Discussion:Revenue Officer tells neighbor "Your neighbor Owes Federal Taxes from 2000 Forward"
From TaxAlmanac
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> Revenue Officer tells neighbor "Your neighbor Owes Federal Taxes from 2000 Forward"
| 28 July 2007 | |
| Now this is gonna be fun. One of my clients called today to tell me that a Revenue Officer was snooping around her home. No problem, right...wrong. She's on vacation and she's not even there. So, how did she know about it? Her neighbor called and said that the Revenue Officer was asking questions then proceeded to tell him that she owed taxes from 2000 forward.
Frankly, I was more than shocked. I was apoplectic. After I calmed down, I spoke with the neighbor who confirmed everything. He is signing a statement under penalty of perjury and that signed statement is going to the Treasury Inspector General on Monday. In addition, the RO bypassed my POA. I fully expect this Revenue Officer to be looking for new work and could be looking at criminal charges as well. | |
Donniecastleman (talk|edits) said: | 28 July 2007 |
| Take 'em down! The Revenue Agents I've run across are either incompetent or trying to get up the IRS corporate ladder any way they can. I'd go to every possible media outlet with names in hand to put a permanent black eye on the Revenue Agent's public AND private life. Sheesh talk about harassment! | |
| 28 July 2007 | |
| Did the Revenue Officer show any type of ID. If not, it could have been anybody. | |
| 28 July 2007 | |
| Oh, my. Clearly an unlawful disclosure on the part of the R/O here. An otherwise permissible "investigative disclosure" under 6103 don't no way stretch that far. | |
| 29 July 2007 | |
| Aren't the filing of the tax liens public record? In other words, the info that someone owes tax is already public information. | |
WIBadgerCPA (talk|edits) said: | 30 July 2007 |
| Kevin - Where can I find that information. Once in a while I'll have a client call up saying they have a tax lien out there, but don't know what for. | |
| 30 July 2007 | |
| no, that is incorrect. The lien exists at the time the tax is owed, it just isn't public knowledge until it is filed, and it attaches to everything, not just real property. The whole purpose of filing is to make it public knowledge. The reason it is filed in a county in which the taxpayer lives or in which he owns real property is so that it will appear in the likely place where someone will look who is concerned with purchasing property from the individual. | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 30 July 2007 |
| Steve does not mention anything about a lien, and for all we know, Steve's client may not have filed for those years. | |
Actionbsns (talk|edits) said: | 30 July 2007 |
| I don't think the issue revolves around a lien, more around the inappropriateness of the RO expounding to the neighbor on back taxes owed by Steve's client as well as not respecting the POA he has in place. | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 30 July 2007 |
| That is what I trying to say: Steve did not say whether there was any 'excuse' or not because it does not matter. Revenue Officers like this would have the debtors sitting in stocks in the town square, wearing shirts with 'Tax Debtor' on them, if they had their way. | |
| 30 July 2007 | |
| No one, I was only making a point that a lien is public record of tax owed. Not that this gives the RO permission to talk about a taxpayer, but that if a lien was filed a nosy neighbor could have already known. | |
Donniecastleman (talk|edits) said: | 30 July 2007 |
| Bottom line, the RO is a worthless sack of monkey crap that should be more professional about his job rather than sinking to the level of a $9 an hour debt collector. If I was in the TP's shoes, I'd file every complaint known to man and request a new RO. | |
| 30 July 2007 | |
| aren't you better off with an RO who doesn't know the rules (and therefore messes up on everything, making the whole process appealabe) rather than an RO who knows what to do? | |
| 30 July 2007 | |
| At the time this happened I worked as a civilian contract health care provider (nurse practitioner)at a military clinic on a military base. RO #1 (Mary Jones) called the company home office and told the secretary she was "an old friend of mine" and was in town for a few days and wanted to get in touch with me. She requested the location and phone number of the clinic where I worked on the military base. Secretary declined and said she would get a message to me with her name and number. I did not recognize the name Mary Jones but went ahead and called the number which connected me to the voice mail of RO #2 (Betty Smith) who's name I did recognize from previous contacts--including one where she came to my home and gave my spouse copies of IRS summons for both of us). I hung up and almost immediately my phone rang (caller ID?) and a woman identifying herself as Mary Jones asked "Is this Linda Roberts?" and I said yes. She said "I am with Betty Smith and we need to give you some papers so we want to know where to find you on (the military base)." I told her that I could not conduct my personal business at work and I did not appreciate her lying to the company I worked for and that I would meet them at my house after work to get the papers they wanted to give me. She said "Oh we could just leave them at your house but we don't want to do that. If you do not tell us where you are WE WILL COME ON THE BASE AND FIND YOU. I again stated that I could not conduct my personal business at work and hung up the phone. About an hour later, the receptionist knocked on the door of one of my exam rooms where I was treating a patient. She said "there are 2 ladies out at the desk with badges from the IRS and they are demanding to see you right now to give you some papers." I told the receptionist to tell the RO's that I was with a patient but tell them I said to give you the papers and you will make sure I receive them. About 10 minutes later, the Officer In Charge of the clinic came to my office with the card from the RO and said "these two women are refusing to leave until they see you. I told them they could not just come in here like that but they are demanding that we tell them where you are." I explained to him that this was personal business and that I had already spoken with them and already offered to meet them at my home after work. He apparently relayed this information to them and they finally left. An hour later I received a phone call from the home office stating the RO's had told the military base contracting office that they would be returning to the clinic with FEDERAL MARSHALLS TO ARREST ME and that the military did not want there to be a 'scene' when this occurred. Meanwhile, my spouse 200 miles away phoned the RO and made an appointment to come to her office in 3 days time to pick up the "papers" which turned out to be another IRS summons.
This whole drama was for no other reason than to make my private situation with the IRS public, harrass and threaten me, and damage my reputation in my workplace. We now have an attorney and and OIC has been "pending" for almost a year. I did make complete documentation of this episode and submit it to TIGTA but as far as I know nothing happened to these 2 fat cows (they showed up in tent dresses and birkenstocks) and they are continuing to terrorize others. I can not believe anyone would have such low self esteem that they would work this job. | |
| 30 July 2007 | |
| B Evans, remember the big bullys from 4th grade? They grew up and got jobs at the IRS. | |
Bottom Line (talk|edits) said: | 30 July 2007 |
| I'd be asking the guard at the gate how they managed to get on the base. | |
| 30 July 2007 | |
| This is a local case. The Revenue Officer is located in the San Francisco area. I'm not going to get any more specific than that. The neighbor signed a statement under Penalty of Perjury that the RO made the disclosure to him.
| |
| 31 July 2007 | |
| I know at times we have received something about "Notification of Potential Third Party Contact" and I could swear it mentions something about contacting your "friends, neighbors and family members" and I guess I always assumed they could do this. To my knowledge, no one we know has been contacted by them. I do know a doctor that owned his practice and got in trouble with them for not depositing the withholdings from the employees and they did show up at his office demanding money or they were going to shut his office down right then. He paid up on the spot.
In your case, can not believe that the RO actually accused the neighbor of snooping in the "targets" papers on the door. But, really, where else can these people work especially for the money and benefits they receive? I would be a prostitute (legally of course) before I would work for them. | |
| 31 July 2007 | |
| Oh, as an aside, I did not use the "real names" of the RO's involved. I think these two were more the fat girls who read alot and are still virgins at menopause. The base I worked on is "open" and anyone with proper ID can go on base after stating their business and having their vehicle inspected by the soldiers at the gate. | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 31 July 2007 |
| How stupid can you get? With the claim of the letter opening, the incident has shifted from one person's word against another's to two account's of the letter opening versus the RO's 'guess.' | |
| 31 July 2007 | |
| I don't have a horror story quite as bad as the above, but this did irk me recently. Client/taxpayer from OH was in Florida for the winter and received audit notice. Getting POA signed took a few days, due to client not being at a location where faxing was convenient and emailing was impossible. Meantime I notified RO that we were working on the POA and explained the circumstances. Whereupon the RO called the client in FL and scheduled the audit for two days after the TP planned to return from winter vacation. When we got the POA in place, I told the RO we could meet at the TP's business on the date appointed for a tour, but no documentation would be available for examination on that date due to the TP not having had time to assemble it. Things have gone better since then, but it still bugged me that the RO, when he got wind of a POA in progress, quickly contacted the TP personally and gave him to understand that the TP was required to set the appointment with the RO since the POA was not yet in hand.
Doesn't IRS material say the POA should be presented at the first appointment? | |
| 31 July 2007 | |
| This thread is really scary. I have dealt with a few really amazingly stupid people at the FTB, but most have been helpful and responsive. As I sit here now, I cannot think of a single IRS agent who I have had direct contact with who has been unreasonable or unprofessional. At worst, at times abrasive - but then who wouldn't be defensive with that job? | |
| 31 July 2007 | |
| Ashland wrote "Doesn't IRS material say the POA should be presented at the first appointment? Don't think that's written anywhere.
The right to a representative is controlled by IRC ยง7521(c). It says representatives HOLDING a POA can represent the taxpayer. The fact that you told the RA (Revenue Agents do exams, Revenue Officers(RO) do collections) that you were in the process of getting a POA doesn't prohibit him/her from contacting the taxpayer. The IRM cautions both RAs and ROs about contacting taxpayers who have representatives HOLDING the POA. While YOUR intentions were good, how does the RA know in fact, you will get the POA? Take consolation the RA is working well with you now. | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 31 July 2007 |
| Good point, NY! Sometimes you might not want to admit that you received the POA. See Discussion: Withdrawal of 12153 for non-payment of fees? | |
Taxguy1024 (talk|edits) said: | 1 August 2007 |
| I wish I could honestly say the same thing, JAD......but I can't.... | |
| 2 August 2007 | |
| JAD, please don't take this personally, but it's fairly clear you don't have much experience with IRS collection matters. If you did, you wouldn't use the term IRS agent. ANYONE that's been doing this for awhile will, without any doubt whatsoever, have war stories about unreasonable and unprofessional Revenue Officers and ACS personnel. No ifs, no ands and no buts. | |
| 3 August 2007 | |
| ALL the letters I get from IRS personnel say "Internal Revenue Agent", Sounds like IRS agent should not be a problem. I have not seen them write "Officer". Where did you get that one? | |
| 3 August 2007 | |
| NO Revenue Officer is ever referred to as an agent and everyone handling collection issues knows the difference. | |
| 3 August 2007 | |
| Revenue Agent and Revenue Officer are completely different cultures within IRS. | |
| 3 August 2007 | |
| TxSrv: Please explain ... Revenue Agent and Revenue Officer are completely different cultures within IRS. | |
| 3 August 2007 | |
| It's the different personalities needed and job satisfactions for the respective jobs. Few return examinations need be confrontational in order to get the job done. Exam also deals with much more complexity and breadth of tax law. Similarly, CID and the customer service functions are very different too. | |
Michaelstar (talk|edits) said: | 3 August 2007 |
| Okay gang.... I would have made the same mistake. I do not deal with collections - down right hate it! Have had very few audits in the last 20+ years although all that I have had have worked out. So we know RA's and RO's are different based on the above. Steve - help us out here a little bit. Your certainly an expert - no doubt about it - so between you and TxSrv, help us out here so we can learn the full difference from your knowledge. I just read TxSrv's post and I am sort of getting it but not fully.
Down on the Star of India, the goal of the museum is to pass along to others the way and what it was like to sail square riggers and barks back in the 1800's and at the turn of the century. After all, she is the oldest active sailing vessel in the world! Without the willingness of others to want to pass that knowledge along over the years, it would have been lost forever. Passing on education to others is a gift. Thanks for your help. | |
| 3 August 2007 | |
| G-d only knows what you are looking at. EVERY single item from an RO I have says Revenue Officer; without exception. | |
| 3 August 2007 | |
| As to Michaelstar's question...and thank you for sending me a potential client. I believe I gave him some free advice and sent him on his way...Revenue Officers are grunts, bag carriers, common everyday Joe types with more power with a pen than virtually anyone in the Federal government. They have college degrees but they have no accounting experience or knowledge...generally speaking. Many come out of the military (as least they did in the mid to late 80's and are a difficult lot to manage. They are self-starters and are hard headed as hell. I loved the job and left due to financial reasons more than anything else. | |
| 4 August 2007 | |
| You can see now how government bureaucracies outlast Congressional intent. I didn't think the IRS would forget the public flogging they got in 1998, and the heat is defintely being turned back up at the agency. This type of thing is a symptom of that kind of pressure now being put on IRS employees, aided by the big national debt we have racked up and the need for revenue. | |
| 4 August 2007 | |
| Only the Congress or the President can put on the pressure. Have they actually done so? The current Commissioner has been accused of forgoing audit assessments by directing a reduction in cycle time of larger corp audits. Doesn't sound like he was pressured. | |
| 4 August 2007 | |
| IRS personnel couldn't care less about the national debt and the need for revenue. That's not the way the agency works. The enforcement pendulum has swung back and forth for at least the past 20 years that I have dealt with them and I am certain it has always been that way. Rosotti was lax and Everson was pro enforcement. It has been heading towards enforcement for the past three years and that has been well documented both anecdotally and in the raw numbers. | |
Death&Taxes (talk|edits) said: | 4 August 2007 |
| An old R.O., retired in 1979 and dead ten years now, told me the R.O. can say almost anything he wants to the taxpayer as long as he is not seated behind a desk, for when seated it becomes an interview and a record had to be made. I noticed that when these man, and woman, would spout threats like "Your client won't eat, sleep or s...." they were always standing, and this usually was before any formal negotiations. I wonder if this has changed; naturally none of the 'threats' would ever be made in hearing range of other taxpayers.
Then again when seated in a cubicle, you could hear taxpayers near you and the most repeated line was always: 'you know I would pay you if I could.' Listening to some of the b/s being thrown, I could almost see why R.O.s were such miserable people. | |
