|
#21
| |||
| |||
| TaxSrv wrote: - quote - > "TaxmanHog" wrote:
One of my neighbors worked for a federal investigation> > Many Field agents are concerned about irrational retribution > > by certain Taxpayers, particularly those with constitutional > > and other frivolous arguments. Some have gone so far as to > > exercise every option in the disclosure regulations to > > compel as much PERSONAL INFORMATION about the RO, RA, as > > possible for intimidation & retribution. > True but the problem is that once past security and inside > the building, anyone in there, including the security guard, > knowing your name can still obtain your home address by > other means. Withholding it from the security guard > accomplishes nothing for protection from harm by those of a > criminal mind. There used to an actual tax protestor two > houses away from me, and agents under my supervision worked > his case. The intervening neighbor knew I worked for IRS > though I never told him so, and it's something many IRS ee's > don't worry much about. No more than two other neighbors, > one each state and local police, whose marked cars are > proudly displayed in their driveway. > And if that weren't the case, and on the lighter side, they > both still look and act like police, to suggest a > stereotype. Once on a busy downtown street in broad > daylight, I walked past two seedy guys whose manner and > words suggested an imminent mugging. One guy grabbed the > other's arm, saying, "Stop!...he looks like "fuzz." agency. His company car did not have lights or other things. Just a my son is an honor roll student bumper sticker. I happened to notice that his home was listed in the Polk directory, with his employment. I told him and he said that he no longer worked in the old areas and did not care about the Polka thing. -- Frederick E. Jorden http://Tax-Accounting-Payroll.com 7825 Midlothian Tpk - 207 Richmond, VA 23235-5247 EMAIL knowtax[at]bigfoot.com (804) 320-6210 FAX (804) 320-6211 << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#20
| |||
| |||
| "TaxmanHog" wrote: - quote - > Many Field agents are concerned about irrational retribution
True but the problem is that once past security and inside> by certain Taxpayers, particularly those with constitutional > and other frivolous arguments. Some have gone so far as to > exercise every option in the disclosure regulations to > compel as much PERSONAL INFORMATION about the RO, RA, as > possible for intimidation & retribution. the building, anyone in there, including the security guard, knowing your name can still obtain your home address by other means. Withholding it from the security guard accomplishes nothing for protection from harm by those of a criminal mind. There used to an actual tax protestor two houses away from me, and agents under my supervision worked his case. The intervening neighbor knew I worked for IRS though I never told him so, and it's something many IRS ee's don't worry much about. No more than two other neighbors, one each state and local police, whose marked cars are proudly displayed in their driveway. And if that weren't the case, and on the lighter side, they both still look and act like police, to suggest a stereotype. Once on a busy downtown street in broad daylight, I walked past two seedy guys whose manner and words suggested an imminent mugging. One guy grabbed the other's arm, saying, "Stop!...he looks like "fuzz." Fred F. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#19
| |||
| |||
| - quote - > I found these guidelines posted deep in the bowels of the
This is the reason!> IRS website today. > http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/irs_e...y_security.pdf > ........................snip...................... > I'm just not sure that I follow why an IRS agent would have > an issue with providing a personal ID just as everyone else > would have to do. Is it because the personal ID would have > their home address & SSN on it? I don't see why everyone > wouldn't be just as vulnerable. Many Field agents are concerned about irrational retribution by certain Taxpayers, particularly those with constitutional and other frivolous arguments. Some have gone so far as to exercise every option in the disclosure regulations to compel as much PERSONAL INFORMATION about the RO, RA, as possible for intimidation & retribution. Recently National Office has been HOT on the issue of "LAZY" (My words), RO's & RO's not getting to the field when they should. Typically the cases of concern are LARGE corporate, or those with representation (CPA, EA, or ATTY). The agents are being asked to schedule --FIELD-- meetings with the taxpayer at the place of business so that a cursory observation of the assets & staffing can be made. If it is not possible to meet with the TP at his place of business then try to Meet at the Rep's office. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#18
| |||
| |||
| Frederick Jorden wrote: - quote - > But then IRS regulations, no matter how well crafted, could
There will always be certain conflicts--the issue will be> run afoul of violation of public policy in regards to > reasonable actions to maintain security on his property by > citizens in the post 9/11 world. whether the current answer (you need to come to the IRS office) is a reasonable compromise between the goals and rights of each party. My guess is the courts would find it so, and not require the IRS employees to disclose whatever information a building owner on a whim might decide he/she wants under the guise of security. Given the relatively ease of forging drivers licenses and the like, I suspect there's also a real question about just what true increase in "security" is provided by demanding that document. Our theory is that our "rent-a-cop" doesn't know what an IRS identification document looks like--but then we think he/she really knows what all 50 states drivers licenses look like--especially all currently valid variants (in Arizona, with extremely long periods during which the license is valid, there are a *bunch* of different cards that are still valid). My own take is that such "security" is, at best, window dressing meant primarily to show the party is "doing something" rather than actually doing a whole lot to increase the security of the building. I'm probably a pretty good example--my own driver's license picture looks very little like me now (lost quite a bit of weight), and since it's scheduled to be valid through 2020 (no kidding) that was going to be inevitable. But I've only *once* had anyone suggest the license was a problem as an ID--and that was a clerk at a gift shop in a hotel. Security people have *never* even taken a second look at it. I half suspect I could present my wife's ID and get through most such checkpoints...<grin So, to get back on topic, it would seem that if you required IRS employees to comply with any request to produce personal information where the person asking said the magic word "security" would simply invite targeted abuse. Considering that it wouldn't take much to move the target to attempting to get other sensitive information from other federal officers, I suspect the courts would likely side with the government agency if push came to shove <grin> . -- Ed Zollars, CPA Phoenix, Arizona << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#17
| |||
| |||
| Ed Zollars, CPA wrote: - quote - > Frederick Jorden wrote:
But then IRS regulations, no matter how well crafted, could> > Ed you are confusing me with the refusal by the agents of > > the property owner that I lease my office from. Many > > landlords have adopted policies for security that are beyond > > the control of the building tenants. Just like nonsmoking > > policies. I would be satisfied by an IRS issued photo ID, > > but not a badge without a photo. > That's fine, but the agent still doesn't need to comply with > that request merely to get in. If the government official > has a right to get in (law enforcement let's say), then the > rent-a-cop needs to give way regardless of "building policy" > or face certain problems. If the government official is > there at your request and for your convenience, the official > can simply refuse to comply with the request and force you > to meet them on their turf. > That is, you would face the consequences of your hired > representative's actions in this regard. The government > employee is not going to be required to disclose personal > information (his/her physical home address) at the whim of > whomever might own the building. > As I said, I understand the purpose of this. If an IRS > agent had to do whatever the building owner requested in > order to gain entrance, then all kinds of mischief could be > carried out. So this gives a "bright line" that simply > throws the consequences of rejecting the government issued > identification in order to require some other one on the lap > of the taxpayer. > I guess I understand because I've once too often hit the > "company policy" line when trying to get information from > organizations they are required to give by law (such as to a > former plan participant). I always find it amusing when such > cases make it to court and it is pointed out that the > entity's policy manual doesn't serve to override federal law > <grin> . run afoul of violation of public policy in regards to reasonable actions to maintain security on his property by citizens in the post 9/11 world. -- Frederick E. Jorden http://Tax-Accounting-Payroll.com 7825 Midlothian Tpk - 207 Richmond, VA 23235-5247 EMAIL knowtax[at]bigfoot.com (804) 320-6210 FAX (804) 320-6211 << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#16
| |||
| |||
| MTW wrote: - quote - > Harlan Lunsford wrote:
I JUST noticed that I referred to it as a "CID badget". That> > For those in the know, what does a CID badget look like? > I don't recall specifically, but I have seen 'em !! is not to imply that I think IRS gets their "badGETS" out of a Cracker Jack (tm) box. Cheer$, Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#15
| |||
| |||
| Frederick Jorden wrote: - quote - > Every time I deal with a law officer who flashes a badge I
At our state society two day seminar just concluded I asked> insist that the officer show me his photo ID. This ID is > issued by his employer and generally sufficient to verify > his identity. In today's society to not permit a taxpayer or > his agent to verify the identity of someone who claims he is > an IRS auditor is ridiculous. about this issue and the IRS speaker replied that all badges these days have photos on them. Further, in response to my second question, that CID badges are very prominently so marked. Cheer$, Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#14
| |||
| |||
| TaxSrv wrote: - quote - > That's all true, theoretically, but if the same IRS employee
Perhaps--but, then again, the agent can elect not to buy the> takes out an auto loan, the same info and more will be eyed > by a whole bunch of people, any one whom may have evil in > mind. car. No problem there as it's a voluntary transaction. My brother, who is a Phoenix police officer, will do the same thing. But on the job, there are a number of cases where he cannot be forced to "jump through hoops" imposed by a building owner once he has presented his government issued badge. As I note, quite often rules like this are created to simply create a rule that can be referred to when someone is being abusive. That is, the agent cannot be required to show more than his official identification. If the rule was that he/she had to show "reasonable" identification, then we'd have created the potential for a game to push to see just how far we could go with "reasonable" requests, which if the agent didn't comply with, would let the taxpayer off the hook. And there are definitely those out there who would play that game. -- Ed Zollars, CPA Phoenix, Arizona << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#13
| |||
| |||
| Frederick Jorden wrote: - quote - > Ed you are confusing me with the refusal by the agents of
That's fine, but the agent still doesn't need to comply with> the property owner that I lease my office from. Many > landlords have adopted policies for security that are beyond > the control of the building tenants. Just like nonsmoking > policies. I would be satisfied by an IRS issued photo ID, > but not a badge without a photo. that request merely to get in. If the government official has a right to get in (law enforcement let's say), then the rent-a-cop needs to give way regardless of "building policy" or face certain problems. If the government official is there at your request and for your convenience, the official can simply refuse to comply with the request and force you to meet them on their turf. That is, you would face the consequences of your hired representative's actions in this regard. The government employee is not going to be required to disclose personal information (his/her physical home address) at the whim of whomever might own the building. As I said, I understand the purpose of this. If an IRS agent had to do whatever the building owner requested in order to gain entrance, then all kinds of mischief could be carried out. So this gives a "bright line" that simply throws the consequences of rejecting the government issued identification in order to require some other one on the lap of the taxpayer. I guess I understand because I've once too often hit the "company policy" line when trying to get information from organizations they are required to give by law (such as to a former plan participant). I always find it amusing when such cases make it to court and it is pointed out that the entity's policy manual doesn't serve to override federal law <grin> . -- Ed Zollars, CPA Phoenix, Arizona << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#12
| |||
| |||
| "Ed Zollars, CPA" wrote: - quote - > ... And that
That's all true, theoretically, but if the same IRS employee> unscrupulous person might not necessarily be the taxpayer or > the practitioner--it's possible the security person might > have a beef with the IRS (or know someone who does) and > would like to get that information for nefarious purposes > once he or she had discovered the person was an agent. takes out an auto loan, the same info and more will be eyed by a whole bunch of people, any one whom may have evil in mind. The IRS guideline should be viewed in context of its being unionized, and management must address such an issue likely raised by the union in good faith, practical nonissue though it may be. If an IRS employee needs to show a driver's license to enter a private sector building, he/she does it like everyone else entering that bldg -- show that document and no more. Same drill as tendering a check at a grocery store. For this reason, this example of incessant missives from HQ are occasionally viewed by IRS ee's, having enough common sense to make them unqualified to write these things, as more than inscrutable. Fred F. << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#11
| |||
| |||
| Phil Marti wrote: - quote - > Harlan Lunsford <lunstax[at]bellsouth.net> writes:
The CIDs had photo ID cards the last time I had contact with> > For those in the know, what does a CID badget look like? > It's been a while, but in my day the CID special agents had > badges that looked like badges. Revenue agents and officers > had "pocket commissions" that had photos and lots of > official gobbledygook, but no badge. a pair at my office. -- Frederick E. Jorden http://Tax-Accounting-Payroll.com 7825 Midlothian Tpk - 207 Richmond, VA 23235-5247 EMAIL knowtax[at]bigfoot.com (804) 320-6210 FAX (804) 320-6211 << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#10
| |||
| |||
| Ed Zollars, CPA wrote: - quote - > Frederick Jorden wrote:
Ed you are confusing me with the refusal by the agents of> > The security guards at the gate may not be in the employ of > > the taxpayer! They may work for the landlord of the office > > building involved. All I know is that if an IRS agent thinks > > he is beyond verification of his identity at the North Anna > > nuclear power plant he will get to meet lots of FBI, > > Virginia State Police, sheriff's deputies, and security > > employees of Dominion Resources. IRS agents are not above > > the law. > No one is saying you have to *admit* the IRS agent to the > building if he refuses to show the document. I'm not > required to submit to going through the security checks at > the airport either--but if I plan to get on the flight I'm > scheduled to make in just over a week, I'm probably going to > have to do it. In this case, the IRS agent is merely going > to require the taxpayer to meet him somewhere else to > conduct the examination--perhaps down at the federal > building. > P.S. - I would suggest you might not get far by insisting on > seeing the driver's license and a litany of other documents > of a law enforcement official who has legitimate cause to > enter the building. Rather the rent-a-cop might find himself > going down to become a guest of the government and getting > his own personal security search <grin> . the property owner that I lease my office from. Many landlords have adopted policies for security that are beyond the control of the building tenants. Just like nonsmoking policies. I would be satisfied by an IRS issued photo ID, but not a badge without a photo. -- Frederick E. Jorden http://Tax-Accounting-Payroll.com 7825 Midlothian Tpk - 207 Richmond, VA 23235-5247 EMAIL knowtax[at]bigfoot.com (804) 320-6210 FAX (804) 320-6211 << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#9
| |||
| |||
| Harlan Lunsford <lunstax[at]bellsouth.net> writes: - quote - > For those in the know, what does a CID badget look like?
It's been a while, but in my day the CID special agents hadbadges that looked like badges. Revenue agents and officers had "pocket commissions" that had photos and lots of official gobbledygook, but no badge. Phil Phil Marti Topeka, KS << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#8
| |||
| |||
| Frederick Jorden wrote: - quote - > The security guards at the gate may not be in the employ of
No one is saying you have to *admit* the IRS agent to the> the taxpayer! They may work for the landlord of the office > building involved. All I know is that if an IRS agent thinks > he is beyond verification of his identity at the North Anna > nuclear power plant he will get to meet lots of FBI, > Virginia State Police, sheriff's deputies, and security > employees of Dominion Resources. IRS agents are not above > the law. building if he refuses to show the document. I'm not required to submit to going through the security checks at the airport either--but if I plan to get on the flight I'm scheduled to make in just over a week, I'm probably going to have to do it. In this case, the IRS agent is merely going to require the taxpayer to meet him somewhere else to conduct the examination--perhaps down at the federal building. P.S. - I would suggest you might not get far by insisting on seeing the driver's license and a litany of other documents of a law enforcement official who has legitimate cause to enter the building. Rather the rent-a-cop might find himself going down to become a guest of the government and getting his own personal security search <grin> . -- Ed Zollars, CPA Phoenix, Arizona << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#7
| |||
| |||
| Harlan Lunsford wrote: - quote - > For those in the know, what does a CID badget look like?
I don't recall specifically, but I have seen 'em !!I ALWAYS ask field agents to present official ID when meeting not at an IRS office. MTW << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#6
| |||
| |||
| Frederick Jorden wrote: - quote - > Every time I deal with a law officer who flashes a badge I
Speaking of badges, I can't recall ever seeing one or even> insist that the officer show me his photo ID. This ID is > issued by his employer and generally sufficient to verify > his identity. In today's society to not permit a taxpayer or > his agent to verify the identity of someone who claims he is > an IRS auditor is ridiculous. asking any IRS employee to show me his/hers. After all, down this way we know the IRS personnel or have other ways to verify who they are before they get here. I ask the question because one of my clients is going to be visited by a 'money anti-laundering specialist" next month in order to check on whether or not he should have/did file form 8300's. For those in the know, what does a CID badget look like? Cheer$, Harlan Lunsford, EA n LA << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#5
| |||
| |||
| Ed Zollars, CPA wrote: - quote - > jake johnson wrote:
The security guards at the gate may not be in the employ of> > I'm just not sure that I follow why an IRS agent would have > > an issue with providing a personal ID just as everyone else > > would have to do. Is it because the personal ID would have > > their home addresse & SSN on it? I don't see why everyone > > wouldn't be just as vulnerable. > What they are saying is, essentially, that conducting the > examination at the "offsite location" isn't required if > there are conditions imposed on that examination. So if the > IRS agent wishes to refuse to comply with the request to > more fully document his/her identity (and I suspect it is > due to the fact it could be used by the unscrupulous as a > ruse to get personal information on the agent) that does not > give the taxpayer a "free pass" on the exam. And that > unscrupulous person might not necessarily be the taxpayer or > the practitioner--it's possible the security person might > have a beef with the IRS (or know someone who does) and > would like to get that information for nefarious purposes > once he or she had discovered the person was an agent. > I suspect most agents aren't going to take advantage of that > provision in most cases. But it gives them the right to do > so if the situation just doesn't "feel right" to the agent. > As well, it gives the agent a bargaining chip with the > practitioner to "call off the dogs" <grin> at the security > gate. the taxpayer! They may work for the landlord of the office building involved. All I know is that if an IRS agent thinks he is beyond verification of his identity at the North Anna nuclear power plant he will get to meet lots of FBI, Virginia State Police, sheriff's deputies, and security employees of Dominion Resources. IRS agents are not above the law. -- Frederick E. Jorden http://Tax-Accounting-Payroll.com 7825 Midlothian Tpk - 207 Richmond, VA 23235-5247 EMAIL knowtax[at]bigfoot.com (804) 320-6210 FAX (804) 320-6211 << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#4
| |||
| |||
| - quote - > > On privacy grounds, these guidelines prohibit the agent from
Because of the failure of Government to prevent 9/11 many> > being required to provide these personal ID's and authorize > > the agent to invoke the authority to instead hold the > > examination at the IRS offices, if necessary. > > > I'm just not sure that I follow why an IRS agent would have > > an issue with providing a personal ID just as everyone else > > would have to do. > The fear that some whacko is going to visit in the middle of > the night. > I don't recall this ever being an issue in my IRS days, but > I don't think I would have given even building security my > home information. > BTW, it seems a little intrusive to me for an office > building to be asking for personal ID when you're visiting > on behalf of your employer, but what do I know? private organizations have been forced to up security levels. When I go to the Richmond Federal Building I am forced to leave my pen knife, legal under Federal and Virginia Law, with the rent a cop at the building entry. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. -- Frederick E. Jorden http://Tax-Accounting-Payroll.com 7825 Midlothian Tpk - 207 Richmond, VA 23235-5247 EMAIL knowtax[at]bigfoot.com (804) 320-6210 FAX (804) 320-6211 << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#3
| |||
| |||
| - quote - > Every time I deal with a law officer who flashes a badge I
That's not the gist of the guidelines as I read them. IRS> insist that the officer show me his photo ID. This ID is > issued by his employer and generally sufficient to verify > his identity. field employees have two pieces of government photo ID, which anyone is free to see (when the employee's on business). For anyone to demand of an employee a driver's license, with the employee's home address on it, in such a setting strikes me as totally inappropriate, just as it would be if you asked the same of the cop. Phil Marti Topeka, KS << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
|
#2
| |||
| |||
| jake johnson wrote: - quote - > I'm just not sure that I follow why an IRS agent would have
What they are saying is, essentially, that conducting the> an issue with providing a personal ID just as everyone else > would have to do. Is it because the personal ID would have > their home addresse & SSN on it? I don't see why everyone > wouldn't be just as vulnerable. examination at the "offsite location" isn't required if there are conditions imposed on that examination. So if the IRS agent wishes to refuse to comply with the request to more fully document his/her identity (and I suspect it is due to the fact it could be used by the unscrupulous as a ruse to get personal information on the agent) that does not give the taxpayer a "free pass" on the exam. And that unscrupulous person might not necessarily be the taxpayer or the practitioner--it's possible the security person might have a beef with the IRS (or know someone who does) and would like to get that information for nefarious purposes once he or she had discovered the person was an agent. I suspect most agents aren't going to take advantage of that provision in most cases. But it gives them the right to do so if the situation just doesn't "feel right" to the agent. As well, it gives the agent a bargaining chip with the practitioner to "call off the dogs" <grin> at the security gate. -- Ed Zollars, CPA Phoenix, Arizona << -------------------------------------------------> << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting > << messages to this newsgroup are at www.asktax.org > << -------------------------------------------------> |
| Tags |
| employee, guidelines, irs, safety |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | Last Post | |
| Self-employment tax for ex-employee taxi: I resigned from company A and joined company B. While at A, I worked on a few patents which got issued after I had resigned. So, A sent me a... | Taxes | 1 | 05-19-2004 07:25 AM | |
| Employee home office Michelle Kapp: The tax law has been drafted to prevent employees from deducting the expenses of an office at home. Even if the employee should meet one of the... | Taxes | 9 | 02-05-2004 05:26 AM | |
| Employee Meals Mr B: Taxpayer runs a Pizza shop and at various times will let his employees eat a Pizza or drink a soda at no charge. Is there any way that he can... | Taxes | 1 | 01-07-2004 01:38 AM | |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |