WP: Private Firms to Chase Delinquent Taxpayers

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35714-2004Dec4?language=printer

When Reps. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) teamed up in September to get the House to pass an amendment blocking the use of private companies to collect back taxes from delinquent taxpayers, it seemed the Bush administration plan might be doomed for at least a year.

But in the final hours of drafting a 3,300-page spending bill last month, House and Senate negotiators eliminated Capito's and Van Hollen's handiwork, clearing the way for the Internal Revenue Service to hire commercial debt collectors. These private agents could keep as much as 25 percent of the amounts they recovered.

While the Bush administration has strongly supported the initiative as a way to increase revenue collections amid growing deficits, critics contend it could lead to harassment of taxpayers and breaches of privacy. Labor groups representing federal workers also oppose the change. But it has the backing of the debt-collection industry, which has contributed heavily to GOP organizations and causes since Bush became president.

One company that lobbied for the change is California-based Diversified Collection Services Inc., one of eight companies indicted in September by a Texas grand jury, along with three Republican fundraisers for House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), on charges of alleged money laundering and illegal corporate campaign contributions.

A DeLay spokesman said last week that neither DeLay nor anyone in his office has had any contact with Diversified Collection representatives for several years.

[NYC]

1. Private industry "bought" the jobs.

...But it has the backing of the debt-collection industry, which has contributed heavily to GOP organizations and causes since Bush became president...

What happened to the confidentiality of tax matters? (among other things)

[aquart]

2. They privatized the IRS?

This is going to be so ugly.

[havocmom]

10. Some tax returns have been processed by private corpopations who

outsource the work to India. Been happening for a few years now. Expected to increase A LOT this coming year.

Google outsource tax returns and take a deep breath.

[Occulus]

3. I refuse to recognize the authority of contractors acting

on behalf of the IRS. So far as I am concerned, if it is not a government agency acting on tax issues, it HAS NO AUTHORITY.

Any "private contractor" attempting to do anything to me on behalf of the IRS will be seen as a thief, and I *will act accordingly*.

If they come to my door assuming such authority, their personal safety will be at stake.

Count on it.

[Straight Shooter]

4. This is the same bill with the provision for peeking at taxpayers' returns

It all adds up now. Republicans can sneak a peek at any American's tax return, they notify the debt collection service of any discrepancy, the collection service goes after the person, armed with their tax return info.

Wait and see, wait and see. This is a psychological bomb getting ready to go off in the public. How would you like some person you don't even know, examining your tax returns and thinking they find something there worth going after, and then harassing you for the money because they get a commission?

This is really, really bad. It's up to bush to veto that provision, right? He won't do it.

We need to find out if Diversified is connected with the Senator from Oklahoma who says his staff was responsible for introducing that clause to examine American taxpayer returns.

Remember, it's only the Repubs who have the authority to look. Not the Dems. This is incredibly ugly.

[genieroze]

8. Don't you need a audit first?

[OneBlueSky]

5. do you have any idea how long it would take . . .

to even skim a 3,300-page bill? . . . much less comprehend it? . . . and discuss it with colleagues? . . .

the only people who read that bill were the people who wrote it . . . and the writing was no doubt pieced out . . .

we should be asking every Democrat who voted for this thing "WHY?" . . . not having time to read and understand it is certainly NOT an excuse . . . if that's the case (and it most assuredly is), then they had an obligation to vote against it . . . WHY did they vote FOR it? . . .

[struggle4progress]

6. In 1998, the Republicans ran a dog-and-pony show claiming ...

... that IRS was terrorizing taxpayers, as a result of which Congress modified the law to make effective collection action more difficult. If the IRS is now having difficulty collecting, perhaps the 1998 changes require reexamination.

[cap]

7. no one has said if this can be outsourced...

i mean as in sent overseas....

what a kicker...

[genieroze]

9. It already is the IRS does outsource processing of your returns

to India

[rodeodance]

11. Bush is spending billions on this war and needs to fill his piggybank!!

with 'contrabutions' from the little guy again!!

....While the Bush administration has strongly supported the initiative as a way to increase revenue collections amid growing deficits, critics contend it could lead to harassment of taxpayers and breaches of privacy. Labor groups representing federal workers also oppose the change. But it has the backing of the debt-collection industry, which has contributed heavily to GOP organizations and causes since Bush became president.