IRS: So… Our Computer Crashed And Erased All Of Lois Lerner’s Emails

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Dreadclaw69**

Ok, the accusations of IRS targeting have been going on for quite some time now. Just out of curiosity where in the timeline did this alleged hard drive crash occur?

**dogma**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
Ok, the accusations of IRS targeting have been going on for quite some time now. Just out of curiosity where in the timeline did this alleged hard drive crash occur?

The scandal began in early 2013, and the IRS seems to have become aware that the data could not be recovered around April of this year.

Now that doesn't mean that's when the alleged crash occurred, no one seems to know when it may have, or even if "crash" is an accurate description for what occurred; regardless of intention. Basically the IRS's claim is that it attempted to recover data from one of Lois Lerner's hard drives, and was unable to do so. Indeed, given that it was apparently a personal drive, it is likely the only person who could provide information as to when any "crash" occurred is Lerner herself; who will obviously be an unreliable narrator for both cynical and legitimate reasons.

**whembly**

Evidently, the IRS paid an outside firm, Sonasoft, to archive that data for long-term retrieval. What's interesting is that the contract got canceled just weeks after Lois Lerner’s hard-drive failure.

...
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) cancelled its longtime relationship with an email-storage contractor just weeks after ex-IRS official Lois Lerner’s computer crashed and shortly before other IRS officials’ computers allegedly crashed.

The IRS signed a contract with Sonasoft, an email-archiving company based in San Jose, California, each year from 2005 to 2010. The company, which partners with Microsoft and counts The New York Times among its clients, claims in its company slogans that it provides “Email Archiving Done Right” and “Point-Click Recovery.” Sonasoft in 2009 tweeted, “If the IRS uses Sonasoft products to backup their servers why wouldn’t you choose them to protect your servers?”

Sonasoft was providing “automatic data processing” services for the IRS throughout the January 2009 to April 2011 period in which Lerner sent her missing emails.

But Sonasoft’s six-year business relationship with the IRS came to an abrupt end at the close of fiscal year 2011, as congressional investigators began looking into the IRS conservative targeting scandal and IRS employees’ computers started crashing left and right.
...

The coincidents just keeps piling up here...

O.o

Sharyl Attkisson is reporting that the Committee is asking for 15 Technology Questions for the IRS Prior to Monday’s Hearing:

In advance of tomorrow evening’s hearing on the Lost Lois Lerner emails, House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) has asked the IRS Commissioner to provide answers to 15 technology questions.

On Fri. June 13, the IRS notified Congress that key emails during a two year time frame, January 2009 to April 2011, were irretrievably lost due to a “crash” of Lerner’s hard drive and of a server. The IRS also said that computer crashes affected six other IRS employees who are connected to the investigation.

After the Friday notification, the Oversight Committee requested that the IRS make Thomas Kane, the IRS Acting Deputy Chief Counsel for Procurement and Administration, available for a transcribed interview about the Lerner emails but the IRS declined. The Committee then requested a briefing “to discuss the IRS’s e-mail systems, data retention policies, and document production processes” but the IRS declined that request as well.

“Because the IRS has refused to provide basic information about these matters to the Committee in advance of the hearing, and in the interest of promoting a frank and thorough discussion at the hearing, I ask that you provide answers to the factual questions posed below,” writes Issa in a letter addressed to Commissioner John Koskinen on Saturday.

At a hearing before the House Ways and Means Committee Friday, Koskinen testified that there’s been no attempt to intentionally destroy documents. Republicans were skeptical while Democrats apologized to Koskinen and accused Republicans of being obsessed with Area 51-like conspiracies.

Here are the 15 questions the Oversight Committee has submitted to the IRS (including subparts). Answers are due prior to Monday’s scheduled 7pm hearing:

1. Please explain the failure of the hard drive on Lois Lerner’s computer in or around 2011, including the following information:

Please provide the date of the failure of the hard drive.

Please identify the type of failure – hardware or software – of the hard drive.

Please identify all IRS employees who had any responsibility or role in examining or recovering data from the hard drive between January 1, 2011, and August 31, 2011.

Please explain the steps, and provide the corresponding dates, taken by the IRS to attempt to recover data from the hard drive between January 1, 2011, and August 31, 2011.

Please explain whether the IRS issued a new computer or hard drive to Lois Lerner following the hard drive failure in or around 2011.

2. Please explain the IRS’s discovery that the hard drive failure on Lois Lerner’s computer resulted in the destruction of documents responsive to the Committee’s subpoenas of August 2, 2013, and February 14, 2014, including the following information:

Please identify all IRS employees who had any responsibility or role in identifying, reviewing, redacting, or producing documents to the Committee in 2013 and 2014.

Please identify the IRS employee who initially discovered the hard drive failure on Lois Lerner’s computer in the course of reviewing, redacting, or producing documents to the Committee in 2013 and 2014.

Please provide the date on which you learned of the hard drive failure on Lois Lerner’s computer.

Please explain how you learned of the hard drive failure on Lois Lerner’s computer.

Please provide the date on which you learned that the hard drive failure on Lois Lerner’s computer resulted in the destruction of documents responsive to the Committee’s subpoenas of August 2, 2013, and February 14, 2014.

Please explain how you learned that the hard drive failure on Lois Lerner’s computer resulted in the destruction of documents responsive to the Committee’s subpoenas of August 2, 2013, and February 14, 2014.

Please identify the IRS employee(s) who informed you that the hard drive failure on Lois Lerner’s computer resulted in the destruction of documents responsive to the Committee’s subpoenas of August 2, 2013, and February 14, 2014.

3. Please explain the steps, and provide the corresponding dates, taken by the IRS to attempt to recover data from the hard drive(s) on Lois Lerner’s computer(s) between May 10, 2013, and the present, including the following information:

Please identify all IRS employees who had any responsibility or role in recovering data from the hard drive(s) on Lois Lerner’s computer(s) between May 10, 2013, and the present.

Please explain whether the IRS used a clean room or similar controlled-environment facility to attempt to recover data from the hard drive(s) on Lois Lerner’s computer(s).

Please provide the name and location of the clean room or similar controlled-environment facility used to attempt to recover data from the hard drive(s) on Lois Lerner’s computer(s).

Please provide the date(s) on which the hard drive(s) on Lois Lerner’s computer(s) was sent to a clean room or similar controlled-environment facility.

4. Please identify all IRS employees who had any responsibility or role in maintaining or servicing IRS e-mail exchange servers between 2009 and the present.

5. Please identify all vendors and outside contractors used by the IRS for the following purposes:

To develop, service, or maintain the IRS’s e-mail systems.

To develop, service, or maintain the IRS’s e-mail exchange servers.

To recycle or destroy IRS hard drives.

To provide mobile phone and data services.

6. Please identify the IRS employee(s) most knowledgeable about the following information:

The IRS’s e-mail systems.

The IRS’s e-mail exchange servers.

The IRS’s mobile phone devices and service contracts.

The IRS’s document retention policies and procedures.

Digital forensics and data recovery.

The IRS’s asset inventory of computers and mobile phones.

7. Please identify the IRS employee(s) with last known custody or control of the following items:

IRS computer(s) and mobile phone(s) issued to Lois Lerner.

IRS hard drive(s) or external drive(s) issued to Lois Lerner.

IRS e-mail exchange back-up tapes or drives.

IRS mobile phone records.

The IRS’s asset inventory of computers and mobile phones.

IRS “trouble ticket,” “incident ticket,” or “requisition request” A “trouble ticket,” “incident tickets,” or “requisition request” refers to any written record of malfunction, failure, or error relating to IRS electronic hardware. logs or records from January 1, 2011, to August 31, 2011.

IRS back-up logs or records for e-mail exchange servers between January 1, 2011, and June 30, 2011.

IRS “trouble ticket,” “incident ticket,” or “requisition request” See supra note 7. logs or records from May 10, 2013, to the present.

8. Please explain the IRS’s document retention policies and procedures, including the following information:

Please identify the IRS document(s) that details the IRS’s document retention policies and procedures.

Please identify the IRS employee responsible for compliance and enforcement of the IRS’s document retention policies and procedures.

9. Please explain the architecture and structure of the IRS’s e-mails systems and exchange servers, including the following information:

Please identify the type of e-mail service used by the IRS.

Please identify the type of e-mail exchange server used by the IRS.

Please explain whether personal storage table (.pst) files are stored on the hard drives of the computers operated by IRS employee or on an IRS network or shared drive.

10. Please explain the architecture and structure of the IRS’s electronic data restoration and archival systems.

Please explain whether the IRS has separate systems for data restoration and data archival.

Please explain the IRS’s restoration and archival back-up policies for e-mail exchange servers between January 1, 2011, and June 30, 2011.

Please explain the IRS’s restoration and archival back-up policies for hard drives and shared drives between January 1, 2011, and June 30, 2011.

11. Please quantify the number of forensic images of the failed hard drive on Lois Lerner’s computer that currently exist.

12. Please quantify the number of forensic images of the failed hard drive on Lois Lerner’s computer that existed as of August 31, 2011.

13. Please quantify the following for the period January 1, 2011, to June 30, 2011:

The number “trouble tickets,” “incident tickets,” or “requisition requests” See supra note 7. issued for hard drive-related malfunctions on IRS computers.

The number of software malfunctions of hard drives on IRS computers.

The number of hardware malfunctions of hard drives on IRS computers.

The number of successful retrievals of data from hard drive-related malfunctions on IRS computers.

14. Please provide the barcode(s) for IRS computer(s) issued to Lois Lerner.

15. Please provide the barcode(s) for IRS mobile phone(s) issued to Lois Lerner.

This will be the turning point this whole ordeal.

**Kanluwen**

The only coincidence is your appalling grammar.

Seriously, at this point it's just hilarious to continue seeing the witch hunt ongoing.

**whembly**

Kanluwen wrote:

Seriously, at this point it's just hilarious to continue seeing the witch hunt ongoing.

Sure... keep on laughing boyo...

Whether Sonasoft gave the backups back to the IRS or not, Sonasoft should be able to prove/disprove the claim that the backups were only kept for 6 months and then destroyed. As a contractor, Sonasoft would have been extremely careful to complying with federal regulations. I find it hard to believe that they would have destroyed any backups themselves.

It's also telling that this didn't appear in any testimony from IRS officials. The IRS commish's opening statement at the hearing spoke of how hard the IRS worked to retrieve that data... but, he didn’t mention any effort to restore the data from a Sonasoft backup, or mention any outside contractor at all for that matter. The existence of this contract appears to have been a better-kept secret than NSA snooping through Internet service providers.

**Kanluwen**

Why does he have to mention it?

**motyak**

I hope the irs bloke/gal gets the same level of treatment as whoever got investigated when the last administration did something similar with their emails, and that they give the same level of detailed answers

**whembly**

motyak wrote:
I hope the irs bloke/gal gets the same level of treatment as whoever got investigated when the last administration did something similar with their emails, and that they give the same level of detailed answers

Um... okay?

Meh...the IRS is an organization that operates on the principle of guilt until proven innocent in its dealings with the taxpayer. We owe the IRS that same standard.

**Kanluwen**

whembly wrote:
motyak wrote:
I hope the irs bloke/gal gets the same level of treatment as whoever got investigated when the last administration did something similar with their emails, and that they give the same level of detailed answers

Um... okay?

Meh...the IRS is an organization that operates on the principle of guilt until proven innocent in its dealings with the taxpayer. We owe the IRS that same standard.

Not true. It operates on the same principle of "innocent until proven guilty". That is why they conduct an audit if there are irregularities, rather than y'know just handing down fines/jailtime.

**whembly**

Kanluwen wrote:
whembly wrote:
motyak wrote:
I hope the irs bloke/gal gets the same level of treatment as whoever got investigated when the last administration did something similar with their emails, and that they give the same level of detailed answers

Um... okay?

Meh...the IRS is an organization that operates on the principle of guilt until proven innocent in its dealings with the taxpayer. We owe the IRS that same standard.

Not true. It operates on the same principle of "innocent until proven guilty". That is why they conduct an audit if there are irregularities, rather than y'know just handing down fines/jailtime.

And if you can't justify those irregularities... then what happens?

**Frazzled**

The Guillotine!

The presumption is against you. Its not at all like "innocent until proven guilty." You must prove your innocence.

**Kanluwen**

whembly wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
whembly wrote:
motyak wrote:
I hope the irs bloke/gal gets the same level of treatment as whoever got investigated when the last administration did something similar with their emails, and that they give the same level of detailed answers

Um... okay?

Meh...the IRS is an organization that operates on the principle of guilt until proven innocent in its dealings with the taxpayer. We owe the IRS that same standard.

Not true. It operates on the same principle of "innocent until proven guilty". That is why they conduct an audit if there are irregularities, rather than y'know just handing down fines/jailtime.

And if you can't justify those irregularities... then what happens?

I don't know Whembly, you tell me?

What happens? What dark and sinister thing happens when you have unexplainable/unjustifiable irregularities in your taxes?

**Frazzled**

Fines, assessments, jail times, all after twelve rounds with their star employee...Klubber Lang.

This audit will involve...PAIN!

**whembly**

Frazzled wrote:
Fines, assessments, jail times, all after twelve rounds with their star employee...Klubber Lang.

This audit will involve...PAIN!

This is his picture...isn't it?

.

**Frazzled**

Close, thats his immediate superviser.

**Jihadin**

Kanluwen wrote:
whembly wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
whembly wrote:
motyak wrote:
I hope the irs bloke/gal gets the same level of treatment as whoever got investigated when the last administration did something similar with their emails, and that they give the same level of detailed answers

Um... okay?

Meh...the IRS is an organization that operates on the principle of guilt until proven innocent in its dealings with the taxpayer. We owe the IRS that same standard.

Not true. It operates on the same principle of "innocent until proven guilty". That is why they conduct an audit if there are irregularities, rather than y'know just handing down fines/jailtime.

And if you can't justify those irregularities... then what happens?

I don't know Whembly, you tell me?

What happens? What dark and sinister thing happens when you have unexplainable/unjustifiable irregularities in your taxes?

You get audit? (I know I know) but if you get subpoena you can like ignore that right?

(punchline

)

**whembly**

The hearing is 7pm tonight. I'm really interested in the following:

4. Name all IRS employees that worked on agency email servers between 2009 and 2014.

5. Name all IRS contractors that worked on agency email or hard drive systems.

6. Give the names of the IRS employees most knowledgeable about email servers and data retention.

7. Identify the IRS employees that last had possession of Lerner’s computer, cell phones, hard drive, backup email tapes and information about errors in IRS electronic hardware.

8. Give us all relevant information about IRS document retention policies.

9. Name the type of email service the IRS uses and the type of email exchange server and tell us whether any email is stored on an IRS shared drive.

10. Explain in detail the IRS’ electronic data restoration and archival systems.

Also... for levity... I saw this on my twitter feed and was directed to the New York Post's page. The NYP wins:

Spoiler:

**-Shrike-**

Well, at least it looks like they should get some useful information.

... or not. Who knows?

**sebster**

Dreadclaw69 wrote:
And for many people, on both sides of the political spectrum, the convenient loss of the emails (and the delay in reporting it given that they knew 4 months ago) is disconcerting. Even more so when the emails lost to date appear to affect mainly those involved in the accusations of targeting.

Absolutely. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there's nothing here to suggest a cover up, there's plenty. I'm just saying that this is the second time after Benghazi that Republicans have got their hands on a small thing, then jumped five steps forward in their accusations. In this case the jump from 'there appears to be an attempt to cover up something' to 'therefore they are covering up the deliberate targeting of conservative groups for overtly political purposes'.

I know that a lot of people I have spoken with have wondered what the IRS's response would be if they were unable to file their tax returns because their hard drive crashed.

Try it!

Actually don't try it, they will not appreciate the joke and likely just rip you a new one.

You are correct, it was not just conservative groups that were targeted. It just so happened that they were targeted in the overwhelming majority of instances. I was about to agree with you concerning the possibility of a policy snafu, but the fact that the IRS apologized for, and admitted to, targeting conservative groups because of certain phrases doesn't really leave a lot of room for maneuver - especially when the IG found that they had deliberately misapplied policy when dealing with conservative groups. Lest we forget they also give misleading information to Senators about targeting before Lerner herself broke the story, and they have been unable to counter the accusations that they passed tax information and donor lists to political enemies of some targeted groups.

What the IRS apologised for falls exactly under the description of a policy snafu. The IRS recognised the tax and policy issues surrounding the rapid rise of 501(c)(4) groups and set about ensuring groups weren't exploiting the status (and remember what's been lost in this is that a number of groups were exploiting this, not just in a tax avoidance sense but in an out and out fraud sense - taking in large amounts from donors and spending little of it on their stated purpose).

And yeah, most of the groups targeted were conservative, but most of the new groups formed were conservative - we're talking about the period in which the Tea Party grew rapidly in power.

What actually needs to be established is whether there was any systematic attempt to judge conservative groups more harshly. And we're a mile away from establishing that.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:
I'm convinced that you just don't care anymore. If a Republican administration use any agency to target liberal/progressive groups over conservative... don't complain here then.

Screw that line of thought. Just don't even fething think that. People get all caught up in politics and trying to score a win for their side, and they don't realise that none of that matters one bit - you're side is up and maybe wins some elections, but sooner or later the other side will be up and win some, and the whole thing will just roll on.

What actually matters is good, effective and honest institutions. If a Republican administration tries to use government bodies to target their enemies, then that has to be completely unacceptable to everyone, no matter what side they cheer for. Just as if any part of the DNC actually tried to use the IRS to target conservative groups for political gain, then it's completely unacceptable.

The only question that matters is what part of any attempted manipulation can be proven. The idea you're suggesting above, that we start thinking 'oh well the other side did it before so this instance is okay' is completely fething unacceptable.

And of course, the other idea that you're actually following in this thread, is that by noticing suspicious elements about this issue, we should then believe that this must be a deliberate, planned act of political manipulation that goes all the way to the President is also completely fething unacceptable.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:
that IRS were in the right to target only conservatives.

Factually false.

**whembly**

sebster wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

whembly wrote:
that IRS were in the right to target only conservatives.

Factually false.

Factually true. Even the IRS' own IG confirmed it.

**Dreadclaw69**

sebster wrote:
Absolutely. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying there's nothing here to suggest a cover up, there's plenty. I'm just saying that this is the second time after Benghazi that Republicans have got their hands on a small thing, then jumped five steps forward in their accusations. In this case the jump from 'there appears to be an attempt to cover up something' to 'therefore they are covering up the deliberate targeting of conservative groups for overtly political purposes'.

Politicians over egging something to get their base fired up before the mid-terms and keep the pressure on an Administration that has terrible approval ratings? Say it isn't so

The problem is that if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, most people don't think it's a flamingo;
- First accusations
- statement before Congress that no targeting is occurring
- Head of the group that was accused of targeting admits it
- Apology followed by claim it was low level staff in one office
- Evidence shows that it was multiple offices and senior staff involved
- Claim made that targeting was non-partisan
- Documents show that applications with "Tea Party" and/or "Patriot" were flagged
- Evidence shows that IRS overstepped their authority when auditing certain individuals
- Evidence that confidential tax documents leaked to political opponents
- Lerner called to testify
- Lerner pleads 5th
- Lerner's emails for the period in question lost with an excuse that many people call into question (including those in the tech field)
- Emails from others also involved in this investigation are also lost

As I said, there is a significant credibility gap

**whembly**

And there's another point I want to bring up...

Folks are trying to excuse the IRS for losing Lerner's email, because emails were lost during Bush's ordeal over the DA firings. In the classic "the other guy did it too!" argument. Those emails were disclosed as “lost” but then were found.

The difference with the IRS, is they said they had them all and now report them as “lost.”

FYI... still trying to catch up to last night's fireworks.

**d-usa**

whembly wrote:
And there's another point I want to bring up...

Folks are trying to excuse the IRS for losing Lerner's email, because emails were lost during Bush's ordeal over the DA firings. In the classic "the other guy did it too!" argument.

The classic "the other guy did it too" argument is your playbook, so don't try to pin it on others.

I posted the link to the Bush emails and spend multiple posts trying to explain to you why I linked to them. The fact that you now claim it was a "the other guy did it too" argument just makes it clear that talking to you about anything politics is a waste of time since you clearly don't read what others are saying.

Because if you can turn page after page of my saying this:

"This excuse is bs and everybody knows it is bs. But it is just plausible enough to make sure that there is enough reasonable doubt to keep any of them from getting into trouble. The Republicans are going to use it to fire up their base and scream and shout, but in the end they will not do anything because they want to be able to do the same in the future. Just like the Democrats screamed and shouted when Bush "lost" emails but they didn't change anything because they want to be able to do the same. But the only important thing is to get their base fired up and pretend that they are outraged so that voters will flock to them, but they have to do it in a way that lets them continue to do that when it is their turn. There is no iron-clad case here and there are so many areas where this could have happened that no charges will ever get filed because they were careful enough to present a scenario where losing the emails could somehow just be considered an "honest mistake" which will prevent any judicial actions against them. Again, it's bs and we all know it's bs. But the Republicans will not to anything about it, just like the Democrats will not do anything about it. They want to pay lip service to us, but want to be able to keep on doing it. It's bs, but no amount of us bitching about it is going to change that."

Into this:

"the other guys did it too!"

Then there is really no point not to ignore you in any future OT posts.

**whembly**

d-usa wrote:

Then there is really no point not to ignore you in any future OT posts.

Have at it bro.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think *anything* will change except for some token rule change (ie, moving tax-exemption determination to different agency).

But that doesn't mean, we as voters, sweep these things under the rug because some previous administrations got away with it.

**d-usa**

Button pushed then.

**whembly**

d-usa wrote:
Button pushed then.

Can you hear me now?*

*I've always wanted to do that....

**IronWarLeg**

Kanluwen wrote:
whembly wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
whembly wrote:
motyak wrote:
I hope the irs bloke/gal gets the same level of treatment as whoever got investigated when the last administration did something similar with their emails, and that they give the same level of detailed answers

Um... okay?

Meh...the IRS is an organization that operates on the principle of guilt until proven innocent in its dealings with the taxpayer. We owe the IRS that same standard.

Not true. It operates on the same principle of "innocent until proven guilty". That is why they conduct an audit if there are irregularities, rather than y'know just handing down fines/jailtime.

And if you can't justify those irregularities... then what happens?

I don't know Whembly, you tell me?

What happens? What dark and sinister thing happens when you have unexplainable/unjustifiable irregularities in your taxes?

Sigh, tried to stay out of this thread since I get to hear this garbage all day anyway... Even from taxpayers who think we target them because they are Republican (no, we target you when you don't do your taxes right, or don't pay withholding/estimated taxes like the law requires) there is no special alert on our screen that pops up with flashy lights saying you are a Republican or Democrat, I only know this information when you tell me this information, AND I DONT CARE.

For those that don't know, I work for the IRS, as a collections rep.

Here what happens when you have an irregularity on your taxes:

For the sake of simplicity, since every case is different as to the reason, we will go with Suzie claiming her bedroom as a home office and taking tax credits for it.

1. Suzie files her taxes.
2. IRS randomly flags tax returns with certain audit risks, such as EIC or other credits that are often abused, but many are simply random.
3. Suzie's return gets flagged, oh noes! This can happen up to 3 years after the original filing date, we process MILLIONS of returns so yeah this can take some time.
4. IRS sends Suzie an audit report, along with a publication with instructions on how to prove the that Suzie can claim the credit.
5. Suzie typically will have 45 days to produce proof that she can claim the credit. This amount of time can be variable depending on the complexity of the situation, Exam will work with taxpayers if additional time is needed, to an extent.

Now here's where things can go wrong or right for Suzie.

Scenario 1: Suzie shows proof

1. Suzie responds to the letter and provides the requested documentation.
2. IRS receives and processes Suzie's correspondence
3. IRS agrees and exam is closed, all is well.
4. If IRS needs further information, they will request it, then see step 1, or scenario 2.

Scenario 2: Suzie ignores the letter

1. IRS doesn't receive a response and after 45 days, assesses a balance to Suzie's account.
2. IRS sends a notice to Suzie, saying "hey you have a balance, call us."
3. After another 45 days if no response the IRS sends a second notice, a bit stronger wording and advising that if no response they may be levied or other things.
4. After ANOTHER 45 days the IRS sends the certified letter called an LT11, or Final Notice of Intent to Levy, basically call us before the next 45 day period is up or be levied.
5. If still no response levies are issued and possible liens are filed.

This is where I come into play, calling one of the numbers on the above notices of balance will get you in touch with my department, Automated Collection Systems, where I will happily assist you in setting up a payment plan, placing you in CNC, or assisting with extensions to pay etc.. At this point if you want to have an audit reconsideration done you certainly can, but given the time already granted for the original reconsideration noted above, collection action will continue until you prove the balance is not valid (we gave you plenty of chances).

So there you have it folks, we don't send out black suburbans to come take your children to labor camps or throw you in jail because you claimed your girlfriends cousins kids on your return.

People love to blame the IRS when they screw up their taxes, the IRS is the bad guy when you claim dependents that are not yours and the IRS says no, or go exempt at your work so your check is bigger but have no taxes to cover your liability in April, or forget to include income on your return or the countless other ways people, either wilfully or not, screw up their taxes. Notice I use "you/your" on all of this, because none of this is the IRS doing, its YOUR signature on the bottom of that 1040, not ours.

I am not some IRS loving tree hugger, but if statements are going to be thrown around as though they are fact, please be sure that they are indeed factual, and not an off the cuff remark about an agency you don't happen to like.

** Note, in case for whatever reason one of my supervisors stumbles across this: I speak on no official authority granted by the IRS, the above views are my own and simply an account of my job.

**Jihadin**

d-usa wrote:Button pushed then.

whembly wrote:
d-usa wrote:
Button pushed then.

Can you hear me now?*

*I've always wanted to do that....

Dammit..almost choked on my coffee

**whembly**

@IronWartLeg...

It's the leadership of the IRS that we're focusing on, not the bulk of the IRS' staff.

To be fair, I don't envy what you do... no one likes paying their taxes.

It's the fact that, with the apparent targeting to conservative groups, the belated discovery and admission to Congress that it lost a chunk of Lerner’s e-mails is inexcusable. Just as inexcusable as similar e-mail gaps that were discovered during investigations of the Clinton administration’s fundraising practices, the Bush administration’s firing of the DA, and his memos on Enhanced Interrogation policy (which were eventually found).

Unfortunately, given how partisan John Koskinen is... I believe the IRS' credibility is at stake here.

**Ouze**

Kanluwen wrote:
The only coincidence is your appalling grammar.

Seriously, at this point it's just hilarious to continue seeing the witch hunt ongoing.

While I do think that the Republicans are using this as a political hammer, I don't think it matters because even a bad tool can sometimes be used to do a good job. I think there are legitimate concerns and I think those are good questions. "We lost all the emails" has been the go-to excuse for 2 administrations now, and it's time that we finally put a stake through that; because although there are lots of reasons and excuses for why it could legitimately happen, there aren't really any for why it should happen.

Emails disappearing is only possible through truly poor IT policy or intentional malfeasance, and with the level of spending the IRS does on IT infrastructure, neither explanation is satisfactory, not in 2014. The timelines alone are so suspicious that an investigation truly is warranted.