IRS Admits Wrongdoing, to Pay $50,000 in Leaking of Marriage Group’s Tax Return

[kcjenkins]

Ken McIntyre   June 24, 2014 

 

 

Two years after activists for same-sex marriage obtained the confidential tax return and donor list of a national group opposed to redefining marriage, the Internal Revenue Service has admitted wrongdoing and agreed to settle the resulting lawsuit.

 

The Daily Signal has learned that, under a consent judgment today, the IRS agreed to pay $50,000 in damages to the National Organization for Marriage as a result of the unlawful release of the confidential information to a gay rights group, the Human Rights Campaign, that is NOM’s chief political rival.

 

“Congress made the disclosure of confidential tax return information a serious matter for a reason,” NOM Chairman John D. Eastman told The Daily Signal. “We’re delighted that the IRS has now been held accountable for the illegal disclosure of our list of major donors from our tax return.”

 

The Daily Signal is seeking comment on the settlement  from the IRS and Justice Department.

 

Update: At 5:28 p.m, IRS spokesman Bruce I. Friedland emailed: “Privacy law, specifically Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, prohibits us from commenting.”

 

In his order entered this morning, District Court Judge James C. Cacheris granted the settlement of NOM’s suit against the IRS, which was represented by the Department of Justice.

 

In February 2012, the Human Rights Campaign posted on its web site NOM’s 2008 tax return and the names and contact information of the marriage group’s major donors, including soon-to-be Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney. That information then was published by the Huffington Post and other liberal-leaning news sites.  HRC’s president at the time, Joe Solmonese, was tapped that same month as a national co-chairman of President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign.

 

Eastman said an investigation in the civil lawsuit determined that someone gave NOM’s tax return and list of major donors to Boston-based gay rights activist Matthew Meisel. Email correspondence from Meisel revealed that he told a colleague of “a conduit” to obtain the marriage group’s confidential information.

 

Testifying under oath in a deposition as part of the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Meisel invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself and declined to disclose the identity of his “conduit.”

 

To get at that fact, Eastman said, the National Organization for Marriage  has asked Attorney General Eric Holder to grant immunity from prosecution to Meisel.

 

The $50,000 to be paid by the IRS represents actual damages NOM incurred responding to the illegal disclosure, not punitive damages,  since the marriage group was unable to prove disclosure of the confidential records was deliberate after Meisel took the Fifth.

 

Meisel provided the marriage group’s tax data to the Human Rights Campaign, documents found as part of the investigation show. HRC is among organizations and activists advocating same-sex marriage that routinely describe NOM as a “hate group” or “anti-gay” for making the case for preserving marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

 

“We urge other groups that have suffered similar problems with the IRS to keep pressing until they, too, are fully vindicated,” Eastman said.

 

Eastman was referring to ongoing congressional probes and lawsuits over IRS targeting of tea party and other conservative groups that sought tax-exempt status.

 

In a draft press release on the settlement and admission by the IRS of wrongdoing, Eastman said:

 

It has been a long and arduous process to hold the IRS accountable for their illegal release of our confidential tax return and donor list, which was ultimately given to our chief political rival by the recipient. In the beginning, the government claimed that the IRS had done nothing wrong and that NOM itself must have released our confidential information. Thanks to a lot of hard work, we’ve forced the IRS to admit that they in fact were the ones to break the law and wrongfully released this confidential information.

 

Eastman, a lawyer and law professor, also is a member of the ActRight Legal Foundation team that brought the lawsuit against the federal government and the IRS on NOM’s behalf in October 2013. He said at the time that the Human Rights Campaign removed “redaction layers” from the electronic documents showing they originated at the IRS.

 

In May 2012, Eastman and NOM President Brian Brown asked the Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute the case. Eastman appeared last June before the House Committee on Ways and Means to testify about the illegal disclosure o the marriage group’s donors.

 

Unauthorized disclosure of confidential tax information is a felony offense that can result in five years in prison, but the Department of Justice did not bring criminal charges.

 

“We urge the Congress to explore this issue with the appropriate government officials,” Eastman said. “It’s imperative that all those who have engaged in corrupt practices and illegal acts in the IRS be identified and held accountable.”

[kcjenkins]

I debated with myself posting this in the Politics forum, but decided it is about more than politics, it's about the administration of the tax code fairly and equally.  I think we all need to be aware of any variation from that line, and to know that there is still some alternative to just 'taking it' when it is not.

[SaraEA]

What has been happening at the IRS of late is horrific.  I'm not even thinking about which political party or official is to blame.  Recent events have far worse consequences than whatever these jerks did for whatever ends. They will get their just punishment (hopefully).  Restoring the IRS's position as a fair and impartial administrator of the tax code will take much longer to accomplish, if it ever happens.

 

Until the recent past, the IRS has done a remarkable job of operating within the law (Title XXVI).   They had to set an example so that taxpayers themselves would follow the law under our "voluntary" tax system.  They did things like send out timely 30-day notices, 90-day letters, respond to correspondence in a timely fashion (or ask for more time), followed the statute to the letter before they issued levies or liens.  I went to graduate school with a number of IRS agents and was amazed at how well versed in the law they were.  They knew exactly what they could do, couldn't do, and where they had a little wiggle room.  The would cite Code sections off the top of their heads, which showed me they had a lot of training in that area.

 

The professionalism of IRS employees, their adherence to law and overall efficiency in administering the tax code encouraged Congress to give them more and more responsibilities.  Remember price controls (was it during the Nixon years?).  Administration went to the IRS because their employees were tempered to operating by the law, in all its minute details, not only trained but trainable in new laws.  Social policies like housing credits, education credits, energy credits, and now a chunk of health care were dumped on the tax collector because their employees could handle anything.  If the agency moved at the speed of a rock going uphill like so many other federal agencies, Congress would never be able to make tax changes on December 30 and expect tax collection to proceed as usual during the filing season. They only did it because of all agencies, the IRS could manage it (and did, every time).

 

Of course everyone hates the "tax man," so the IRS had to operate in a way that was beyond reproach.  They did so for most of their history.  Now to find out that they are corruptible and corrupted will damage all the goodwill they have worked for so long to create among taxpayers and Congress.  And of course lawmakers have "punished" the agency by cutting their budget (real cuts, not just cuts in the rate of growth), so it is now public that there are less auditors and the chances of being audited are slimmer than ever.  So fewer auditors will collect less money, fewer people will be compliant so even less will be collected, and our national debt will continue to soar.  What business would cut its accounts receivable department, especially one that yields such a huge return on investment?

 

I have often defended the IRS to my clients.  I have great respect for the agents I know who take their positions of authority seriously and work hard to administer the laws fairly.  I can never take their side again.  The whole thing makes me sick.

[bertrans]

 

What has been happening at the IRS of late is horrific.  I'm not even thinking about which political party or official is to blame.  Recent events have far worse consequences than whatever these jerks did for whatever ends. They will get their just punishment (hopefully).  Restoring the IRS's position as a fair and impartial administrator of the tax code will take much longer to accomplish, if it ever happens.

 

Until the recent past, the IRS has done a remarkable job of operating within the law (Title XXVI).   They had to set an example so that taxpayers themselves would follow the law under our "voluntary" tax system.  They did things like send out timely 30-day notices, 90-day letters, respond to correspondence in a timely fashion (or ask for more time), followed the statute to the letter before they issued levies or liens.  I went to graduate school with a number of IRS agents and was amazed at how well versed in the law they were.  They knew exactly what they could do, couldn't do, and where they had a little wiggle room.  The would cite Code sections off the top of their heads, which showed me they had a lot of training in that area.

 

The professionalism of IRS employees, their adherence to law and overall efficiency in administering the tax code encouraged Congress to give them more and more responsibilities.  Remember price controls (was it during the Nixon years?).  Administration went to the IRS because their employees were tempered to operating by the law, in all its minute details, not only trained but trainable in new laws.  Social policies like housing credits, education credits, energy credits, and now a chunk of health care were dumped on the tax collector because their employees could handle anything.  If the agency moved at the speed of a rock going uphill like so many other federal agencies, Congress would never be able to make tax changes on December 30 and expect tax collection to proceed as usual during the filing season. They only did it because of all agencies, the IRS could manage it (and did, every time).

 

Of course everyone hates the "tax man," so the IRS had to operate in a way that was beyond reproach.  They did so for most of their history.  Now to find out that they are corruptible and corrupted will damage all the goodwill they have worked for so long to create among taxpayers and Congress.  And of course lawmakers have "punished" the agency by cutting their budget (real cuts, not just cuts in the rate of growth), so it is now public that there are less auditors and the chances of being audited are slimmer than ever.  So fewer auditors will collect less money, fewer people will be compliant so even less will be collected, and our national debt will continue to soar.  What business would cut its accounts receivable department, especially one that yields such a huge return on investment?

 

I have often defended the IRS to my clients.  I have great respect for the agents I know who take their positions of authority seriously and work hard to administer the laws fairly.  I can never take their side again.  The whole thing makes me sick.

 Believe me or not, I actually wept in reading your last paragraph. I can only ask you and others like you to continue to believe that the Service is fighting the good (and ever more fifficult) fight - despite its occasional thundershowers of inanity. The Service, I submit, began to change for the worse, whe its leadership began to adapt the bells and whistles, without the substance, of the private sector: complete with back-slapping, glad-handing and happy horse-s**t masters-of-the-universe talk. It was and remains a fad. A big fad - but a fad. And as such, doomed to evanesce.