Sorry about that $2.1 million. Remember the world’s thriftiest tax cheat, the one who stole $2.1 million from Oregon and used it to buy a 1999 Dodge Caravan and some tires? An apology from the director of the Oregon Department of Revenue didn’t go well, according to this report from OregonLive.com:
SALEM — A contrite director of the Oregon Department of Revenue appeared before a legislative committee Wednesday and apologized repeatedly for dropping the ball on a $2.1 million fraudulent tax refund. But both Democrats and Republicans weren’t in a forgiving mood, demanding to know why four workers who failed to catch the return weren’t fired and whether the agency can do its job.
“It’s not going to be enough to sit here and say you’re sorry,” said Rep. Cliff Bentz, R-Ontario.
Why are they so upset? He said he was sorry, after all?
Two managers and one administrative clerk received written reprimands but no change in their salaries. A fourth worker was demoted and transferred to another part of the agency. That person, an administrative specialist, got a pay cut from $45,396 a year to $41,208.
Why is Doug Shulman too darn busy to apologize for letting ID thieves loot the Treasury?
Maybe because he’s spending his time making life miserable for Canadians. Tax Notes reports ($link) that Frustration Grows for Canadians in OVDI
Taxpayers and their advisers asked the IRS for guidance on how to deal with RRSPs [Canadian retirement accounts] in the summer of 2011 but received inconsistent replies The IRS’s delay in issuing the guidance… annoyed taxpayers because, at least regarding the requests for a letter ruling granting 9100 relief, it caused them to incur professional fees that turned out to be unnecessary.
“This decision could have been made in September, October, even November, and the clients could have avoided the additional costs,” said [attorney] Ciraolo. “While we appreciate the 9100 relief offered under FAQ 54, the fact that the IRS failed to acknowledge the inconvenience and cost caused by the delayed guidance, and failed to address whether the Canadians in the OVDI would be eligible for the new program open on September 1, only furthered the belief of the Canadian taxpayers that the IRS is acting without due consideration to the circumstances of those taxpayers who entered the OVDI in good faith.”
Of course. The program has been haphazardly administered, treating innocent noncompliance with obscure IRS rules as presumptive evidence of offshore money-laundering.
The frustration that the delayed guidance on late elections to file Form 8891 has caused for U.S. practitioners and their Canadian clients exacerbated an increasingly tense diplomatic situation and perhaps convinced some Canadian taxpayers who sat out the 2011 OVDI that noncompliance was the right choice.
So we’ve provoked our closest neighbor while convincng many that non-compliance is safer than expecting the IRS to be fair. Well done, Commissioner!
The AICPA letter described six specific errors the IRS letters claim taxpayers have made, including filing Form 3520 late when it was filed on time.
When you make it harder to follow the rules than to ignore them, the results won’t be good.
This looks like one of those kinds of things that happen when staffing at a government agency is reduced beyond what is reasonable for the kinds of tasks that have to be carried out.
I’d be more sympathetic to that argument if Doug Shulman’s IRS hadn’t taken it upon itself to devote massive resources to an intrusive and futile preparer regulatory scheme at the behest of the big national tax preparation firms
and to requiring massive amounts of futile paperwork for international compliance.
There has been lots of talk over the past few days about how Bain Capital executives have used management fee waivers to effectively lower their tax payments (a tactic that is not unique to Bain). Some academics have argued that such waivers are an illegal dodge, while private equity tax attorneys I’ve spoken with call it “aggressive but accepted by the IRS.”
Here is the basic structure: Bain officially charges 2% management fees to investors in its private equity funds. The idea is to cover overhead, such as salaries, office leases, electric bills, etc. But Bain has lots of other business lines (venture capital funds, hedge funds, etc.) that generate sufficient cash flow, so it “waives” the PE fund management fees…
By doing so, Bain partners don’t pay ordinary income taxes on their management fees. Instead, they pay at capital gains rates if/when the deals generate profit (because it’s now considered carried interest).
Many commentators seem to think that Mitt Romney should have gone out of his way to pay the highest tax possible, rather than doing what his tax advisors and the rest of his industry did. I doubt that they direct their own preparers to forego deductions and exclusions that they think are poor policy or the result of poor administrative interpretations of the tax law.
TaxProf: Mitt Romney’s Tax Mysteries: A Reading Guide
Dan Meyer, The Annual Tax Extenders Legislation Addressed by the Senate. But it has a long way to go.
Peter Reilly, Challenge To Clergy Tax Break Gets Green Light — Next Stop, Scientology?
Jason Dinesen has incorporated.
Anthony Nitti, How Does a “Go Shop” Provision Impact the Treatment of Transaction Costs?