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

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.

 

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 .

Brad Birkenfeld receives $104 million IRS whistleblower award

The National Whistleblowers Center announced this morning that UBS banking whistleblower Bradley Birkenfeld received a tax whistleblower award of $104 million.  The IRS made the award for Birkenfeld's contributions in providing the U.S. Government with insider information on UBS’ illegal offshore banking scheme. This is believed to be the largest reward ever given to an individual whistleblower in the United States and the first major reward issued under the IRS tax whistleblower law.

In a joint statement, Mr. Birkenfeld’s attorneys, Stephen M. Kohn and Dean A. Zerbe (pictured third and second from left in the photo with David Colapinto and Michael Kohn) stated:

The IRS today sent 104 million messages to whistleblowers around the world – that there is now a safe and secure way to report tax fraud and that the IRS is now paying awards. The IRS also sent 104 million messages to banks around the world – stop enabling tax cheats or you will get caught. 

In granting the award, the IRS described Mr. Birkenfeld’s contributions as follows:

Birkenfeld provided information on taxpayer behavior that the IRS had been unable to detect, provided exceptional cooperation identified [and] identified connections between parties to transactions . . . The comprehensive information provided by the whistleblower was exceptional in both its breadth and depth. While the IRS was aware of tax compliance issues related to secret bank accounts in Switzerland and elsewhere, the information provided by the whistleblower formed the basis for unprecedented actions against UBS.

A copy of the IRS Award Report is attached.

Stephen Kohn, who also serves as the Executive Director of the National Whistleblowers Center, stated that the NWC was initiating an international campaign to educate employees regarding their rights under new whistleblower reward laws covering tax evasion, securities fraud and violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act: “Employees throughout the world need to know that there is a safe haven to blow the whistle on major frauds. As demonstrated by the IRS’ decision in the Birkenfeld case, these laws can be effectively used to combat corruption, illegal offshore tax evasion and money laundering,” Kohn said. Video of today's NWC press conference announcing the award is available here.

Mr. Birkenfeld's disclosures directly resulted in: a fine paid to the U.S. by UBS bank in the amount of $780,000,000.00; over 35,000 taxpayers participating in “amnesty” programs to voluntarily repatriate their illegal offshore accounts; and the collection of over $5 billion in back taxes, fines and penalties. Mr. Birkenfeld's disclosures also forced the Swiss government to change its tax treaty with the United States, resulting in UBS turning over the names of over 4,900 U.S. taxpayers who held illegal offshore accounts. These "taxpayers" are now being investigated and prosecuted.

Whistleblowers can visit www.whistleblowers.org to learn about their rights and to find out how they can report fraud confidentially.

Tax Court calls for an answer from IRS whistleblower case

Tax CourtThe United States Tax Court issued an order Tuesday that requires the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to respond by September 24, 2012, to an amicus brief filed by the National Whistleblowers Center (NWC). We reported here on July 11, 2012, about the NWC "friend of the court" brief in Insinga v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Docket No. 4609-12W. The main issue is whether tax whistleblowers will have any remedy when the IRS Whistleblower Office drags its feet in issuing rewards to whistleblowers who helped the IRS collect $2 million or more.

Attorney Dean Zerbe, arguing for NWC, objected to the IRS practice of pocketing the money they can collect with the help of the whistleblower's tip, and then becoming non-responsive when the whistleblower asks for the reward now required by federal law. The IRS cannot be allowed to "dine and dash," Zerbe argues. The NWC brief argues that the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) applies to the IRS and authorizes the Tax Court to compel timely action on its legal mandates.

The IRS opposed the NWC request to file its amicus brief. The IRS argued that it is not subject to the APA, and the Court should not even read the NWC argument on the issue.

Now the Tax Court has accepted the NWC brief and ordered the IRS to respond. The Tax Court specifically asked the IRS to explain how it could be exempt from the APA when the Supreme Court specifically rejected the IRS claim of exemption just last year in Mayo Foundation v. United States, 131 S.Ct. 704, 713 (2011).

This order is a good sign that Tax Court can come a viable route for tax whistleblowers to recover the rewards due to them under law, but for which the IRS is dragging its feet. In a press release, Dean Zerbe said, "Tax whistleblowers should be heartened by the Tax Court's actions."

IRS plans to retool its whistleblower program

On Wednesday, the IRS announced a plan for a comprehensive review of its whistleblower program, working with both “internal and external shareholders” to produce a program that can evaluate whistleblower claims and make quicker payouts to whistleblowers. As a part of the review, the IRS will set up new timelines, including a mandatory 90 day deadline to review whistleblower claims after receipt. Furthermore, debriefings of whistleblowers will become “the rule, not the exception.”

This development comes in the wake of a critical report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration. The report found that the whistleblower program may produce inaccurate data when pursuing cases and that deadline goals were not strong enough. Republican Senator Charles Grassley told Reuters that the report was evidence that “the IRS isn’t serious about processing whistleblower claims in a timely way.”

In 2010, the IRS paid out $18.7 million in rewards to whistleblowers and collected $464.7 million in taxes thanks to whistleblowers. Senator Grassley said that since last September, he has heard a number of complaints from whistleblowers stating that their claims have been stalled at the IRS. If the IRS can run its whistleblower program so that whistleblowers are actually encouraged to submit reports, billions of additional dollars would be recovered from fraudsters.

This blog post was written by intern Julia Maloney.

IRS resists using whistleblowers

Whistleblower disclosures have helped the federal government make some of its biggest recoveries from fraudsters. In the Obama administration alone, the government recovered over $21 billion thanks to whistleblowers using the “qui tam” procedure under the False Claims Act (FCA). The government also recovered many additional billions through criminal fines and penalties.

Erika Kelton, an attorney in the Washington, DC, whistleblower law firm of Phillips & Cohen, wrote an article in last week's Forbes magazine that explains how the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is losing out on the opportunity to develop its own income stream from whistleblower tips. In December 2006 Congress enacted a law similar to the FCA to reward whistleblower who informed the IRS of tax frauds and violations. Many whistleblowers have filed claims under the new IRS whistleblower program.

Kelton says the IRS however, has squandered opportunities to recover billions of dollars in revenue with the information submitted by whistleblowers. Dozens of whistleblower submissions concerning losses over $100 million in tax fraud were reportedly received by the IRS Whistleblowers Office. Another thousand concerning tax underpayments over $2 million were also reported. However, the IRS has paid only one whistleblower reward during the program's first five years.

Clearly, there is a problem here. The problem, according to Kelton, does not lie within the laws implemented by the program in 2006, but with the IRS itself and institutional resistance within the IRS to rewarding whistleblowers.

After leaving the IRS and joining a white-collar law firm to defend companies from the IRS, former IRS Chief Counsel Donald Korb expressed anti-whistleblower opinions. In a 2010 interview with Tax Notes, he revealed an astonishing mindset. He stated: “The new whistleblower provisions Congress enacted a couple of years ago have the potential to be a real disaster for the tax system. I believe that it is unseemly in this country to encourage people to turn in their neighbors and employers to the IRS as contemplated by this particular program. The IRS didn’t ask for these rules; they forced on it by the Congress.”

The IRS Office of Chief Counsel (OCC) interpreted the laws set by the program in such a way that discouraged many whistleblowers from reporting information and lowering the whistleblower 's potential for success.

The OCC guidance appear problematic, Kelton says, as it:

  • Narrowed the sources of recovery that are the bases of whistleblower awards.
  • Imposed unprecedented withholding requirements on whistleblower awards.
  • Created roadblocks to IRS interactions with whistleblowers such as the 2008 “one-bite” rule (now relaxed) that limited receipt of information to an initial meeting.
  • Defined “planners and initiators” of the tax scheme – who by law receive only a reduced award (if any) – in a manner that could block employees whose involvement is far form the true architects of a scheme.

It can be frustrating to see the unwillingness of the IRS to use the assistance and information given by whistleblowers. Employees see tax frauds occurring from the front seat and hold all the information necessary for the IRS to take action. Kelton says their assistance, contemplated by the 2006 law, could be permissible without violation of confidentiality restrictions with the use of special confidentiality agreements known as “6103(n) contracts.”

Most of the claims submitted to the IRS have been going nowhere. Kelton reports that the IRS has failed to give whistleblowers and their lawyers’ status updates on their claims. Unlike the attitude by the IRS, the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) has taken a more positive approach to its new whistleblower program. The SEC is actively welcoming help from whistleblowers.

An SEC enforcement official told Kelton that whistleblower information has been of immense help to the SEC saving them six to twelve months of investigative time. Unfortunately, time saving whistleblower information like this is what the IRS has been failing to use.

Whistleblower reports have reportedly been dropping in number according to statistics in the IRS Whistleblower Office’s 2010 report to Congress. Seeing that their reports are being ignored, set aside and not put into action, we can see why whistleblowers are now thinking twice of about reporting fraud and placing their own livelihood at risk.

The IRS is weakening its whistleblower program, pushing aside these tools given to them by Congress. Kelton argues that if they took advantage of these tools, they would be able to narrow the annual $450 billion gap between what is owed in taxes and what is paid. Ultimately, the IRS' present course will only hurt taxpayers and the federal Treasury.

This blog post was written by intern Laura Berumen.

FBI's PSA Excludes Key Information for Whistleblowers

This week, the FBI released a public service announcement by actor Michael Douglas encouraging the public to report financial fraud. On its face this sounds like a good thing. However, the FBI left out some key information, namely other avenues of reporting that are likely better for whistleblowers.

There are robust financial incentives for filing a claim with the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC), the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. NWC General Counsel David Colapinto told the Washington Post if a whistleblower goes “to the FBI, they are probably going to get zero. The FBI’s not obligated to do anything for them.” The FBI’s rewards would be solely at the discretion of the Department of Justice. This is scary. Just take a look at how they treat their own whistleblowers.

As pointed out by the Huffington Post, the financial crisis has put financial fraud on more people’s radar. The SEC has seen an increase in securities fraud reports, despite the fact that nearly 70 percent of Americans are unaware of the SEC’s whistleblower program (see recent report by Labaton Sucharow).

If the FBI is truly interested in encouraging people to come forward and protecting those who do, they should not hide the ball. Give workers information about all their rights, including the much more robust financial reward programs at the SEC, IRS and the CFTC.

We always tell whistleblowers who contact us that is in their best interest to know their rights before they blow the whistle. Make sure you educate yourself and consult an attorney before you blow the whistle.

IRS Tax Court Upholds Whistleblower Anonymity

The IRS tax court issued a very important decision yesterday in Whistleblower 14106-10W vs. Commissioner of Internal Revenue regarding confidential and anonymous whistleblower claims through the IRS. The court’s first-ever decision on this matter upholds whistleblowers’ right to file anonymous claims—a major victory for whistleblowers and their advocates.

Dean Zerbe, Special Counsel at the National Whistleblowers Center, issued the following statement:

“Whistleblowers should be heartened by yesterday’s decision from the tax court that helps ensure their anonymity. The Tax Court in a thoughtful and informed opinion clearly understands the need to protect the identity of whistleblowers. This is another opinion from the Tax Court that is pro-whistleblower. The Tax Court is establishing a reputation as a court that understands this law and the underlying policy very well and is committed to ensuring that the whistleblower gets a fair hearing and the IRS whistleblower law works. A welcome early Christmas present for whistleblowers.”

GAO Releases Report on IRS Whistleblower Program

Yesterday, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its report on the current effectiveness of the IRS whistleblower program. Since 2007, over 1,300 whistleblowers have filed claims with the IRS Whistleblower Office alleging tax fraud (in excess of $2 million) against 9,540 "taxpayers." The IRS is still investigating 8,254 (86.5%) "taxpayers" for tax fraud. The GAO report’s recommendations focus on improving the efficiency of the claim evaluation process.

The GAO made eight recommendations aimed at improving the efficiency of the current whistleblower program. Some of these recommendations include; redesigning the whistleblower form, improved claim tracking, and setting target goals for how long a completed review should take.

The NWC supports the IRS whistleblower program and the recommendations of the GAO for the improvement of the program.

Dean Zerbe, Special Counsel for the National Whistleblowers Center  (NWC) stated that, “the IRS whistleblower program is a winner”, “[it] is the skeleton key that the IRS needs for unlocking the door on tax fraud.” Further, Zerbe supported the need for improved efficiency within the IRS whistleblower program through better communication during the review process. Zerbe stated that, “The GAO report is exactly right when it highlights the need for the IRS to find a path to improving communication with whistleblowers.”

Stephen M. Kohn, NWC Executive Director also issued a statement in support of the GAO efficiency recommendations. “Justice delayed is justice denied. The GAO is absolutely correct that in order for the IRS whistleblower program to be successful, whistleblowers need to have confidence that their claim will be handled properly and in a timely manner. The U.S. government cannot recover $345 billion a year in unpaid taxes without the help of whistleblowers.” 
 

*Trevor Melvin (a NWC intern) contributed to this posting

Is the IRS Systemically Averse to Whistleblowers?

Since the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) instituted a new whistleblower program in 2006, only one award has been made to a whistleblower, according to Mike Hudson from iWatch News. In yesterday’s article, “Red tape, old guard slow whistleblowing on corporate tax cheats,” Hudson explains why the IRS has been so disinclined to give monetary awards to whistleblowers. The primary reason, it seems, is a bureaucratic avoidance to receive help from whistleblowers in the IRS.

A law passed in 2006 requires the IRS to pay a reward of 15 to 30 percent for whistleblowers who report cases of unpaid taxes totaling at least $2 million. However, the lone person to receive an award under the new program is an “accountant of a Fortune 500 firm.” The only reason we know of this award is because attorney Eric Young issued a press release announcing his client’s award of $4.5 million for reporting approximately $20 million in unpaid taxes.  The lack of announcement by the IRS may underscore their reluctance to work with whistleblowers.

However, an aversion to whistleblowers may not be agency-wide. The IRS Whistleblower Office “is widely praised by attorneys representing whistleblowers.” Dean Zerbe, NWC Special Counsel, agreed. “The Whistleblower Office is great,” said Zerbe. “But you obviously have people in the IRS and Treasury who, instead of trying to make this program work, wake up in the morning trying to put sand in the gears.” 

Cases can also last “six, seven, eight, ten years” according to Donald Korb, the IRS chief counsel when the new program was required by law to be implemented. Before the new program was created, claims took an average of 7 ½ years to issue a reward, according to a June 2006 inspector general report. As Hudson points out, whistleblowers often get stuck in limbo waiting for a decision.  Here, there appears to be an institutional deterrent to whistleblowing. Hudson also tells the stories of attorneys and whistleblowers who have made claims with the IRS but have been kept waiting due to the lengthy process. One whistleblower died of natural causes while waiting for the IRS to close the case, but his case is still ongoing with the whistleblower’s widow, according to the his attorney. 

Moreover, though the law was passed with the intention of producing better tips, even those coming from persons involved with the wrongdoing themselves, the IRS has tried to set up institutional road blocks to prevent those reports. The law only “disqualifies from bounties any individuals who ‘planned and initiated’ evasion schemes and are convicted of criminal conduct.” However, the IRS policy manual updated last year goes one step further than “planned and initiated” and may disqualify subordinates even if they are not the principal wrongdoer. This could keep those with the best information of massive evasion schemes from coming forward. 

Perhaps Korb best summed up the agency’s reasoning. “The Senate Finance Committee just did it. The IRS didn’t ask for it,” he said. But, maybe Senator Grassley, who was the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee at the time, decided the IRS needed the new program because statistics suggested it was necessary. In approximately one year (2008 to 2009), the IRS paid 110 rewards under its whistleblower rules prior to the 2006 law, totaling $5.9 million. On average, that is about $54,000 per award. That is hardly enough to warrant risking your career and livelihood for reporting a tax cheat. However, the amount the IRS recovered in that time span was $206 million, which means whistleblowers only received 3 percent of the recoveries. Not only did whistleblowers only receive pennies for their claims, but the IRS also chose to not share any of the cake with the starving baker.

*Philip Barrett (NWC Public Interest Fellow) drafted this posting