Increased IRS Collection Enforcement—Who Is That Knocking on Your Door?
The IRS intends to reallocate resources to conduct more face-to-face meetings with taxpayers who have ongoing tax issues. This effort stems from the low and limited number of revenue officers available due to the historical constraints and limitations on the resources and budget of the IRS.
December 17, 2019 at 10:07 AM
5 minute read
On Nov. 20, the IRS issued Fact Sheet 2019-15, announcing that "as part of a larger effort by the Internal Revenue Service to ensure fairness in the tax system, the IRS is taking steps to conduct special compliance efforts for individual and business taxpayers in various communities." The IRS intends to reallocate resources to conduct more face-to-face meetings with taxpayers who have ongoing tax issues. This effort stems from the low and limited number of revenue officers available due to the historical constraints and limitations on the resources and budget of the IRS.
In general, during an IRS examination (audit), the taxpayer deals with a revenue agent; whereas once the case is in collections, the taxpayer deals with a revenue officer. Not to pity the IRS but being a revenue officer is truly a thankless job. In addition to dealing with average taxpayers behind on their tax bills, revenue officers deal with tax evaders and fraudsters every single day. Their job requires them to pursue all reasonable avenues to determine the extent of the taxpayers' assets and ability to pay—and one can only imagine the lengths taken by some taxpayers to conceal and frustrate the process. As part of the process, revenue officers routinely conduct in-person, face-to-face interviews of taxpayers, their employers, spouses and anyone who may shed light on the taxpayers' finances. In the context of a business, revenue officers often interview key employees, bookkeepers, accountants and even other businesses with which the business transacts. Ultimately, once a determination is made, the revenue officer works with taxpayers to satisfy their liabilities through full payment or a collection alternative via a payment plan or an offer-in-compromise. If no agreement can be reached, the revenue officer will commence enforcement through liens, levies, garnishment or otherwise. As one can imagine, the revenue officer's job is tedious, frustrating, stressful and extremely time consuming, so the IRS decided to take action.
This new effort by the IRS is aimed to target taxpayers who are aware of an existing tax issue, but who have not resolved the matter with the IRS through correspondence by mail. Furthermore, IRS efforts will increase during specific times, in specific geographical areas where there are a limited number of revenue officers available. Although the IRS did not provide any geographic specifics, it would be safe to assume that South Florida is an area where resources are limited, and increased enforcement may be warranted. With that in mind, here are some things you should know.
Make sure it is really a revenue officer. We are all familiar with the "IRS scams" going around —where individuals on the phone (usually with a thick foreign accent) tell you that you must pay your IRS bill immediately or the police will be summoned to your door. Well, don't put it past the scammers to show up at your door claiming to be from the IRS. In case there is a knock at your door claiming to be the IRS, you have the right to demand two forms of official credentials that include both a serial number and photo of the IRS employee. Also, the visit will not be out of the blue—that is, you would have received at least a few notices by mail before someone shows up at your door. Finally, if any arrangement for payment is made, make sure that the check is made out to the "United States Treasury," and not to any other payee.
You have a right to be represented. You have a right to be represented by an attorney, CPA, enrolled agent, enrolled actuary or other person permitted to practice before the IRS. As such, you may consider either providing the revenue officer with your representative's contact information or requesting the revenue officer's information for your representative to contact the revenue officer directly.
You have a right to record the interview. If you do wish to proceed with the interview at such time, you may be surprised to learn this, but it is your right to audio record the entire interview as long as you make the revenue officer aware that he or she is being recorded. I would certainly advise doing so as it would keep the revenue officer from overstepping, and provide you with admissible proof, should the revenue officer overstep.
You catch more flies with honey. One thing you should always remember is that the revenue officer is there to do his job, and, even if you feel the revenue officer is being unreasonable or overstepping his authority, you should always maintain a calm and respectful decorum; nothing is gained by a hot temper or disrespect. If you see yourself getting angry, ask to end the interview and seek qualified representation.
Datan Dorot is a Florida Bar board certified tax attorney and managing partner of Dorot & Bensimon in Aventura.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTurning Down the Rancor Around DEI: Re-embracing the Value of—and Values Behind—Workplace Diversity Programs
6 minute readWill Ohtani's 50/50 Ball Be Split 50/50? Fla. Court to Decide Owner of $4.5M Disputed Catch
How the Legislature Can Fix the Middle-Income Affordable Housing Exemption in Fla.'s Live Local Act
8 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250