 

Identity Theft Act will toughen sentencing for tax return identity thieves, 

which will help deter this kind of 

crime. 

Importantly, the legislation also expands the definition of an identity 

theft victim to include businesses and 

charitable organizations. Often these 

organizations have their identities stolen and used in phishing schemes to extract the sensitive information from 

unsuspecting taxpayers used in tax return thefts. Essentially what happens, 

and we’ve all been warned about this, 

you get an email from what you think 

is your bank or the charitable organization that you are used to giving donations to, but it’s really not because 

these thieves have stolen that organization’s identity, and they are asking 

for your personal information, and 

unsuspecting victims give them that 

information. 

b 2030 

By the way, you should never do that 

because your bank and charitable organization won’t ask you for personal information. 

These thieves then use the harvested 

information to file thousands of fraudulent tax returns. In fact, on the IRS 

Web site, it is noted that this type of 

phishing scheme is the most common 

one seen by the IRS. This amendment 

to the identity theft statutes will ensure that thieves who misappropriate 

the identities of any business, be it a 

small business or a nonprofit organization, can be prosecuted. 

The STOP Identity Theft Act also 

calls for better coordination between 

the Department of Justice and State 

and local law enforcement to make the 

most efficient use of the law and resources. My own local law enforcement 

agencies in south Florida have been 

flooded with crime reports of tax return identity theft, and they need all 

the help they can get. 

Finally, the legislation also calls for 

the Department of Justice to report 

back on trends, progress on prosecuting tax return identity theft, and 

recommendations for additional legal 

tools to combat it. Information and 

data about trends on tax return identity theft can be valuable tools to detect and prevent future fraud, and it 

will inform Congress of additional legislative actions that will help in the effort. 

This legislation is just the strong beginning of the congressional effort to 

combat tax return identity theft. I 

know this issue is deeply concerning to 

many of my colleagues, and I look forward to working with them in their efforts. 

This legislation is intended to provide targeted tools for law enforcement 

right away so that it is better prepared 

before next tax season rolls around and 

we have more victims who are really 

going to have months and months of 

problems and billions of dollars lost. 

I want to thank Chairman SMITH for 

your support and your leadership on 

this issue. It really is a pleasure to 

work with you. And as to the various 

organizations that have supported and 

helped craft this legislation, in particular I would like to recognize the 

National Conference of CPA Practitioners and the American Coalition for 

Taxpayers Rights for their support and 

efforts with this bill. 

We must ensure that Federal laws 

are keeping pace with emerging crimes 

such as tax return identity theft. It is 

time to make prosecution of tax return 

identity theft a greater priority. The 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
July 31, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5513 

STOP Identity Theft Act is an important step toward this goal, and I urge 

my colleagues to support this legislation. 

Once again, I thank Chairman SMITH

for working with me on this legislation. 

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Mr. SMITH of Texas. I yield back the 

balance of my time. 

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise 

in support of H.R. 4362, the Stopping Tax Offenders and Prosecuting Identity Theft Act of 

2012. 

Tax-related identity theft is a wide-spread 

problem that must be addressed. The Internal 

Revenue Service (IRS) has reported that 

641,052 taxpayers were affected by identity 

theft last year, more than double the number 

from 2010. This year, all indications point to 

an even greater number of incidents of tax-related identity theft. In April, the IRS had already blocked more than $1.3 billion in potentially fraudulent tax refunds. 

While many taxpayers throughout the country have fallen victim to identity theft, the 

Tampa Bay area that I have the privilege to 

represent has unfortunately become a hotbed 

for this criminal activity. Local police have arrested street criminals with hundreds of Social 

Security Numbers, online tax preparation software, and prepaid debit cards containing tax 

refunds. Thieves are selling innocent people’s 

identities for as little as $10 per Social Security Number. 

After these criminals have stolen an identity, 

they file a false tax return using the victim’s 

name and information. The IRS will send the 

criminal a refund on a prepaid debit card that 

is virtually untraceable. The IRS says that 

these fraudulent refunds could cost the taxpayers $26 billion over the next five years. 

When the victim attempts to file his legal tax 

return, the IRS flags the account as having already received a refund and then begins an 

investigation to determine which return was 

actually filed by the valid taxpayer. Unfortunately, this process can take more than a year 

to complete and the victims are given no indication when they will receive their refund 

check. So now, not only has the victim’s identity been stolen, the IRS will not give him the 

money that he or she is rightfully owed. 

H.R. 4362 is good legislation in that it calls 

on the Department of Justice to do more to 

prosecute tax-related identity theft and 

strengthens criminal penalties on the thieves. 

However, I believe there is much more that 

can be done to combat this growing problem. 

It is clear that the IRS needs to do a better 

job addressing this crime. There are steps that 

the IRS can and should take to prevent identity theft before it sends out fraudulent refunds. 

The IRS needs to do much better assisting the 

victims in getting their proper refunds. In May, 

the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration released a report titled, ‘‘Most Taxpayers Whose Identities Have Been Stolen to 

Commit Refund Fraud Do Not Receive Quality 

Customer Service.’’ More than 40 of my constituents have contacted me to express their 

personal experiences with tax-related identity 

theft and frustrations in getting the refunds 

they are owed from the IRS. 

In April, I wrote to IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, to call on him to address the 

growing problem of identity theft. I asked the 

Commissioner to respond to me about the actions the IRS has taken to combat fraud, how 

the IRS can better utilize its resources to deal 

with identity theft, how we can ensure that victims receive their proper refunds in a timely 

manner, and how the IRS can better collaborate with law enforcement to identify and prosecute identity thieves. Despite the public’s increasing concerns regarding this important 

issue, it took the IRS until the end of June to 

respond to my original inquiry. I would like to 

insert into the RECORD my letter to Commissioner Shulman as well as the response from 

the IRS. 

The House Appropriations Committee, of 

which I am a senior member, has also indicated its strong concerns regarding the IRS’s 

efforts to combat identity theft in the Fiscal 

Year 2013 Financial Services and General 

Government Appropriations bill. Section 103 of 

the legislation would require the IRS to ‘‘institute policies and procedures that will safeguard the confidentiality of taxpayer information and protect taxpayers against identity 

theft.’’ Additionally, the Committee Report directs the IRS to report to the Congress regarding the number of cases of tax-related 

identity theft, the time it takes to resolve 

cases, and the agency’s efforts to expedite 

resolution for these taxpayers. 

The Stopping Tax Offenders and Prosecuting Identity Theft Act is a good start for 

addressing tax-related identity theft. But it is 

only a start. As our national debt approaches 

$16 trillion, we cannot afford to send out billions in fraudulent refunds to criminals. At the 

same time, the victims of this crime should not 

have to wait more than a year to receive the 

money that is owed to them. There is much 

the IRS can do on its own to address these 

issues. However, if more legislative changes 

are needed, I stand ready to work with my colleagues in the House to combat this problem. 

CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

Washington, DC, April 12, 2012. 

Hon. DOUGLAS H. SHULMAN, 

Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 

Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC. 

DEAR COMMISSIONER SHULMAN: As the deadline for individuals to file their tax returns 

approaches, I would like to take this opportunity to call on the IRS to address the issue 

of tax fraud by identity theft. 

As you arc well aware, this crime has been 

particularly prevalent in the Tampa Bay region that I have the privilege to represent. 

Several of my constituents have been victims of identity theft and I thank you and 

your staff for your efforts to help resolve 

their cases. 

Tax season is stressful enough without the 

threat of identity theft. The taxpayers we 

work for should not have to worry that their 

identity has been stolen while they are complying with the law and simply filing their 

tax returns. 

Victims of identity theft can also experience significant delays in receiving their refunds, depriving them of money that many 

were counting on to help in these difficult 

economic times. Often, these innocent citizens are left with no idea of when they will 

be able to get the refund that is rightly 

theirs. 

At a time when the federal government is 

again projected to run a deficit of more than 

$1 trillion, we should not be paying out 

fraudulent tax refunds to identity thieves. 

The IRS should do everything in its power to 

prevent this crime and quickly assist victims. If the IRS requires additional statutory authority to take these steps, I would 

urge you to work with the Congress to find 

appropriate solutions. 

To this end, I ask that you to respond to 

the following questions: 

1. What actions has the IRS taken in this 

tax filing season to address the growing 

number of tax-related identity theft cases? 

2. How can the IRS better focus its resources to deal with identity theft and assist 

victims? 

3. What steps has the IRS taken to ensure 

the timely issuance of refunds to victims of 

identity theft? 

4. How can the IRS better work with federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies to identify, investigate, and prosecute 

identity thieves while protecting the privacy 

of victims? 

Again, thank you for your work to help the 

victims of tax-related identity theft and 

your prompt reply to these questions. With 

best wishes and personal regards, I am. 

Very truly yours, 

C.W. BILL YOUNG, 

Member of Congress. 

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY, 

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, 

Atlanta, GA, June 28, 2012. 

Hon. C.W. BILL YOUNG, 

House of Representatives, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. YOUNG: thank you for your letter 

of April 12, 2012, on our policy and processes 

for identity theft. We appreciate your concern as this is an ongoing problem in the 

country and continues to worsen. We understand and sympathize with your constituents 

who have experienced identity theft problems. 

Identity theft is a complex problem. The 

nature of the problem is constantly changing, as identity thieves continue to find new 

ways to steal personal information. Over the 

past few years, we have seen a significant increase in refund fraud schemes that involve 

identity theft. As a result, we have developed 

a comprehensive identity theft strategy that 

focuses on preventing, detecting, and resolving these cases. 

What actions has the IRS taken in this tax 

filing season to address the growing number 

of tax-related identity theft cases? 

We have taken a number of additional 

steps this tax filing season to prevent identity theft and detect refund fraud before it 

occurs. We designed new identity theft 

screening filters that improved our ability to 

identify false returns before we processed 

them and issued a refund. We also placed 

more identity theft indicators on taxpayer 

accounts to track and manage identity theft 

incidents. 

How can the IRS better focus its resources 

to deal with identity theft and assist victims? 

We continue to assess our needs and resources, and, as a result, we are currently 

undergoing training an additional 1,200 employees to assist with the processing of identity theft cases. We will train these employees to assist identity theft victims. 

What steps has the IRS taken to ensure the 

timely issuance of refunds to victims of identity theft? 

In identity theft situations, our employees 

work to resolve all the issues affecting both 

the taxpayer and the IRS. When we receive a 

fraudulent tax return, we conduct an indepth review to identify the ‘‘valid’’ taxpayer, verify the amounts claimed on the tax 

return, and complete all tax account adjustments. Unfortunately, this process can be 

time consuming. 

Once we verify the taxpayer is a victim of 

tax-related identity theft, we place an identity theft indicator on his or her account. 

This indicator triggers a review of any tax 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
H5514 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE July 31, 2012 

return submitted with the taxpayer’s social 

security number to confirm the validity of 

the return. We continue working to correct 

the taxpayer’s account until we complete the 

correction. 

How can the IRS better work with federal, 

state, and local law enforcement agencies to 

identify, investigate, and prosecute identity 

thieves while protecting the privacy of victims? 

Recently, we, with the Justice Department, announced the results of a nationwide 

investigation of suspected identity theft perpetrators. Working with the Justice Department’s Tax Division and local U.S. Attorneys’ Offices, the nationwide effort targeted 

105 people in 23 states. This coast-to-coast effort included indictments, arrests, and the 

execution of search warrants involving the 

potential theft of thousands of identities and 

taxpayer refunds. In all, the resulting indictments included 939 criminal charges. 

Local law enforcement and other federal 

agencies play a critical role in combating 

identity theft. Thus, an important part of 

our effort to stop identity thieves involves 

collaborating with law enforcement agencies. Although the rules for protecting taxpayer privacy often make it difficult for us 

to share information that local law enforcement might find helpful, we are developing a 

procedure that would enable us to share falsified returns with local law enforcement 

after obtaining a privacy waiver from the innocent taxpayer. Also, proposed legislation 

H.R. 3482 (the Tax Crimes and Identity Theft 

Prevention Act) would expand section 6103 of 

the U.S. tax code to allow limited disclosure 

of returns and return information to law enforcement for the purpose of combating tax 

crimes. 

We share your concerns about identity 

theft. We will continue to review our processes to ensure that we are doing everything 

possible to minimize the affect of identity 

theft to taxpayers and help those who are 

victims of this crime. 

I hope this information is helpful. If you 

need further assistance, please call me at 

(559) 454–6004 or Mr. James Denning (Identification Number 1000160482) at (559) 454–6691 if 

we can assist you further. 

Sincerely, 

ROSALIND C. KOCHMANSKI, 

Field Director, Accounts Management. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. 

MEEHAN). The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from 

Texas (Mr. SMITH) that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 

4362. 

The question was taken. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the 

opinion of the Chair, two-thirds being 

in the affirmative, the ayes have it. 

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I 

object to the vote on the ground that a 

quorum is not present and make the 

point of order that a quorum is not 

present. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. 

The point of no quorum is considered 

withdrawn. 

f 

EDWARD BYRNE MEMORIAL JUSTICE ASSISTANCE GRANT PROGRAM REAUTHORIZATION ACT 

OF 2012 

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I 

move to suspend the rules and pass the 

bill (H.R. 6062) to reauthorize the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program through fiscal 

year 2017. 

The Clerk read the title of the bill. 

The text of the bill is as follows: 

H.R. 6062 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in 

Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Edward 

Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant 

Program Reauthorization Act of 2012’’. 

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF BYRNE JAG 

GRANTS. 

Section 508 of title I of the Omnibus Crime 

Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 

U.S.C. 3758) is amended by inserting before 

the period the following: ‘‘, and $800,000,000 

for each of the fiscal years 2013 through 

2017’’. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 

Texas (Mr. SMITH) and the gentleman 

from Virginia (Mr. SCOTT) each will 

control 20 minutes. 

The Chair recognizes the gentleman 

from Texas. 

GENERAL LEAVE

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I 

ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within 

which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material 

on H.R. 6062 currently under consideration. 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there 

objection to the request of the gentleman from Texas? 

There was no objection. 

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I 

yield myself such time as I may consume. 

Mr. Speaker, I thank my Judiciary Committee colleague Mr. MARINO for his leadership 

on this law enforcement priority. 

The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program is the centerpiece of the 

federal government’s assistance for state and 

local criminal justice initiatives. It was created 

in 2005 when two existing federal grant programs were combined. 

Byrne JAG is a streamlined block grant program that empowers states and localities to 

address specific law enforcement challenges. 

Byrne JAG funding is distributed by the Justice Department based on a formula that considers the jurisdictions’ population and crime 

rates. 

Some of the money is kept at the state level 

but much of it is distributed to localities. 

Jurisdictions can tailor their spending based 

on their own communities’ needs. These include prosecution and court programs, drug 

treatment programs and crime victims programs. 

In my district, Byrne JAG funds have been 

used by the City of Austin to hire additional 

911–call operators, purchase protective gear 

for law enforcement officers and provide training on forensics technology. These are all important public safety initiatives that were 

prioritized by local leaders. 

Byrne JAG is currently authorized at $1.1 

billion per year, although this authorization is 

set to expire at the end of September when 

the current fiscal year ends. 

In fiscal year 2012, Congress appropriated 

$470 million for the Byrne JAG program, although $100 million of this money was a onetime set aside for this year’s presidential nomination conventions. 

H.R. 6062 reauthorizes the Byrne JAG program for five years at $800 million a year. 

H.R. 6062 enjoys bipartisan support and is 

widely supported by the law enforcement community. 

I thank my Judiciary Committee colleague, 

Mr. MARINO, for his work on this issue and I 

urge my colleagues to support the bill. 

I would like to yield as much time as 

he may consume to the gentleman 

from Pennsylvania (Mr. MARINO), who 

is a member of the Judiciary Committee and the sponsor of this legislation. 

Mr. MARINO. Mr. Speaker, Chairman 

SMITH, I rise today in strong support of 

legislation I introduced, H.R. 6062, the 

Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program Reauthorization Act of 2012. 

The Edward Byrne Memorial JAG 

Program is the primary provider of 

Federal criminal justice funding to 

State and local jurisdictions, and it has 

been referred to as the ‘‘cornerstone 

Federal crime-fighting program.’’ 

The JAG program provides State and 

local governments with critically needed resources to support a wide range of 

law enforcement activities, including 

prosecution, prevention, education, 

planning, corrections, treatment, evaluation, and technology. 

As a former district attorney and 

United States attorney, I understand 

the tremendous value of JAG-funded 

projects in fighting crime by improving 

the processes, procedures, and operations of criminal justice systems. 

My legislation being considered 

today reauthorizes the JAG program 

for 5 years—I repeat, for 5 years— 

through fiscal year 2017. 

This legislation is supported by the 

National Criminal Justice Association, 

the International Association of Chiefs 

of Police, the Major Cities Chiefs Association, the National Sheriffs’ Association, the National District Attorneys 

Association, and many more law enforcement organizations. 

H.R. 6062 enjoys bipartisan support, 

including Chairman SMITH and Ranking Member CONYERS of the House Judiciary Committee, who are cosponsors. The legislation was considered by 

the House Judiciary Committee and 

approved by a voice vote on July 18. 

I would like to thank the chairman 

and the committee for their help in ensuring that the authorization for this 

critical program does not lapse. I urge 

all of my colleagues to join in the support of our State and local law enforcement agencies by voting in favor of 

H.R. 6062. 

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, 

I yield myself such time as I may consume. 

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 

6062, the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Program Reauthorization Act of 2012. 

The Federal justice grants reauthorized under this legislation provide critical funding to State and local jurisdictions in their efforts to combat crime. 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE