By The Washington Times
The Treasury Department has admitted for the first time that
confidential tax records of several political candidates and campaign
donors were improperly scrutinized by government officials, but the
Justice Department has declined to prosecute any of the cases.
Its
investigators also are probing two allegations that the Internal
Revenue Service “targeted for audit candidates for public office,” the
Treasury’s inspector general for tax administration, J. Russell George,
has privately told Sen. Chuck Grassley.
In a written
response to a request by Mr. Grassley, the ranking Republican on the
Judiciary Committee, Mr. George said a review turned up four cases since
2006 in which unidentified government officials took part in
“unauthorized access or disclosure of tax records of political donors or
candidates,” including one case he described as “willful.” In four
additional cases, Mr. George said, allegations of improper access of IRS
records were not substantiated by the evidence.
Mr.
Grassley has asked Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to explain why
the Justice Department chose not to prosecute any of the cases. The Iowa
Republican told The Washington Times that the IRS “is required to act
with neutrality and professionalism, not political bias.”
The
investigation did not name the government officials who obtained the
IRS records improperly, nor did it reveal the identities or political
parties of the people whose tax records were compromised. By law,
taxpayer records at the IRS are supposed to be confidential.
The
disclosures deal another blow to the IRS and the Obama administration,
which are still grappling with revelations that IRS agents
inappropriately targeted conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status
for extraordinarily burdensome scrutiny during President Obama’s first
term. Amid that furor over the abuse of the agency’s powers, the IRS has
denied that the tax records of political candidates or donors were
improperly accessed.
“The Justice Department should
answer completely and not hide behind taxpayer confidentiality laws to
avoid accountability for its decision not to prosecute a violation of
taxpayer confidentiality laws,” Mr. Grassley told The Times. “With the
IRS on the hot seat over targeting certain political groups, it’s
particularly troubling to learn about ‘willful unauthorized access’ of
tax records involving individuals who were candidates for office or
political donors. The public needs to know whether the decision not to
prosecute these violations was politically motivated and whether the
individuals responsible were held accountable in any other way.”
A
spokesman for the Justice Department did not respond to a request for
comment Monday. Mr. Grassley has given Mr. Holder until July 26 to
answer his questions.
In a letter July 3, Mr. George
told Mr. Grassley that, of the four instances in which tax records were
improperly accessed, three cases were determined to be “inadvertent.”
“In
the fourth case, we presented evidence of a willful unauthorized access
to the Department of Justice, but the case was declined for
prosecution,” Mr. George wrote.
Of the three cases
that the inspector general called “inadvertent” disclosures, Mr. George
said his office referred one to Justice with a recommendation that no
prosecution be brought. He said Justice officials agreed with his
office’s assessment.
No reason was given for
Justice’s rejections of prosecutions in the examples cited by Mr.
George. In a July 12 letter to Mr. Holder, Mr. Grassley asked whether
the attorney general knew about the cases, who in the Justice Department
decided against prosecution, and with which parties the “victims” in
the cases were affiliated.
“Although this may not be indicative of wide spread targeting, any instance is cause for concern,” Mr. Grassley wrote. “Even more alarming, in at least one instance TIGTA referred evidence of ‘willful unauthorized access’ to the United States Attorney’s Office, but criminal prosecution was declined. Decisions such as these directly impact the political process and should be subject to the scrutiny of the American public.”
“Although this may not be indicative of wide spread targeting, any instance is cause for concern,” Mr. Grassley wrote. “Even more alarming, in at least one instance TIGTA referred evidence of ‘willful unauthorized access’ to the United States Attorney’s Office, but criminal prosecution was declined. Decisions such as these directly impact the political process and should be subject to the scrutiny of the American public.”
The IRS did not respond to a request for comment on Mr. George’s findings.
No comments:
Post a Comment