Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?

Steven Miller Did the IRSs Head Mislead Or Did He Just Lead Poorly

Nothing quite like flipping through channels and landing on C-SPAN. Not only is it a great place to hear your favorite Jay-Z quotes recited by Marco Rubio, you also get to learn about the bizarro world that is our government agencies. Generally you would expect, indeed demand, leaders to have deep knowledge of their respective organizations including acceptable tasks, procedures, and a general philosophy and mission statement regarding how business is conducted. Not exactly the leadership the IRS had under Steven Miller. How can it be acceptable or even possible for the head of an agency to be so clueless with regards to his own agency? Yes, corporations are far from omniscient (i.e. JP Morgan’s Jamie Dimon vs. the London Whale) with regards to their business, but surely they don’t pride themselves on ignorance. Yet not only is this commonplace in the public sector, it seems to be preferred. Perhaps the political risk is greater for a perceived “scandal” than it is for general incompetence. Alas, our collective moral finger-wagging attracts more fear than our admiration for efficacy. This hubbub with the IRS is quite revealing indeed. The leaders of the IRS not only shared their incompetence, they lauded it in a characteristically political manner. However, I feel the biggest failure in leadership was not that of any of the IRS heads, but rather of our favorite non-leaders of the day, Congress. Yes, our legislative branch and its inability to pass a comprehensive and intelligible tax code.

The IRS has a long tradition of targeting political groups. While it is true that the IRS were targeting conservative groups with extra scrutiny, from someone with the IRS’s point of view … it made sense.  501c4 groups have long been viewed with suspicion as recipients of unfair tax exemptions (including by Mitch McConnell). It follows, by that same logic, that the IRS would indeed target those groups. When, over the last four years, a number of groups sprung up claiming tax-exempt status, it probably did make sense to target them, perhaps to catch a few that could be viewed as purely political organizations and not deserving of the tax-exempt status.

This doesn’t absolve the IRS, of course, which had no right to take it upon itself to decide who received such exemptions. However it was in the absence of good leadership that the agency moved down this path. The true disappointment here is a tax system that allows for such a gray area. Not only does it clearly fail in efficiency and encouraging investment, it also fails to promote the behavior (i.e. charitable giving) that it intends to.   

During these troubling times in our political process, we may be a little skeptical of government as a whole. But let me suggest placing our demand for efficacy and prudent management on equal footing with our disdain for scandal. Perhaps we could encourage future IRS chiefs to loudly proclaim that they know what’s going on in their agency when they’re summoned before Congress. And perhaps a streamlined tax system would allow us to cut the IRS staff by half, and that way maybe the next commissioner will know what’s actually going on.

PolicyMic

Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?

Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?

Steven Miller Did the IRSs Head Mislead Or Did He Just Lead Poorly

Nothing quite like flipping through channels and landing on C-SPAN. Not only is it a great place to hear your favorite Jay-Z quotes recited by Marco Rubio, you also get to learn about the bizarro world that is our government agencies. Generally you would expect, indeed demand, leaders to have deep knowledge of their respective organizations including acceptable tasks, procedures, and a general philosophy and mission statement regarding how business is conducted. Not exactly the leadership the IRS had under Steven Miller. How can it be acceptable or even possible for the head of an agency to be so clueless with regards to his own agency? Yes, corporations are far from omniscient (i.e. JP Morgan’s Jamie Dimon vs. the London Whale) with regards to their business, but surely they don’t pride themselves on ignorance. Yet not only is this commonplace in the public sector, it seems to be preferred. Perhaps the political risk is greater for a perceived “scandal” than it is for general incompetence. Alas, our collective moral finger-wagging attracts more fear than our admiration for efficacy. This hubbub with the IRS is quite revealing indeed. The leaders of the IRS not only shared their incompetence, they lauded it in a characteristically political manner. However, I feel the biggest failure in leadership was not that of any of the IRS heads, but rather of our favorite non-leaders of the day, Congress. Yes, our legislative branch and its inability to pass a comprehensive and intelligible tax code.

The IRS has a long tradition of targeting political groups. While it is true that the IRS were targeting conservative groups with extra scrutiny, from someone with the IRS’s point of view … it made sense.  501c4 groups have long been viewed with suspicion as recipients of unfair tax exemptions (including by Mitch McConnell). It follows, by that same logic, that the IRS would indeed target those groups. When, over the last four years, a number of groups sprung up claiming tax-exempt status, it probably did make sense to target them, perhaps to catch a few that could be viewed as purely political organizations and not deserving of the tax-exempt status.

This doesn’t absolve the IRS, of course, which had no right to take it upon itself to decide who received such exemptions. However it was in the absence of good leadership that the agency moved down this path. The true disappointment here is a tax system that allows for such a gray area. Not only does it clearly fail in efficiency and encouraging investment, it also fails to promote the behavior (i.e. charitable giving) that it intends to.   

During these troubling times in our political process, we may be a little skeptical of government as a whole. But let me suggest placing our demand for efficacy and prudent management on equal footing with our disdain for scandal. Perhaps we could encourage future IRS chiefs to loudly proclaim that they know what’s going on in their agency when they’re summoned before Congress. And perhaps a streamlined tax system would allow us to cut the IRS staff by half, and that way maybe the next commissioner will know what’s actually going on.

PolicyMic

Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?

Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?

Steven Miller Did the IRSs Head Mislead Or Did He Just Lead Poorly

Nothing quite like flipping through channels and landing on C-SPAN. Not only is it a great place to hear your favorite Jay-Z quotes recited by Marco Rubio, you also get to learn about the bizarro world that is our government agencies. Generally you would expect, indeed demand, leaders to have deep knowledge of their respective organizations including acceptable tasks, procedures, and a general philosophy and mission statement regarding how business is conducted. Not exactly the leadership the IRS had under Steven Miller. How can it be acceptable or even possible for the head of an agency to be so clueless with regards to his own agency? Yes, corporations are far from omniscient (i.e. JP Morgan’s Jamie Dimon vs. the London Whale) with regards to their business, but surely they don’t pride themselves on ignorance. Yet not only is this commonplace in the public sector, it seems to be preferred. Perhaps the political risk is greater for a perceived “scandal” than it is for general incompetence. Alas, our collective moral finger-wagging attracts more fear than our admiration for efficacy. This hubbub with the IRS is quite revealing indeed. The leaders of the IRS not only shared their incompetence, they lauded it in a characteristically political manner. However, I feel the biggest failure in leadership was not that of any of the IRS heads, but rather of our favorite non-leaders of the day, Congress. Yes, our legislative branch and its inability to pass a comprehensive and intelligible tax code.

The IRS has a long tradition of targeting political groups. While it is true that the IRS were targeting conservative groups with extra scrutiny, from someone with the IRS’s point of view … it made sense.  501c4 groups have long been viewed with suspicion as recipients of unfair tax exemptions (including by Mitch McConnell). It follows, by that same logic, that the IRS would indeed target those groups. When, over the last four years, a number of groups sprung up claiming tax-exempt status, it probably did make sense to target them, perhaps to catch a few that could be viewed as purely political organizations and not deserving of the tax-exempt status.

This doesn’t absolve the IRS, of course, which had no right to take it upon itself to decide who received such exemptions. However it was in the absence of good leadership that the agency moved down this path. The true disappointment here is a tax system that allows for such a gray area. Not only does it clearly fail in efficiency and encouraging investment, it also fails to promote the behavior (i.e. charitable giving) that it intends to.   

During these troubling times in our political process, we may be a little skeptical of government as a whole. But let me suggest placing our demand for efficacy and prudent management on equal footing with our disdain for scandal. Perhaps we could encourage future IRS chiefs to loudly proclaim that they know what’s going on in their agency when they’re summoned before Congress. And perhaps a streamlined tax system would allow us to cut the IRS staff by half, and that way maybe the next commissioner will know what’s actually going on.

PolicyMic

Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?

Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?

Steven Miller Did the IRSs Head Mislead Or Did He Just Lead Poorly

Nothing quite like flipping through channels and landing on C-SPAN. Not only is it a great place to hear your favorite Jay-Z quotes recited by Marco Rubio, you also get to learn about the bizarro world that is our government agencies. Generally you would expect, indeed demand, leaders to have deep knowledge of their respective organizations including acceptable tasks, procedures, and a general philosophy and mission statement regarding how business is conducted. Not exactly the leadership the IRS had under Steven Miller. How can it be acceptable or even possible for the head of an agency to be so clueless with regards to his own agency? Yes, corporations are far from omniscient (i.e. JP Morgan’s Jamie Dimon vs. the London Whale) with regards to their business, but surely they don’t pride themselves on ignorance. Yet not only is this commonplace in the public sector, it seems to be preferred. Perhaps the political risk is greater for a perceived “scandal” than it is for general incompetence. Alas, our collective moral finger-wagging attracts more fear than our admiration for efficacy. This hubbub with the IRS is quite revealing indeed. The leaders of the IRS not only shared their incompetence, they lauded it in a characteristically political manner. However, I feel the biggest failure in leadership was not that of any of the IRS heads, but rather of our favorite non-leaders of the day, Congress. Yes, our legislative branch and its inability to pass a comprehensive and intelligible tax code.

The IRS has a long tradition of targeting political groups. While it is true that the IRS were targeting conservative groups with extra scrutiny, from someone with the IRS’s point of view … it made sense.  501c4 groups have long been viewed with suspicion as recipients of unfair tax exemptions (including by Mitch McConnell). It follows, by that same logic, that the IRS would indeed target those groups. When, over the last four years, a number of groups sprung up claiming tax-exempt status, it probably did make sense to target them, perhaps to catch a few that could be viewed as purely political organizations and not deserving of the tax-exempt status.

This doesn’t absolve the IRS, of course, which had no right to take it upon itself to decide who received such exemptions. However it was in the absence of good leadership that the agency moved down this path. The true disappointment here is a tax system that allows for such a gray area. Not only does it clearly fail in efficiency and encouraging investment, it also fails to promote the behavior (i.e. charitable giving) that it intends to.   

During these troubling times in our political process, we may be a little skeptical of government as a whole. But let me suggest placing our demand for efficacy and prudent management on equal footing with our disdain for scandal. Perhaps we could encourage future IRS chiefs to loudly proclaim that they know what’s going on in their agency when they’re summoned before Congress. And perhaps a streamlined tax system would allow us to cut the IRS staff by half, and that way maybe the next commissioner will know what’s actually going on.

PolicyMic

Steven Miller: Did the IRS"s Head Mislead, Or Did He Just Lead Poorly?

How the IRS"s Nonprofit Division Got So Dysfunctional

This story first appeared on the ProPublica website.

The IRS division responsible for flagging Tea Party groups has long been an agency afterthought, beset by mismanagement, financial constraints and an unwillingness to spell out just what it expects from social welfare nonprofits, former officials and experts say.

The controversy that erupted in the past week, leading to the ousting of the acting Internal Revenue Service commissioner, an investigation by the FBI, and congressional hearings that kicked off Friday, comes against a backdrop of dysfunction brewing for years.

More MoJo coverage of the IRS tea party scandal

• The IRS Tea Party Scandal, Explained



• IG Report Says IRS Has No Idea What Its Own Rules Mean



• 5 Things You Need to Know in the Inspector General’s IRS Tea Party Scandal Report



• Did the Acting IRS Commissioner Mislead Congress?



• Word of the Month for May: BOLO



• Ex-IRS Director: Tea Party Groups Deserved Scrutiny, But IRS Bungled the Job

Moves launched in the 1990s were designed to streamline the tax agency and make it more efficient. But they had unintended consequences for the IRS’s Exempt Organizations division. 

Checks and balances once in place were taken away. Guidance frequently published by the IRS and closely read by tax lawyers and nonprofits disappeared. Even as political activity by social welfare nonprofits exploded in recent election cycles, repeated requests for the IRS to clarify exactly what was permitted for the secretly funded groups were met, at least publicly, with silence.

All this combined to create an isolated office in Cincinnati, plagued by what an inspector general this week described as “insufficient oversight,” of fewer than 200 low-level employees responsible for reviewing more than 60,000 nonprofit applications a year.

In the end, this contributed to what everyone from Republican lawmakers to the president says was a major mistake: The decision by the Ohio unit to flag for further review applications from groups with “Tea Party” and similar labels. This started around March 2010, with little pushback from Washington until the end of June 2011.

Continue Reading »

Politics | Mother Jones

How the IRS"s Nonprofit Division Got So Dysfunctional

How the IRS"s Nonprofit Division Got So Dysfunctional

This story first appeared on the ProPublica website.

The IRS division responsible for flagging Tea Party groups has long been an agency afterthought, beset by mismanagement, financial constraints and an unwillingness to spell out just what it expects from social welfare nonprofits, former officials and experts say.

The controversy that erupted in the past week, leading to the ousting of the acting Internal Revenue Service commissioner, an investigation by the FBI, and congressional hearings that kicked off Friday, comes against a backdrop of dysfunction brewing for years.

More MoJo coverage of the IRS tea party scandal

• The IRS Tea Party Scandal, Explained



• IG Report Says IRS Has No Idea What Its Own Rules Mean



• 5 Things You Need to Know in the Inspector General’s IRS Tea Party Scandal Report



• Did the Acting IRS Commissioner Mislead Congress?



• Word of the Month for May: BOLO



• Ex-IRS Director: Tea Party Groups Deserved Scrutiny, But IRS Bungled the Job

Moves launched in the 1990s were designed to streamline the tax agency and make it more efficient. But they had unintended consequences for the IRS’s Exempt Organizations division. 

Checks and balances once in place were taken away. Guidance frequently published by the IRS and closely read by tax lawyers and nonprofits disappeared. Even as political activity by social welfare nonprofits exploded in recent election cycles, repeated requests for the IRS to clarify exactly what was permitted for the secretly funded groups were met, at least publicly, with silence.

All this combined to create an isolated office in Cincinnati, plagued by what an inspector general this week described as “insufficient oversight,” of fewer than 200 low-level employees responsible for reviewing more than 60,000 nonprofit applications a year.

In the end, this contributed to what everyone from Republican lawmakers to the president says was a major mistake: The decision by the Ohio unit to flag for further review applications from groups with “Tea Party” and similar labels. This started around March 2010, with little pushback from Washington until the end of June 2011.

Continue Reading »

Politics | Mother Jones

How the IRS"s Nonprofit Division Got So Dysfunctional