Report strengthens IRS abuse suspicions
By McClatchy Newspapers
Published: Tuesday, May 14, 2013, 8:36 p.m.
WASHINGTON — The Internal Revenue Service asked “unnecessary, burdensome questions” of conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, questions that unfairly delayed the applications, according to an investigative report obtained on Tuesday by McClatchy.
Ultimately, the organizations were told the information was not needed, according to the report by the Treasury inspector general for tax administration. The report, which has not yet officially been made public, has strengthened allegations of abuse of government power to target the rising Tea Party political movement.
While the report from Inspector General J. Russell George gave no indication that he encountered legal violations in his audit, Attorney General Eric Holder said that he's ordered a criminal investigation of the IRS actions.
“The FBI is coordinating with the Justice Department to see if any laws were broken in connection with those matters related to the IRS,” Holder told reporters. “Those were, I think as everyone can agree, if not criminal, they were certainly outrageous and unacceptable.”
At the same time, the Obama administration was pressured to disclose who in the White House knew about the actions by the IRS. The inspector general's report said it found no evidence of influences from outside the IRS.
“Unfortunately, the report raises more questions than it answers,” said House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.
“What we do know for sure is that the IRS personnel responsible for granting tax exemptions systematically targeted conservative groups for extra scrutiny, and that officials in Washington, D.C., were aware of this practice, even while publicly claiming that it never happened,” Issa said.
Leaked portions of the report emerged Monday and created chaos in the capital. The leaks suggested that top IRS officials, including current acting chief Steven Miller, were aware of the unusual targeting of conservative groups as far back as at least May 2012. Lower level officials knew about it at least since April 2010.
The full report obtained concluded that the Cincinnati-based Determinations Unit developed and used inappropriate criteria that effectively slowed down applications when an organization had Tea Party or other political names. It said the IRS agreed with most but not all of the unit's recommendations.
“Although the IRS has taken some action, it will need to do more so that the public has reasonable assurance that applications are processed without unreasonable delay in a fair and impartial manner in the future,” the report said.
In its written response, the IRS defended its actions as well-meaning but acknowledged they were “inappropriate.”
Cases should be organized by “a review of the facts” and “not just by name,” Joseph Grant, acting commissioner, tax exempt and government entities, wrote in an April 30 response to the inspector general.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Health marketplace targets not signing up, survey shows
- El Nino could bring relief to U.S.
- Shuster plans oversight for DUI program
- Former National Security Agency contractor Snowden’s leaks to cost billions, take years to fix
- Married priest in U.S. ordained
- Would wind turbines deflate hurricanes?
- ‘Senior officers should not do that,’ Army leader says in pleading guilty to misconduct charges
- Maryland bill would link criminal, gun owners data
- Senator wants fast action on rail safety
- House foils Obama’s new power plant limits on carbon pollution
- Sex-crimes prosecutor accused in groping