SIGN UP NOW
Follow the NWC on Twitter!Follow the NWC on Facebook!

NWC and Others Outline Objections to Proposed Rules During Public Hearing

Dean Zerbe and Felipe Bohnet-Gomez, representing the National Whistleblowers Center and Kohn, Kohn, and Colapinto LLP, respectively, presented remarks today at a public hearing on the IRS’s proposed regulations on its Whistleblower Program. Zerbe spoke on the policy implications of the regulations in their current form, and underscored the importance of whistleblowers in assisting the IRS to fight fraud effectively and efficiently. Bohnet-Gomez outlined objections to proposed regulations’ definition of certain key terms, which narrow the scope and effectiveness of the whistleblower program far beyond the language of the 2006 law.

All in attendance at today’s public hearing—including other attorneys and advocacy groups—agreed that the regulations should not be finalized in their current form. In addition to concern over the IRS’s definition of key terms, speakers also disagreed with the Service’s treatment of Net Operating Losses (NOLs) and other tax attributes, as well as a variety of provisions relating to the administration of the IRS Whistleblower Program and the Service’s communication with whistleblowers. Currently, whistleblowers face wait times of several years before their claims are processed, during which they typically do not receive any communication from the IRS regarding the status of their claim.

The National Whistleblowers Center submitted extensive written comments on the proposed regulations on February 19, 2013, and is available here.

A copy of Dean Zerbe’s presentation on whistleblower policy can be found here.

My previous blog post on this issue can be found here.

 

Dean Zerbe Gives Guidance for IRS Whistleblower Submissions

Today on Forbes.com, Dean Zerbe, the National Whistleblower Center’s Senior Policy Analyst, explains the potential issues that may be slowing or sidetracking submissions at the IRS Whistleblower Office. He also gives detailed insight into issues that may cause delay that whistleblowers cannot control.  The IRS Whistleblower Program: What To Do When The IRS Isn't Moving On Your Submission tackles the most commonly asked questions in a simple and straightforward way.

 

 

 

IRS Tries to Duck Whistleblowers

Late Friday, the Department of Treasury posted a notice in the Federal Register regarding the IRS's proposed rules for its whistleblower office (26 CFR Part 301 [Reg-141066-09]. The notice announces a public hearing on the proposed rules for the IRS Whistleblower Program. I previously shared information about these proposed rules here: IRS On Verge Of Crippling Whistleblower Program and here: IRS Whistleblowers Received Record Payouts in 2012, But Future Recoveries At Risk. In addition, the National Whistleblower Center issued an Action Alert regarding these proposed rules encouraging the public to submit comments. New IRS Regulations Hurt Whistleblowers, Help Swiss Bankers!

These proposed rules have caused uproar in the whistleblower community. On March 4 CNN Money noted that “"A grassroots campaign started by the National Whistleblower Center...saw more than 670 barb-laden letters from lawyers and ordinary citizens, an unusually high number, flood Miller's desk over the past two months.” Also see: NWC Threatens Legal Action if IRS Does Not Bend on Whistleblower Rules.

This notice, filed late on Friday, which gives the public two business days to respond, has further enraged whistleblower advocates. See IRS to Gut Whistleblower Program-Publishes Notice in Fed Registry Providing Little to No Time for Public Comment.

The public hearing is being held on Wednesday, April 10, 2013, at 10:00 a.m., in the IRS Auditorium, Internal Revenue Service Building, 1111, Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20224.  

Persons who submitted written comment by February 19, 2013, will be permitted to present oral comments at the hearing. A period of 10 minutes is allotted to each person for presenting oral comments. If you wish to present oral comments, you must submit an outline of the topics to be addressed and the amount of time to be denoted to each topic. The IRS must receive outlines of the topics to be discussed at the public hearing by Wednesday, March 20, 2013.

Send Submissions to: 

CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–141066–09), room 5205
Internal Revenue Service,
P.O. Box 7604
Ben Franklin Station
Washington, DC 20044.

Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through Friday to:

CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG–141066–09),
Couriers Desk, Internal Revenue
Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20224

Submissions may also be sent electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at www.regulations.gov (REG–141066–09).

Due to building security procedures, visitors must enter at the Constitution Avenue entrance. In addition, all visitors must present photo identification to enter the building. For information about having your name placed on the building access list to attend the hearing, contact Oluwafunmilayo Taylor at (202) 622–7180.

 

IRS On Verge Of Crippling Whistleblower Program

Whistleblower Advocates Submit Extensive Comment  in Response to Proposed IRS Regulations

Yesterday, the National Whistleblower Center ("NWC"), the National Whistleblowers Legal Defense and Education Fund ("Fund"), Bradley Birkenfeld, Scott Rosen, and Gene Ross jointly submitted a comprehensive 84-page comment on the IRS's proposed rules for its whistleblower office (26 CFR Part 301 [Reg-141066-09]).  Click here to view their comment.

The critical issues addressed in the joint submission include: 

  • IRS rules that would severely restrict the scope of the IRS whistleblower program by limiting "collected proceeds" to violations of Title 26 only. The joint comment states that the statute was intended to cover all violations enforced by the IRS, even if they are in Title 31 or Title 18. A strong whistleblower program is needed to prevent tax fraud related to offshore banking.

  • The proposed IRS rules seek to define "related action" in an unreasonably and arbitrarily narrow manner. The NWC's position is that whistleblowers that provide information about a type of tax shelter or other complex transaction that the IRS would not have proceeded on otherwise, should receive an award for all proceeds collected as a result of that information.

  • The joint submission further states that the IRS needs to set reasonable deadlines for administrative action, both to encourage whistleblowing and to increase accountability. The IRS should promulgate regulations adopting and expanding on the guidelines in Commissioner Miller's June 20, 2012 Memorandum.

Dean Zerbe, the NWC's Senior Policy Analyst who also represents tax whistleblowers such as Bradley Birkenfeld, released the following statement in regard to the proposed rules:

"I appreciate the time and energy that the IRS put into these proposed regulations. However, the proposed regulations are the beginning not the end.  My hope is that the IRS will listen closely to the whistleblower community and that we can at the end of the day have final regulations that are based on the plain language of the statute and meet the policy goals of Congress of encouraging whistleblowers to come forward by providing them awards based on the information they provide.  It is the honest taxpayers of this country that will benefit from having a successful whistleblower program in place that helps the IRS address those engaged in tax evasion." 

Stephen Kohn, Executive Director of the NWC and who also represents Birkenfeld and other tax whistleblowers stated, "The future of the IRS Whistleblower program is on the line. The final rules will either encourage employees to risk their careers to do the right thing, or they will create a straight jacket over the law thus thwarting its effectiveness."

The National Whistleblowers Center encourages U.S. Tax-payers to submit comments on the proposed rules. Click here to learn how.

IRS Whistleblowers Received Record Payouts in 2012, But Future Recoveries At Risk

The Internal Revenue Service Whistleblower Office announced that it paid a record $125.4 million in 2012 to whistleblowers that provided evidence of tax cheating, but new rule changes place future recoveries at risk.  The IRS report, which was made public on Wednesday, stated that more than 80 percent of the total paid out by the IRS in 2012 went to Bradley Birkenfeld, a former employee of UBS AG who received $104 million.

In total, the IRS issued 128 whistleblower rewards for the 2012 fiscal year, though just 12 of those cases involved more than $2 million in unpaid taxes.  Whistleblowers helped the IRS collect more than $592 million.  

However, proposed rules to the IRS whistleblower law are drawing criticism from the NWCU.S. Sen. Grassley and others. The IRS’s proposed rules will make it harder for whistleblowers to collect awards and limit the scope of cases that qualify for awards. 

The IRS is seeking public comment until Feb. 19 on the proposed rules. You can learn more about the issues that are being criticized and submit a comment by clicking here.

The National Whistleblower Center has criticized the IRS whistleblower program for moving too slowly and being given inadequate resources, causing whistleblowers to grow reluctant to file claims, Here and Here.  

The IRS Report indicated that the number of taxpayers coming forward to report tax fraud has declined in the past two years.

Senator Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, a vocal critic of the problems at the IRS Whistleblower Office, called the report's low number of new whistleblowers "alarming" in that it showed a drop and leveling off in the number of whistleblowers coming forward for the past two years. Sen. Grassley further stated in his response to the IRS report:

“Instead of rushing to raise new revenue through tax increases, as the President wants, the government should work with whistleblowers to collect taxes that are due under current tax levels. I’m concerned that the delay in awards and the way the IRS treats whistleblowers might be contributing to the leveling off of whistleblower cases.  Unfortunately, the regulations proposed in December are likely to contribute to a drop-off in whistleblowers coming forward. The IRS has made some progress in processing and tracking claims, but whistleblowers are still left in the dark for years. The IRS needs to do a lot more to give whistleblowers the confidence they need to take the risk of coming forward to expose tax fraud.”

Dean Zerbe Honored As Contender for 2012 Tax Notes Person of the Year

Dean Zerbe
On January 6, 2013 The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center was announced as the 2012 Tax Notes Person of the Year. Tax Notes also recognized nine others who were “contenders” for the title. Among the contenders was the National Whistleblowers Center’s Senior Policy Analyst, Dean Zerbe.

Zerbe gained significant recognition in 2012 when he and co-counsel Stephen M. Kohn helped internationally acclaimed UBS whistleblower Bradley Birkenfeld obtain a historic $104 million reward.  Mr. Birkenfeld’s unprecedented disclosure resulted in cracking the illegal offshore Swiss bank system and resulted in over $5 billion recovered for U.S. taxpayers. Birkenfeld’s information forced Switzerland to change its international treaty with the United States resulting in it’s largest bank being forced to turn over the names of over 4,900 U.S. citizens who held illegal offshore accounts.

In Zerbe’s position as Senior Policy Analyst with the NWC he has frequently commentated on the government's development of the revised IRS whistleblower program. He has pressed the IRS to develop guidance on whistleblower anonymity and to define procedures for award payments and timelines for acting on whistleblower information. In addition, Zerbe co-authored with Kohn, on behalf of the NWC, an amicus brief filed with the Tax Court addressing key questions of law governing the IRS Whistleblower program. The brief, linked here, addressed the issue of "collected proceeds" under the IRS whistleblower law. The "collected proceeds" issue impacts hundreds if not thousands of cases in which the IRS must determine whether a whistleblower is entitled to a reward based on monies obtained by the U.S. government related to tax violation.

2012's 10 Big Moments for Chief Compliance Officers


By Guest Columnist: Donna Boehme

Principal at Compliance Strategists LLC and editor of the weekly CS Newsflash (and former chief compliance and ethics officer at two leading multinationals). Follow her on Twitter @DonnaCBoehme.

Originally Published in Corporate Counsel (January 14, 2013)

 

As companies head into 2013 facing yet another year of increasing and complex compliance and ethics challenges, here’s a threshold question for the Board of Directors: Does your chief compliance officer have the empowerment, independence, seat at the table, line of sight, and resources to do the job?

Following is a “boardworthy” sample of big developments from 2012 that should give some boards and C-suites (and you know who you are) pause:

1. Morgan Stanley Declination

Companies and CCOs have been waiting a long time to see public recognition and credit for a preexisting compliance program. In 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice decided not to prosecute Morgan Stanley for flagrant FCPA violations by an employee in China, citing robust compliance program elements that illustrated the firm’s strong efforts to prevent and detect wrongdoing. It was just like the Federal Sentencing Guidelines contemplate, and a powerful “show and tell” example for CCOs to discuss with management and boards. More like this in 2013, please.

2. Wal-Mart Mexican Bribery Scandal

Unpack many of the big corporate scandals of the last five years and very few feature a strong, well-positioned, empowered, and experienced CCO voice in the C-suite. (Actually, I can’t think of any, but please write and tell me if you can). In Wal-Mart’s case, the compliance function reported to the legal department, but according to The New York Times reportage, the company’s top lawyer participated in a C-suite decision to “hush up” a too-hot investigation by sending it back to the very same Mexican GC who allegedly approved the bribes in the first place. It was a decision that ignored a compliance officer’s strong recommendation for an expanded independent investigation. Wal-Mart is Exhibit A for an independent, empowered CCO.

3. PwC Survey Shows Increased CCO Independence

According to the 2012 PricewaterhouseCoopers State of Compliance study, the number of CCOs reporting to GCs fell by 6 percent—to 35 percent from 41 percent—in the prior year. CCOs reporting to CEOs held steady at 32 percent. This is momentum in the right direction and is consistent with the 2010 amendments to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, which favor “direct reporting obligations” to the board or its independent committee. According to Keith Darcy, the ECOA’s executive director, “A clear, unfiltered CCO voice in the C-suite is key to a robust program. Without independence, a CCO is mere window-dressing and false security for the board."

4. Madoff’s Brother and CCO Pleads Guilty to Fraud, Gets 10-Year Sentence

Did you know that Ponzi scheme king Bernie Madoff’s brother Peter was also the firm’s chief compliance officer? Oh yeah, I’m not making that up. He’s in jail now, serving a 10-year sentence. Lack of independence is rarely this obvious, but it is incumbent on boards and management to recognize empowerment and independence issues in all their nuanced appearances. Note to the Securities and Exchange Commission: Please add “the CCO is the CEO’s brother” to your list of red flags. And add “independence” to the list of CCO requirements. Thank you.

5. Joint DOJ/SEC FCPA Resource Guide on Adequate Autonomy for CCO (and Incentives)

The widely anticipated Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Resource Guide, issued jointly by the DOJ and SEC, may not have broken new ground—but for CCOs it validated many best practices already in place in the field (ahem, use of incentives in programs- ahem) and also expressly tracked the language of the 2010 OECD Good Practice Guidance on Internal Controls, Ethics, and Compliance, which noted that the CCO must have “adequate autonomy from management” in order to do the job. The Justice Department has been using this language in individual FCPA settlement agreements since 2010, going beyond the letter of the current Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations.

6. Big Milestones for the C&E Profession

In 2012, the Ethics and Compliance Officer Association, the first industry association for C&E professionals, marked its 20th anniversary—a significant milestone for the profession. Also this year, the Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics, an industry association that traces its founding to 2002, earned its 3,000th member, making it the largest cross-industry compliance and ethics organization, and its annual meeting attracted over 1,000 attendees for the first time. In addition, the SCCE’s sister organization, the Health Care Compliance Association, passed the 8,000-member mark. These important milestones signal the vitality, increased profile, and continued growth of the rapidly evolving profession.

7. HSBC Settlement Agreement Elevates and Empowers CCO

I would make the DOJ settlement agreement with HSBC (for widespread anti money-laundering violations and failure to maintain any semblance of a compliance program) required 2013 reading for boards, if I had that power. The case is notable for many reasons, but CCOs will recognize all manner of glaring missteps in how the firm positioned and structured its compliance function. HSBC has now “elevated” its CCO by separating compliance from the legal function, adding resources, fixing the line-of-sight, and creating levels of independence. And one more thing I’ve never seen before: the CCO was expressly raised to the level of the top 50 employees of the firm. Now that’s what I call a seat at the table. As SCCE CEO Roy Snell said “The real question is, will industry give independence to the compliance officer before the government mandates independence through regulatory action as they have with auditors.” Time will tell.

8. Enforcers Tally a Record $9 Billion in Corporate Settlement Agreements, Warn Boards and Management

As Joe Warin of Gibson Dunn puts it, the “B word”—corporate settlements levied by federal enforcers with totals in the billions—are almost the “new norm.” The 2012 total of $9 billion dwarfs the previous 2006 high of $3 billion. With 35 NPAs and DPAs in 2012, across a broad spectrum of industries, CCOs have significant new input to add to the existing guidance for compliance programs, many of which include positioning, structure, and resources of the compliance function. As Gibson Dunn advised its clients: “Make no mistake: while not formally labeled as such, DOJ and other regulators appear to be promulgating compliance guidance for various industries through the remedial requirements included in the DPAs and NPAs used to resolve real-world cases.” In 2012, officials made a number of public statements and speeches urging boards and management to “elevate the role of compliance” by supporting their CCOs with “adequate resources, independence, standing, and authority” to be effective. Boards and management should take heed.

9. Greg Smith’s Very Public Goldman Sachs Resignation, General Services Adminstration, et al—It’s the Culture, Stupid

In 2012, organizational culture hit the headlines. Greg Smith wrote about it in his spectacular “take-this-job-and-shove-it” New York Times op-ed (key word: “muppets”). And social media was abuzz over photos of Jeff Neely, the former head of the General Services Administration, in a taxpayer-funded hot tub with two glasses of wine at the ready. And don’t get me started on those wild and crazy Secret Service parties in South America. The 2012 RAND Symposium report also zeroed in on this “missing link” in its examination of compliance programs at a crossroads. Of course this is all preaching to the CCO choir.

10. The Year of the Corporate Whistleblower

By the end of 2012, it was clearly the year of the corporate whistleblower on a number of fronts. False Claims Act recoveries totaled over $9 billion, more than double the previous year, including the largest health care fraud settlement in history—a $3 billion settlement paid by British drug maker GlaxoSmithKline. After a slow start to its 2007 whistleblower program, the Internal Revenue Service also paid out at least two eye-popping bounties, including $104 million to former UBS banker Bradley Birkenfeld. Companies continue to scramble to respond to the new Dodd-Frank whistleblower program, which provides a direct line to the SEC for allegations of fraud, and a potential bounty of 10 to 30 percent for penalties collected over $1 million. With 3,001 whistleblower tips in its first year and its first bounty paid in 2012 (and reportedly many more in the pipeline), the new Dodd-Frank whistleblower program is now officially alive and kicking. With so much at stake, companies that fail to empower their CCOs could pay a steep price.

And there you have it. After the chief compliance officer was named 2011 Person of the Year by former federal prosecutor Michael Volkov, who recognized the CCO as the “unsung hero” of the corporate workplace, CCOs made strides in 2012. And that’s a good thing, with 2013 promising to be no less fraught with peril for the overseer of the company compliance and ethics program. As Machiavelli wrote, “There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order of things."

Donna Boehme is an internationally recognized authority and practitioner in the field of organizational compliance and ethics, designing and managing compliance and ethics solutions within the U.S. and worldwide. As principal of Compliance Strategists LLC, Boehme is the former group compliance and ethics officer for two leading multinationals and currently advises a wide spectrum of private, public, governmental, academic, and nonprofit entities through her NJ-based consulting firm.

 

NWC Files Amicus Brief on IRS Whistleblower Program

On November 5, 2012, the National Whistleblower Center filed a briefing paper/amicus brief with the Internal Revenue Service addressing key questions of law governing the IRS Whistleblower program. The brief, linked here, addresses the issue of "collected proceeds" under the IRS whistleblower law. The "collected proceeds" issue impacts hundreds if not thousands of cases in which the IRS must determine whether a whistleblower is entitled to a reward based on monies obtained by the U.S. government related to tax violations.

The brief was co-authored, pro bono, by myself and Dean Zerbe. In a statement issued by the NWC, Zerbe explained the importance of the briefing paper: "Whistleblowers are eligible for rewards based on the government recovering ‘collected proceeds.' A narrow definition of this term will devastate the impact of this critical whistleblower law and result in a hardship to hundreds (if not thousands) of whistleblowers who lawfully report tax violations but who are found ineligible for a reward based on a restrictive and hyper-technical definition of the term ‘collected proceeds.' Whistleblowers risk their careers to help detect fraud. They should not be doubly punished for their good deeds."

 

The Undeniable Truth About Corporate Misconduct and Whistleblowers

By Guest Columnist: Donna Boehme
Principal at Compliance Strategists LLC and editor of the weekly CS Newsflash (and former chief compliance and ethics officer at two leading multinationals). Follow her on Twitter @DonnaCBoehme.

Originally Published in Corporate Counsel (September 20, 2012) 


Last week’s outsized bounty award of $104 million to former UBS AG banker-turned-whistleblower Bradley Birkenfeld has commentators lighting up the Twitterverse with outrage and the Wall Street Journal calling Birkenfeld’s tale one of “sordidness piled on sordidness.” Seems his 2007 testimony regarding thousands of U.S. tax dodgers netted the Internal Revenue Service a $780 million fine and the names of 5,000 potential tax cheats from the Swiss banking giant—not to mention potential recovery of over $5 billion in unpaid taxes.

This has resulted in what one of Birkenfeld’s lawyers has called "the largest whistleblower reward issued to a single individual.” What has got so many folks’ knickers in a wad is not just the record-setting, eye-popping monetary reward, but the fact that Birkenfeld himself had a spectacular role in the scheme, at one point famously smuggling diamonds for a client in a tube of toothpaste. And what’s more, he lied to the IRS and served 30 months in jail before collecting his reward. Judging by much of the commentary, this is being seen by many as whistleblower protection gone horribly awry and the end of civilization as we know it.

As a former chief compliance officer who has been in the trenches for 20-plus years, I’d like to offer an alternative view, starting with some undeniable truths about whistleblowers (and, by the way, we need another term for individuals who report misconduct, but I digress.) To all the outraged commentators, please have a glass of Pinot and unwad your knickers. Go ahead, I’ll wait.

OK, on to the undeniable truths about corporate whistleblowers:

UNDENIABLE TRUTH NO. 1

Whistleblowers are not always model citizens (gasp). Sometimes they are very close to the misconduct—that’s how they know about it. This is the same reason that in developing the Dodd-Frank whistleblower program, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission declined to exclude whistleblowers involved in the misconduct unless criminally convicted: it makes no sense to automatically exclude the people most likely to have the information. Ever heard of the U.S. Department of Justice’s antitrust leniency program?

UNDENIABLE TRUTH NO. 2

Whistleblower bounty programs help create a level playing field. Without these programs, the deck is always stacked against the mere mortal employee or regulator slaving away in the trenches trying to unravel the facts. The large, well-resourced financial institution holds all the cards (and the data). But the introduction of large financial rewards creates incentives for others, such as plaintiffs law firms (or in some cases, hedge funds investing in a whistleblower case for a percentage of the bounty), to support a whistleblower and thus even the score. Harry Markopolos is, no doubt, well versed in Undeniable Truth No. 2 [PDF].

UNDENIABLE TRUTH NO. 3

Sometimes it takes a thief to catch a thief. Who better to unravel the mysteries of complex business misconduct than a whistleblower steeped in the nuances, tricks, and practices of the fraudulent scheme? Wal-Mart’s alleged massive Mexican bribery scheme, which was splashed across the headlines earlier this year, wasn’t uncovered by a regulator or a compliance officer, but by the ex-Wal-Mart executive who for years was allegedly at the center of the bribery-palooza. See Undeniable Truth No. 1.

Ultimately, all whistleblower bounty cases, whether under the False Claims Act, Dodd-Frank, or IRS programs, are a form of “whistleblower arbitrage.” If companies do not seriously root out misconduct through their internal compliance programs, then someone else probably will. However unpalatable the whistleblower, and however ridiculously large and undeserved the bounty may appear, misconduct left on the table will likely be disclosed for profit. Sometimes a very, very big profit. Time will tell whether that becomes Undeniable Truth No. 4.


Reprinted with permission from the September 20, 2012 edition of Corporate Counsel© 2012 ALM media Properties, LLC. All rights reserved. Further duplication without permission is prohibited. For information, contact 877-257-3382 or reprints@alm.com or visit www.almreprints.com .

IG report says IRS Whistleblower Office falls short and resists audit

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) issued a report that criticizes the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for dragging its feet in processing whistleblower claims. The report follows up on TIGTA's 2009 report and found, "deficiencies in the IRS’s internal controls and timely resolution of whistleblower claims." Now, three years later, the IRS still has "not fully and adequately" addressed those concerns. Meanwhile, last August the General Accounting Office (GAO) issued a report making recommendations for improvements at the IRS Whistleblower Office. IRS management has promised to implement those recommendations and make a report by October 12, 2012.

In 2009, TIGTA found that the Whistleblower Office was tracking its inventory on three different systems. In response, the IRS had employees manually transfer the data to a single system. However, the IRS did not audit the data to discover and reconcile errors. IRS management responds that no errors have been identified.  Readers may wonder, though, if that is because no one looked for errors. IRS management did not allow the TIGTA direct access to the information system, even though the 1978 law creating the TIGTA gives it "authority to access all records, reports, audits, reviews, documents, papers, recommendations, or other material . . .." The 2009 report identified 1,973 claims for which TIGTA wanted to review the tracking data.  Without direct access to management's database, TIGTA could not determine how many of these claims are correctly logged into the information system.

Also, TIGTA found that the Whistleblower Office has not yet fully developed standards for timeliness in processing claims.  When management trained the staff at the Whistleblower Office, it did not instruct them to check the date a claim was received. According to TIGTA, this point "is critical when reporting business results to internal and external stakeholders."

I find it interesting that the report's chart on page 8 shows that the IRS has no standards for how long it should take to acknowledge receipt of a claim, or for issuing rejection letters to whistleblowers. Under "Steps in the Claims Process," the chart does not even have a line for actual issuance of awards. This blog editor is aware of only one award the IRS has actually made.

The Tax Relief and Health Care Act of 2006 created the mandatory IRS whistleblower award program for tips that lead to recoveries of over $2 million. As a result of the program deficiencies at the Whistleblower Office, the program "is not as effective as it could be" in assisting tax enforcement, reducing the gap between the taxes due and the taxes collected, and in "maintaining the integrity of the voluntary tax compliance system."

The new report is called, Improved Oversight Is Needed to Effectively Process Whistleblower Claims.