I previously predicted that no one at the IRS would (or could) be fired over the recent scandal and that the most noteworthy offenders would probably get punished with mandatory paid vacation.

Those predictions seem to have been correct.

Having gotten the easy ones right, I’d like to venture a couple less certain ones: 1) I think that no one in the permanent bureaucracy at the IRS violated a law or regulation; and 2) I think that had the permanent bureaucrats at the IRS targeted progressive groups, the same actions would in fact have been a violation of law and regulation.

Prediction 1: no violations

I’ve run across three suggestions regarding the law or regulation that the permanent bureaucrats at the IRS might have violated. If you don’t want the details, in all cases it’s possible to contort language to argue that permanent bureaucrats violated the law or regulation, but in all cases it’s a stretch and unlikely to hold up in court give wide deference that’s typically given to agencies and bureaucrats.

John Boehner said the following about what laws were broken:

Section 7214 of the title 26 of the U.S. code states very clearly, “any officer or employee of the united states acting in connection with any revenue law of the united states who is guilty of extortion or willful oppression under the color of law shall be dismissed from office and if convicted be fined up to 10,000 dollars and spend five years in jail”.

There’s no evidence of extortion, so we’re left only with “willful oppression under the color of law.”

I have no idea what this means, but I put my legal team on it (the team can identify himself in the comments if he wishes, though he may be too embarrassed by the exorbitant rates he charged to do so). The team referred me here. The gist is the term is meant to prohibit IRS agents from turning into “shady collection agents” (to borrow the description from my legal team).

The legal team did come up with an alternative regulation that may have been violated, specifically,18 USC 242.

The part is generally used against law enforcement officials run amok, but it’s not necessarily limited to such officials. The key bit of code is, “… the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution …”

It’s possible to argue that extra auditing violated free speech rights or due process rights, but it’s a stretch. The IRS has wide discretion to conduct audits, and all such groups know that they face the prospect of an audit.

There is one final contender, Section 1203 of the Internal Revenue Code. The relevant portion reads:

(a) In General.–Subject to subsection (c), the Commissioner of Internal Revenue shall terminate the employment of any employee of the Internal Revenue Service if there is a final administrative or judicial determination that such employee committed any act or omission described under subsection (b) in the performance of the employee’s official duties. Such termination shall be a removal for cause on charges of misconduct.

(b) Acts or Omissions.–The acts or omissions referred to under subsection (a) are–
. . .
(2) providing a false statement under oath with respect to a material matter involving a taxpayer or taxpayer representative;
(3) with respect to a taxpayer, taxpayer representative, or other employee of the Internal Revenue Service, the violation of–
(A) any right under the Constitution of the United States; or
(B) any civil right established under–
(i) title VI or VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964;
(ii) title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972;
(iii) the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967;
(iv) the Age Discrimination Act of 1975;
(v) section 501 or 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; or
(vi) title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990;
. . .
(7) willful misuse of the provisions of section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for the purpose of concealing information from a congressional inquiry;

Parts (b)(2) and (b)(7) may be a problem for some appointed officials that testified before Congress, but to create a problem for the permanent bureaucrats, you’re back to needing to demonstrate that Constitutional rights were violated by increased audit frequency – a tough sell.

In sum, while it’s possible to stretch some terms in the laws and regulations to argue that permanent bureaucrats at the IRS broke them, it’s an uphill battle. It’s also worth noting that the courts (and Congress and the President) have been highly deferential (see here for a recent and illuminating example) to agencies and bureaucrats. It’s unlikely that they’d change their tune now.

Prediction 2: turning the tables

If you read the list under (b) in Section 1203 again, you’ll notice that certain specific groups are protected from discrimination. By sheer coincidence, these protected groups tend to be overwhelmingly progressive.

It seems to me that permanent bureaucrats would be getting the boot if they’d targeted progressive groups. Instead, they’ll get paid vacations for a while and then they’ll resume their jobs as if nothing happened.

Closing thoughts

Conservatives have been working hard to connect the scandal to the administration. They should stop. It’s a much bigger problem if this all happened without direction, which it almost certainly did.

(People always assume that bureaucrats’ jobs change when a new administration comes in. This is a silly assumption. My job has not changed at all when the administration has changed. I still work on the same projects, take the same views, and perform the same tasks regardless of who is campaigning and giving interviews. Indeed, the only way an administration could actually change this is by meddling with bureaucrats – we value our “independence” from sordid politics too much. My guess is that if the administration asked the IRS to do this, the permanent bureaucrats in the IRS would have done less of this than they did).

Conservatives have succeeded in demonstrating that some higher level permanent bureaucrats knew what was going on and that they later told certain officials in the administration, but who cares? The point is that the abuses happened at the lower levels first.

Permanent employees with wide discretion, with no consequences associated with their actions, with no oversight, with nothing to lose will, and all beholden to the same ideology will behave this way – such is their incentive structure.

Our modern government is wide discretion to the permanent bureaucracy. In that system, they did nothing wrong (other than getting caught – maybe someone just wanted some extra time off).


12 Responses to IRS

  1. Red says:

    This may backfire. Rank and file conservatives are beginning to get it that only are non official government against them(media education, ect), but the federal government itself is a hostile entity. This may lead to real government Opposition by people who are not without skills that would make life tough for the USG. The GOP is setup to suck these people up and to make their efforts useless, but USG is taking less and less trouble to even pretend that’s the case. If nothing happens then the death of the GOP in the next 8 years is likely.

  2. Jehu says:

    You can’t expect to get justice enforced by Caesar against Caesar. That only works if Caesar is just using you to hit a competitor, like Agripa. Conservatives can’t expect to win via program without overwhelming electoral superiority and the willingness to abandon gentleman’s rules, because the bureacracy is always keen to act as a diode against them. This leaves the mechanism of pogrom. Level zero pogrom is this: who…whom in EVERY jury room, criminal or civil. Any corporation or group that is against us should categorically lose every single case brought by them or against them. Practice level zero pogrom effectively and you’ll build the necessary unity to take the next step. It’s also very profoundly satisfying to punish your adversaries. Get a taste of it and you’ll want more. Who…Whom!

  3. Anonymous says:

    I don’t think proving that increased audits violated “any right under the Constitution of the United States” is a tough sell at all. It obviously did so.

    • Handle says:

      Heh. Try telling that to a Federal judge – the bar is high my friend. And that’s even assuming that the Obama-Holder DOJ would prosecute the case vigorously and in good faith – which it totally wouldn’t. They are so many ways to pretend to pursue a case while planting plausibly-deniable poison pills in it. “The judge overturned us on a technicality, we did our best, but you know how these things go, c’est la guerre.” And that’s assuming they don’t reach some fraudulent plea deal or settlement a la Pigford anyway. And who’s going to report the result anyway?

      And none of that other media or bureaucratic or legal acton will need any direction – from the top or anywhere else – either.

      That’s the problem, people. Don’t be duped; there’s no way to salvage this system anymore if you don’t want these things to occur routinely.

  4. RS says:

    > other than getting caught – maybe someone just wanted some extra time off

    I wonder if perhaps three or four of them actually sojourned in tropical locales, that would really top it all off. Might as well go whole hog.

  5. Anonymous says:

    interesting that the author would use the term “regulation” in reference to a U.S. statute; no one familiar with the functioning of government, or simply well-educated in law or political science, would have made that error; so one wonders who the blogger actually is

    • Foseti says:

      The differences exist only in law school curriculums these days. I’ve done a lot of things wrong, fortunately attending law school wasn’t one of them.

  6. Bill says:

    to create a problem for the permanent bureaucrats, you’re back to needing to demonstrate that Constitutional rights were violated by increased audit frequency – a tough sell.

    This is, to me, the most interesting thing. Federal courts are very selective in “seeing through” facially neutral laws, regulations, and law-enforcement practices. For federal courts, poll taxes or literacy tests are racial discrimination despite them having jack shit to do with race, facially. Courts claim to be completely convinced by “darkies are poor and illiterate; therefore, poll taxes and literacy tests are racisss” That kind of inference only applies when it gets the courts to conclusions wanted by the evil elite. Since the evil elite apparently likes harassing Tea Partiers, courts will not deploy this kind of inference.

    Another interesting question is: why does the evil elite apparently like harassing Tea Partiers? The Tea Party is obviously another dopey distraction offered up by the evil elite to the right’s natural constituency. It’s like libertarianism, with extra added dumb.

    • Foseti says:

      Blacks are a protected class. Tea Partiers are not.

    • Nergal says:

      “Another interesting question is: why does the evil elite apparently like harassing Tea Partiers?”

      Simple answer,the Tea Party is for smaller government. The bureaucratic/media/government alliance depends on BIGGER government to inflate their salaries and provide more useless makework jobs for their protected classes.

      “The Tea Party is obviously another dopey distraction offered up by the evil elite to the right’s natural constituency.”

      Nope,it’s obvious from the reaction by the left elites that the Tea Party is not with the elites at all or even one of their fake front groups with earnest participants that they use periodically.

      The hippie movement and “countercultural revolution”,by contrast, WAS one of these such groups. Though they made a show of supposedly hating on the hippies in public, they also had certain “tells” that told the other elites that the hippies were their unwashed footsoldiers. These tells included members of the elite wearing their hair longer,not long like the hippies,but longer, and the Fourth Branch providing them favorable coverage and framing them as a movement for peace,despite all their aggressive warlike words and actions,the reverse of what has been done to the Tea Party.

      That’s how you can tell the Tea Party is outside the elite,because the Old Money attitude of distrust and hatred is being displayed by the establishment toward the New Money Tea Partiers. This has been stereotypical of the rich and connected since the dawn of time.

      The Tea Party revolution produced a smattering of good candidates and a bunch of bad ones, just as bad as the establishment candidates. My take is that though the elites fear and despise the Tea Party, a movement that was violent and hateful like OWS and all the other classically leftist movements would produce better results.

      The Muslims are openly professing how they’re going to kill us all and enslave us, and look how much the establishment loves them.The left bends over and spreads its cheeks for any group that threatens violence. The only reason why the Tea Party is not in control of the government right now is because they ARE goofy and non-violent.

  7. […] scary part of the IRS scandal is the general reaction. Related: Foseti on the IRS scandal. Related: The personal effects of the IRS scandal. Related: Gibson targeted by federal raids for […]

  8. […] If you happen to follow news about politics, how vulgar, you might want to take a look at his writing on the scandal of the IRS mysteriously not being ideologically […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: