GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Taxpayer advocate again raps private debt collection effort

• 29530
  

  Moot point when we go to a consumption tax. There will be no need to collect taxes from individuals, only from companies who are negligent in paying taxes they collect on sales of new taxable items. Newt Grigrich will become president and the tax system will finally be changed. April 16 will become just another lovely Spring Day!

  Jacques Bakke Posted July 27, 2007 5:37 PM
• 29525
  

  I am a union rep and a government employee, and am sroblgy against outsourcing of any kind unless a unique set of skills is needed in a life and death situation. Tax collecting is not life and death. If the agency (in this case, the IRS) does not feel that current employees would be ineffective in collections, why are they there in the first place? Maybe some employees could be trained and shifted to this function on an ad hoc basis. The IRS had a drastic situation in tax collections in the early 90s wherein their employees came down like a ton of bricks on recalcitrant (non)taxpayers, and that is why we have such Congressional legislation including the Innocent Spouse Relief Act. There has to b a middle ground between IRS employees effectively dealing with taxpayers and having non-IRS employees handl them. Why not contract with a collection agency to train th IRS employees in collection techniques? That would prove they meant business. But it may also mean hiring people with certain skill sets that may not be present in the current employee base. But as with any job that requires interaction with the public (such as mine), fostering these skills is crucial.

  Teresa P Bland Posted July 27, 2007 4:42 PM
• 29522
  

  All this hoopla seems to miss a couple of points: (1) in the overwhelming majority of cases, there is no debate about whether this is a debt owed, and (2) in spite of claims to the contrary, collection agencies can do this class of collections at lower cost than the government, allowing the government staff to go after larger cases.

  Jerry Posted July 27, 2007 3:44 PM
• 29306
  

  I just want to praise Gary Straub, an IRS taxpayer advocate employee in St. Louis. I spent an entire year trying to get the IRS to fix a $3900 alleged deficiency in my tax account but had no success until Gary Straub took an interest in my problem. Thanks again, Gary!

  pleasantly surprised Posted July 25, 2007 11:23 AM
• 29239
  

  If we are "legally" bound to pay federal taxes on our hard-earned income, I really don't mind that I am helping to support the infrastructure of our country, our military, protection and safety measures - whatever. It's the user's fee we pay for living in a great country. But should I hit hard times and get behind on paying them - the LAST THING I want to see profit from it would be one "appointed" private contract. Appointed over all others, to slurp up the gravy of sitting ducks. It's not right. Let them stick with the debt we incur by other means. Besides - this sets a scary precedent.

  K.T. Posted July 24, 2007 4:55 PM
• 29217
  

  Well, by now its obvious that some favors are coming home to roost. All that s missing is the investigation. The IRS study has shown that federal employees can get the collection done better and significantly cheaper than the "hired guns". This is just more pork. Seems like everybody gets a share, except the tax-payer. There is less control now on how folks owing back taxes will be treated (they have rights) and those of us who pay our taxes, are being overcharged by the contractors. I guess we just have to leverage our vote.

  Don Posted July 24, 2007 12:59 PM
• 29216
  

  Washington Fed: " ... overstepped her responsibility ... has unilaterally declared that debt collection is inherently governmental". What she said was Tax collection, not debt collection. The right way to decrease fraud on tax paying is to increase the IRS staffing to a level commensurate with the work load, properly train the agents and stand back and let them do their jobs. Sheesh, what's so hard to understand about that. The free lunchers need to quit whining and get over it.

  bill t Posted July 24, 2007 12:53 PM
• 29211
  

  Another attempt by the administration to grease the pockets of the private sector at the expense of our privacy. Taxes are the exclusive domain of government. Paying federal taxes is not a voluntary exercise like taking a loan on a car, boat, etc. Non payment of taxes can result in a citizen's cash and/or property being seized without court approval.

  Federal employees who've collected taxes, swear an oath of allegiance to the US and it's citizens. They collect taxes based on the legal respeonsibility to do so, not to generate profits for the government.

  The private collection agency is there to make a profit. There loyalty is to share holders and their focus is to make a reasonable or "unreasonable" return on investment. You think their workers swear an oath to anyone ?

  d. dupuy Posted July 24, 2007 11:26 AM
• 29194
  

  I'm suprised that no one mentions that the collection agencies are headquartered in Iowa and Texas...hmmm the home states of Charles Grassley and the President of the United States.

  Perhaps there is another source to resisting closing the program down?

  Terrance O'Malley Posted July 24, 2007 9:42 AM
• 29190
  

  The Taxpayer Advocate has again overstepped her responsibility and expertise and, in a clear attempt to get even with IRS management, has unilaterally declared that debt collection is inherently governmental (IG). In a report that seeks a 24 percent staffing increase in FY 2008, she notes that "all too often IRS executives and employees view the cases TAS send to the IRS as TAS work rather than IRS's own work." What taxpayer debt collection complaints is she responding to? Are they statistically or legally significant as compared to similar IRS efforts? The report notes that IRS is collecting comparative cost and effectiveness data for a report due in August 2008, yet also declares the program ineffective and inefficient. The excersize of judgement and discretion alone is not dispostive to the assertion that work is IG. To be IG requires substantial discretion operating outside of established and recurring ministerial procedures and processes - that should indeed be transparant to taxpayers, IRS employees and to private debt collection employees. This odd advocacy has the ring of a conflict of interest to it.

  Washington Fed Posted July 24, 2007 9:21 AM