Christine O’Donnell: I was a victim of the IRS

This is certainly a disturbing idea, that your tax records are subject to scrutiny based solely on your political beliefs and party affiliation. Say what you want about O'Donnell and her witchy past, but no politician should be harassed by a partisan federal government agency like the IRS without good reason other than that their boss simply doesn't like you.

Congressional inquiry on Christine O’Donnell tax records heats up, but truth may stay hidden

​

Powerful committees in both chambers of Congress now want answers to questions surrounding Christine O'Donnell’s personal tax records and whether the Delaware Republican’s private information was illegally accessed and ultimately used in an effort to derail her 2010 U.S. Senate bid.

The House Ways and Means Committee has joined the Senate Finance Committee in probing a string of incidents dating back to March 2010, when Ms. O'Donnell — a tea party favorite who riled Delaware’s GOP establishment by besting party mainstay Mike Castle in a primary contest before losing to Democrat Chris Coons in the general election — was told by Treasury Department investigators that her tax information had been breached.

Since then, Ms. O'Donnell has run into roadblock after roadblock in her search for answers as officials at the IRS, in Delaware state government and at the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration remain tight-lipped.

But for Ms. O’Donnell, who believes she was politically targeted in much the same way the IRS has singled out tea party groups and Hollywood conservatives for extra tax scrutiny, the Ways and Means inquiry is another step in the slow yet steady journey toward closure.

“I would like to see [congressional] hearings, but the hearings are the means to an end. The end is that this gets exposed,” she told The Washington Times last week.

“Two powerful committees in both houses of Congress are investigating this. That alone indicates there is some serious weight to this. Unless this is all exposed, unless every level of inappropriateness and corruption is exposed, I certainly won’t be the last person to be politically intimidated like this.”

Congressional hearings, however, may be unlikely. Ways and Means sources and outside legal analysts say the IRS tax code prevents the disclosure of any information related to cases like Ms. O'Donnell‘s.

Even Ms. O’Donnell herself will not be briefed on what either congressional committee discovers, as the federal government asserts that tax law goes so far as to shield its own employees from being exposed publicly if they are engaged in willful targeting or other wrongdoing.

Only the chairmen of the investigating committees — Rep. Dave Camp, the Michigan Republican who heads Ways and Means, and Sen. Max Baucus, the outgoing Montana Democrat who heads the Senate finance panel — can learn exactly what happened in a case such as Ms. O'Donnell‘s.

By law, they are unable to reveal what they discover.

“The IRS takes a position that they don’t have to tell you the wrongdoing by their own agency and employees because of the protections that are supposed to be afforded to the taxpayer are then reversed and afforded to the IRS employee. This is a big problem. This agency is a big problem,” said Cleta Mitchell, a Washington lawyer who has sued the IRS on behalf of the National Organization for Marriage and has worked with tea party groups who claim they were singled out by the government.

The National Organization for Marriage lawsuit is an attempt to find out who accessed and leaked its confidential tax files, which included the names of donors.

The IRS did not respond to a request for comment.

The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, the primary investigative body in the O’Donnell case which first informed her that her tax information had been breached, said very little. A spokesman told The Times that “by law, TIGTA is not able to disclose any information concerning its investigative work.”

In addition to looking into the details of the O’Donnell case specifically, the Ways and Means probe also has spurred a conversation within the committee about proposed changes to U.S. tax law, sources familiar with the investigation said. The law in question, Section 6103 of the U.S. code, states that “no officer or employee of the United States shall disclose any return or return information obtained by him in any manner.”

The rule also extends to state government employees, law enforcement agencies and other investigative bodies.

The law is meant to protect the privacy of personal tax information, but critics argue that it is being used to prevent guilty parties in the IRS or elsewhere from being exposed.

“The IRS has been used as a political weapon, something in the campaign arsenal of the higher-ups for so long that of course there are going to be measures put in place to protect the secrecy of what they’re doing,” Ms. O'Donnell said. “I think that is exactly what’s happening here. And this is exactly why there needs to be a hearing.”

For Ms. O'Donnell, the improper accessing of her tax records was more than a breach of privacy. It also carried tangible consequences.

Just as she was announcing her ill-fated 2010 Senate bid, a tax lien was placed on a house purported to be hers. The lien was highly publicized and used to discredit Ms. O'Donnell’s candidacy just as it was getting off the ground, even though she no longer owned the home in question.

The IRS eventually blamed the lien on a computer glitch and withdrew it. Ms. O'Donnell sold the home in 2008, and financial documents from her lender show that her back payments were satisfied in July of that year, long before the IRS initiated the erroneous lien.

Ms. O'Donnell also battled a three-year audit of her personal finances that ultimately ended with her repaying $1,100 to the federal government. She said friends and family also were subjected to intrusive audits, though they were cleared.

Before the ordeal began, Ms. O'Donnell said, she was warned of what would come.

As she pondered a Senate run, she said, she was told by a prominent political figure in Delaware that if she challenged Mr. Castle — a former Delaware governor and congressman and a fixture in the state Republican Party — that the IRS and others would “F with her head.”

The case eventually spawned an inquiry from Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, an influential Republican who serves on the Finance and Judiciary committees.

As a result of his probe, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration revealed that at least four politicians or political donors have had their personal tax records improperly accessed since 2006, including one case described as a willful violation of federal law.

The Justice Department has declined to prosecute in any of the cases, and many of the details remain unclear.

The IRS previously stated that the “willful violation” unearthed by inspector general was not by an IRS employee.





http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/jan/26/congressional-inquiry-on-christine-odonnell-tax-re/

 

THREAD CREDIT: TAXRENTONLY

Christine O’Donnell: I was a victim of the IRS

By Christine O’Donnell

February 22, 2014 | 1:46pm
Modal Trigger
Christine O’Donnell: I was a victim of the IRS
Republican U.S. Senate candidate Christine O'Donnell's confidential tax documents were leaked to the press. Photo: AP

Whether Democrat or Republican, do you really want your private tax information leaked with impunity?

On March 9, 2010, around 10 a.m., I announced my plans to run for senate representing Delaware.

Later that same day, my office received a call from a reporter asking about my taxes.

It’s since come out, after a halting and unenthusiastic investigation, that a Delaware Department of Revenue employee named David Smith accessed my records that day at approximately 2 p.m. — out of curiosity, he says.

That these records ended up in the hands of the press is just a coincidence, the IRS claims.

To add insult to injury, the tax records given to the reporters weren’t even accurate. I had never fallen behind on my taxes, and a supposed tax lien was on a house I no longer owned.

The lien was highly publicized and used as political ammunition by my political opponents. The IRS later withdrew the lien and blamed it on a computer glitch but, at that point, the damage — and the invasion of my privacy — was done.

I wasn’t the only one preyed upon by the IRS, of course. The agency admits to targeting conservative nonprofits, asking them for membership lists and other data not required while delaying their tax-exempt status. And opponents of President Obama have been subjected to audits soon after criticizing the administration.

What we all have in common: no answers.

In January 2013, a US Treasury Department special agent told me that my tax records were compromised and misused. That was three years after my campaign. Now, in the 12 months since, no one has been called to testify, no more answers given.

How did Smith’s curiosity become an erroneous tax lien? How did the material end up in the hands of a journalist? Neither Smith, nor anyone else in the Delaware Department of Revenue, nor anyone at the IRS has never been placed under oath to explain this.

Fortunately, two congressional committees are working hard to break the stonewall and get answers. The House Ways and Means Committee has joined the Senate Judiciary Committee in an investigation into what happened and Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) has publicly raised questions about this case.

In a brutal irony, even if Congress does track down answers, they may not be able to share what they discover with me.

This is because the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), the agency looking into my case alongside Congress, cannot publicly disclose any information about what it finds in this investigation.

That’s supposedly according to Section 6103 of the US code which is intended to protect the privacy of personal tax information.

Too bad it didn’t protect mine.

What was written as a well-meaning law to protect taxpayers has inexplicably transformed into a shield for the perpetrators. Unless the law is changed, there will be no public accountability for those who committed this crime, no one will be brought to justice and there will be no deterrent preventing such crimes from being committed again.

While there has been bipartisan support for resolving these cases, Congressmen Gerald E. Connolly (D-Va.) and Matthew Cartwright (D-Pa.) are attempting to further impede investigations into my case as well as others. Shortly after the Ways and Means Committee confirmed it was investigating my case, these congressmen attacked TIGTA, accused that agency of being pro-Republican and called for an ethics investigation.

Let’s imagine if the situation was reversed. What if, while a Republican was president, the IRS leaked the tax records of Democratic candidates to the press? What would the reaction look like then?

Would journalists be dismissing this as “not a scandal”?

You may not agree with my politics, but is this the kind of precedent Democrats really want to set — that leaking private information is no big deal?

Surely if either of Connolly or Cartwright had a family member, neighbor, friend or constituent who was targeted by the IRS this way, they would be doing everything in their power to get justice.

One would think they realize if they don’t use their power in Congress to stop these illegal activities, the same crimes could be committed to smear them.

President Obama recently said there was “not a smidgen of corruption” at the IRS, even though evidence continues to mount and investigations continue to be pursued. It has already been 10 months since Sen. Grassley and I were told by Treasury Department officials that we would be given information about my case. What is taking so long?

The only way people will be confident the government is truly on their side is if these cases are resolved with the perpetrators held accountable and brought to justice. Until then, any taxpayer is a potential target.

--------------------------

What happened here is tyranny. Withing 4 hours of a person announcing their candidacy, the government bureaucrats used their power to attack this person because her politics were not in line with their statist authoritarian (Democrat) desires.

Her private information was leaked to political foes.

Making matters worse, the government is employing a law meant to protect the American citizens to instead keep their illegal activity secret.

We have the people fearing the government which is tyranny, instead of the government fearing the people which is freedom.

To make matters worse we will have a bunch of Liberals / Progressives support such a tyrannical act, because it aligns with their authoritarian views.

 

There really ought to be serious, serious, repercussions for people going rouge and divulging confidential personal information to the public, especially when they are in a position of trust.

 

What happened here is tyranny. Withing 4 hours of a person announcing their candidacy, the government bureaucrats used their power to attack this person because her politics were not in line with their statist authoritarian (Democrat) desires.

Her private information was leaked to political foes.

Making matters worse, the government is employing a law meant to protect the American citizens to instead keep their illegal activity secret.

We have the people fearing the government which is tyranny, instead of the government fearing the people which is freedom.

To make matters worse we will have a bunch of Liberals / Progressives support such a tyrannical act, because it aligns with their authoritarian views.

 

I hope they merge my thread into this one. This article is more recent. The one I found was from a month ago.

 

I am waiting for Democrats to denounce when the Government is used as a political weapon. Good thing I am not holding my breath.

 

I was fined by the IRS for paying employees taxes with a check. Guess how they want me to pay my fine? To send them a check.

 

If proven true then this will validate a lot of the cries from the right and really seriously damage the credibility of the person who leaked it and the organization (not sure about the tax structure between state and the IRS at the federal level) that individual answers too.

The timing is just a bit too convenient, though the fact that the information 'leaked' was wrong suggests that someone without access was trying to create a story from nothing about a new candidate.

 

Go get yourself an EFTPS account setup (if you haven't already) then you can send the IRS money with a push of a button, lol. They haven't liked checks for payroll taxes for 2-3 years now.

 

Oh I know now. They waited two years to let me know they were fining me every time. So $1000.00 and two years later I know now.

 

Oh I know now. They waited two years to let me know they were fining me every time. So $1000.00 and two years later I know now.

 

What is "taking so long'is the FACT that O'donnell and all the other Republicans have not the tiniest bit of evidence for ANY of these lies.

The latest singe example the Righties ca come up with is someone getting audited who had made a film critical of Obama. There have been THOUSANDS of critical films, books, stories, articles, proclamations, testimony and everything else, yet ALL the Republicans can come up with is one or two supposed "retributions from Obama". Not even a single denied Tea Party tax exemption refused.

There should be THOUSANDS of audit cases and the IRS is hardly populated with Liberals if any of this was true. There are plenty of Republicans to spill the beans, yet there is NO one.

Another utter failure of a Right Wing "hate Obama" smear.

Try harder, goofballs.

 

That does not make sense whatsoever.

Was this a case of misclassification?

 

It makes perfect sense.

http://biztaxlaw.about.com/od/payro...-Payments-Electronically-Starting-In-2011.htm

 

In other words, the IRS caught someone lying on their taxes which you say you are not doing when you submit them.

Apparently attempting to defraud the government now makes you a victim.

 

According to the TIGTA report by the OP, the report said there were breaches as far back as 2006 and that the IRS has said it was not an employee. Based on those two significant facts, I would hardly call this tyranny.

Ms. O'Dnnnell knew the tax lien was there before she ran and is now crying and whining because she lost. Oh boy.

 

No a few years ago the IRS stopped taking checks for my employes federal taxes. I just started my company and couldn't afford a CPA. Went visit one to get an idea of how to do it. I confused my quarterly with my payroll and paid it quarterly. They sent so paper stating so kind of legal crap I didn't understand at the time saying they received my money and wasn't sure what it was for. So I sent them another copy of the employees tax papers. Don't remember to tax code paper crap. W whatever. Never anything about a fine or I was doing anything wrong. And was paying with a check. Two years later I received a fine for all these mistakes. $2500.00 in paying my payroll taxes quarterly instead of monthly and a little over a $1000 in fines for paying with a check. Oh and the interest it accursed for two years. You know the two years they never served me with anything stating I was being fined. Now they received every dine I owed them. Just not in the right time frame. And my fines can be paid by internet or a check. So I can pay my fines for paying them with a check by writing them a check.
Governmental thinking is great isn't it?

 

Riot was not clear on whether it was the 941's or the actual employees. Which is why I asked was this a misclassification issue or not.

- - - Updated - - -

So I take it you did not read the instructions when completing your 941's or the notices that you should have received when said regulation went into effect.

 

I'm not a type of guy to sit at a desk. Sitting behind a desk I'm not making money. Can't feed my boys behind a desk. Especially when I first started. Money was tight. Every bit was in operations. So no I didn't read that legal worded crap that you have to have a PhDs in tax codes crap. Hell man I wasn't sure what a 941 was. I knew how to run my crew and do a great job for my customers.

 

I went to my local IRS office when I open my company. Needed my 941 forms to file these payroll taxes. Wasn't sure what it was called. Walked in and asked for the forms I need to file my employee federal taxes. They were lost. Kept asking me the form numbers. Like if I had a clue. It took me going to four different people before one of them goes ( oh you need a 941 ).. This just proved to me this system is too damn confusing. For both the agents and the people that have to follow them. The difference is we get fined when we miss understand the tax codes.
Meanwhile they are making Star Trek videos for thousands or staying at five star high end hotels or spending thousand on line dancing lessons or thousands on gift bags at meetings.
But we need them to run our medical records?

 

$1,100 could easily be an oversight on her part. Unless you're actually believing that a three-year audit on O'Donnell resulting in a measly $1,100 payment on her part qualifies as a successful IRS sting operation? I'd hardly call that scandalous.

 

Christine ODonnell BROKE ALL THE RULES. I as a vendor had to create receipts for CAMPAIGNS when I sold stuff to them for them to keep their records separate and apart from their LIVES. She paid the rent, utilities, AND LIVED OFF CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS. VERBOTEN!!! And that is NOTHING new!
She was either TOO STUPID to either run a campaign (and certainly be a Senator) or too arrogant to follow the rules. SCREW HER!

 

But yet its fine Little Timmy the Treasury Sec forgot to pay his taxes right?

 

The IRS job is to collect revenue. Nor have I stated anything was a scandal. What I did say is that someone is crying victim when it is they who is the problem. IF you aren't pushing the boundaries of the tax system, the flags don't go up and the IRS could care less.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, not paying them is different than filing a fraudulent claim. You can always file for an extension.

 

It certainly could be, but then she would not be claiming to be a victim then now would she?