The Sasquatch's Open Salon Blog

Joe Stack's unintended victims--my clients.

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 13:02:22 -0500

As the smoke clears from the Echelon building, and the government ministers to its traumatized employees, one group's interests are ignored--the taxpayers.

Many of the employees who officed in Echelon I were Revenue Officers, the front line in the IRS collection efforts against delinquent taxpayers. Revenue Officers become involved when the IRS computer decides that a taxpayer needs personal attention. They are the ones that come to your house or place of business. They're the ones that initiate seizure of assets. They levy bank accounts and wages, and file liens.

As the government rightly looks to the welfare and safety of its employees, the taxpayers they are engaged in enforcement against have been forgotten, to their great detriment. As of this morning, the IRS website included only a sympathetic press release and an assurance that the processing of tax returns (not conducted from the Echelon offices) will not be affected by the tragedy. There is no guidance for tax professionals or self-represented taxpayers on how to proceed.

When an account reaches a Revenue Officer, that Revenue Officer becomes the only person with whom the account may be discussed. All of the numbers for Echelon officers currently are busy. That's understandable, of course, and no one expects these people to go on as if nothing has happened. They are, at the very least, due some mental health time.

But the deadlines they set for their collection accounts continue to pass without any way for the taxpayer to submit the requested information, or make the required filings, or establish an installment agreement. At best, my clients are in limbo, with penalties and interest continuing to accrue. At worst, they are subject to liens and levies kicked out by the computer--with no one available to release them.

The collections line points me to the Revenue Officer. The practitioner priority line points me to the Revenue Officer. I've called Congressmen, who point me to the Taxpayer Advocate. The Advocate points me to the Revenue Officer.

While it is vitally important that the IRS help its employees, it has forgotten, as it so often does, the people it ostensibly serves. I have at least 20-30 of those people and businesses as my clients, unintended victims of terrorism. And they are terrified.

What was eating Joe Stack?

Wed, 24 Feb 2010 12:02:23 -0500

I couldn't see the smoke from downtown Austin--the Echelon buildings are miles to the northwest--but as I got the call from my partner, I looked anyway. The building hit is the one that I go to to meet Revenue Officers and Auditors when representing my clients in tax matters. The people that I have interacted with there run the complete spectrum of humanity, from the security guard from Crawford who chatted with me about working the Bush wedding, to dead-eyed government lifers counting the days to retirement. There were Revenue Officers who would go out of their way to work with taxpayers to resolve problems, but also power-mad bureaucrats who ruled their small sphere of influence capriciously with an iron fist.

Likewise, the people who come in to my office can be widowed housewives dealing with the taxes left by their husbands, or businessmen looking to avoid unnecessary taxation, or tax protesters looking for validation for something they found on the internet. The conference room sees emotions from despair and confusion, to rage and anger. The one common emotion is frustration.

No doubt Joe Stack was frustrated. He had thrown his idealogical lot in with some of the various fringe tax theories that circulated in the 70s, variations of which I still see today. He realized too late, as so many others have, that standing on principle often means standing in Federal prison. By the time that people who are seduced by these no-tax theories realize either their error or the futility of pressing their claim, they are tens of thousands of dollars in debt to the IRS, with Revenue Officers hounding them for payment and threatening to seize their home, bank accounts and cars.

I can't tell from his final document whether he settled this debt or not. But that apparently wasn't the end for Stack. As a software engineer, he viewed a particular section of the 1986 Tax Bill as aimed at him particularly. The offending provision provided for engineers to be treated as W-2 employees, not contractors. Prior to this provision, engineers could be paid on 1099, without withholding. This allowed the payor to save the 7.65% that they would have to match to the IRS and eliminated the need for employee tax filings. Engineers could claim expenses against the income, such as home office expense and mileage, that would offset the income, thereby reducing their tax bill. The 1986 bill ended this option, which meant substantial tax increases to the specific class of workers specified in the bill. It was a very specific provision, aimed at increasing tax revenue from a specific class of worker. One can imagine how those affected by this provision would see this as a personal attack on their finances.

That doesn't appear to be the final straw, however, though it certainly contributed to Stack's frustration and hatred of the IRS. He references his accountant's alleged failure to include some of his wife's income, and a resulting audit. I suspect that his wife received a 1099 which was not included on the return. The IRS computer noticed this omission, and selected them for audit. At the audit, they were unable to contest the income, or offset it with expenses, and were adjusted. Most likely, the auditor went through the whole return, and disallowed any expenses that weren't documented to the IRS's standards, further increasing the debt. The auditor issued a "Notice of Deficiency," which eventually became an assessment of tax. At the instant the balance was increased, the computer added penalties for inaccuracy and failure to pay, and interest running back to the date the return was due.

After that, his experience clearly departs from the mainstream. Very few of the multitudes of people frustrated by the IRS become tax protester terrorists. But I see people who have reached Stack's extremis weekly. Either through their own fault, or the IRS', or usually (as in Stack's case) a combination, they've reached their wit's end and sit in my consultation room crying, seething, sweating, or swearing.

The IRS' settlement procedures have become farcical. They hold out the possibility of settlement and a new beginning to people over their head in IRS debt, only to yank it away like Lucy with the football. Cadres of alleged "Settlement Officers" have no purpose other than to find or manufacture a technicality to keep the IRS from having to consider the merits of an otherwise valid offer to settle the tax debt. The acceptance rate of offers has gone from 40% acceptance rate in 2000, to barely above 20% now. The bankruptcy code, gutted repeatedly, most recently in 2005, is little help. The valves that released the pressure from the system have been disabled.

There's no justification for the horrific act Stack's rage led him to commit, but we'd be fools not to look at the underlying causes. The rage and hopelessness that he felt is widespread, and exacerbated by the economy and the unneccesarily draconian IRS collection procedures, which can lead to Kafka-esque results even when followed to the letter. I admittedly see more of these people because it's what I do. But before you dismiss it, think of the neurologist I saw yesterday, who, after checking me out and ordering tests, handed me a dvd movie which dealt with federal intrusion into private lives, and pointed to his Debra Medina button with a smile as I left.

I'm out.

Wed, 8 Jul 2009 13:07:25 -0400

I'm out. That's all. If I write that it's because of the new use agreement, I risk being accused of flouncing, 'cause it makes some feel better to say that about everyone who leaves. I always meant to write more, and probably would have had the time come fall, but since I didn't, I won't be any great loss. The only reason I'm typing this last entry is in hopes that there's a giant tally somewhere in NY where I will be added to the "against" column.