Posts

TAS Significant Hardship Definition | International Tax Lawyer & Attorney

/in , /by

Sometimes, a taxpayer may find himself in a situation where his problem cannot be resolved through normal IRS channels. In this case, one of the options is to secure the help of the Taxpayer Advocate Service (“TAS”). TAS can issue a Taxpayer Assistance Order (TAO) to require the IRS to desist from a certain action that causes the taxpayer to suffer or about to suffer a significant hardship. At this point a logical question arises: what does “significant hardship” mean in this context? In this article, I will try to answer this question and introduce the readers to the Significant Hardship definition.

Significant Hardship Definition: Background Information

The Taxpayer Advocate Service is an independent organization within the IRS, led by the National Taxpayer Advocate (“NTA”). Each state has at least one Local Taxpayer Advocate (“LTA”), who is independent of the local IRS office and reports directly to the NTA.

 TAS helps individual and business taxpayers resolve problems with the IRS by:

  • • Ensuring that taxpayer problems not resolved through normal IRS channels are promptly and impartially handled;
  • • Assisting taxpayers who are facing hardships; identifying issues that impact taxpayer rights, increase taxpayer burden or otherwise create problems for taxpayers, and bringing these issues to the attention of IRS management; and
  • • Recommending administrative and legislative changes through the National Taxpayer Advocate’s Annual Report to Congress.

Pursuant to §7811(a); 7803(c); Reg. §301.7811-1(a)(1), NTA has the authority to issue TAO when the taxpayer is suffering or is about to suffer a significant hardship as a result of the manner in the administration of tax laws, including action or inaction on the part of the IRS. TAO may have broad implications, including obligating the IRS to release a levy, stop a collection action and even stop an audit.

Significant Hardship Definition: General Definition

Treas. Reg. §301.7811-1(a)(4)(ii) defines “significant hardship” as “a serious privation caused or about to be caused to the taxpayer as the result of the particular manner in which the revenue laws are being administered by the IRS.”  Significant hardship includes situations in which “a system or procedure fails to operate as intended or fails to resolve the taxpayer’s problem or dispute with the IRS”.

The regulations state a non-exclusive list of four situations that the IRS classifies as significant hardship:

“(A) An immediate threat of adverse action; (B) A delay of more than 30 days in resolving taxpayer account problems; (C) The incurring by the taxpayer of significant costs (including fees for professional representation) if relief is not granted; or (D) Irreparable injury to, or a long-term adverse impact on, the taxpayer if relief is not granted.” Id.

It should be pointed out that even if the taxpayer’s situation falls within any of these four situations (or a similar situation that the NTA agrees that it constitutes significant hardship), it does not mean that NTA will automatically issue TAO.  Rather, NTA must still determine whether the facts and the law support such a dramatic relief for the taxpayer.

Let’s go over each of the four categories of significant hardship one by one.

Significant Hardship Definition: Immediate Threat of Adverse Action

The Treasury Regulations do not detail the definition of this category except to provide the following example of what “immediate threat of adverse action” means:

“The IRS serves a levy on A’s bank account. A needs the bank funds to pay for a medically necessary surgical procedure that is scheduled to take place in one week. If the levy is not released, A will lack the funds necessary to have the procedure. A is experiencing an immediate threat of adverse action.”

Significant Hardship Definition: Delay of More Than 30 Days

There are two situations when a delay of more than 30 days may result in significant hardship. First, “when a taxpayer does not receive a response by the date promised by the IRS.” Treas. Reg. §301.7811-1(a)(4)(iii). Second, “when the IRS has established a normal processing time for taking an action and the taxpayer experiences a delay of more than 30 days beyond the normal processing time.” Id.

The regulations give the following example of a delay causing significant hardship: “B files a Form 4506, ‘Request for a Copy of Tax Return.’ B does not receive the photocopy of the tax return after waiting more than 30 days beyond the normal time for processing.”

Significant Hardship Definition: Significant Costs

The Treasury Regulations again do not detail the definition of this category except to provide the following example of what “significant costs” means:

“The IRS sends XYZ, Inc. a notice requesting payment of the outstanding employment taxes and penalties owed by XYZ, Inc. The notice indicates that XYZ, Inc. has small employment tax balances with respect to 12 employment tax quarters totaling $10x. XYZ, Inc. provides documentation to the IRS that it contends shows that if all payments were applied to each quarter correctly, there would be no balance due. The IRS requests additional records and documentation. Because there are 12 quarters involved, to comply with this request XYZ, Inc. asserts that it will need to hire an accountant, who estimates he will charge at least $5x to organize all the records and provide a detailed analysis of how to apply the deposits and payments. XYZ, Inc. is facing significant costs.”  Treas. Reg. §301.7811-1(a)(4)(iv).

Significant Hardship Definition: Irreparable Injury

The IRS again fails to detail the definition of this category beyond providing an example of an “irreparable injury”:

“D has arranged with a bank to refinance his mortgage to lower his monthly payment. D is unable to make the current monthly payment. Unless the monthly payment amount is lowered, D will lose his residence to foreclosure. The IRS refuses to subordinate the Federal tax lien, as permitted by section 6325(d), or discharge the property subject to the lien, as permitted by section 6325(b). As a result, the bank will not allow D to refinance. D is facing an irreparable injury if relief is not granted.” Id.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help with IRS Audits

If the IRS has informed you that your federal tax returns are subject to an audit and you have foreign assets/foreign income, contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help.  We are a team of dedicated tax professionals, headed by an international tax attorney Mr. Eugene Sherayzen, with extensive experience in IRS audits of US taxpayers with foreign assets. We can help you!

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

IRS Acquires Phone-Hacking Software | IRS Lawyer News

/in , /by

It seems that the IRS audit powers are increasing more and more at the expense of taxpayers’ privacy rights. In June of 2019, the IRS posted a procurement notice on its website to award a contract to a company Cellebrite, an Israeli company that specializes in smartphone decryption software and equipment. In other words, the IRS is about to acquire phone-hacking software from this company.

IRS Phone-Hacking Software: Primary Targets

What exactly does the IRS want to be able to hack? It appears pretty much everything that is used by taxpayers on a daily basis. Cellebrite software is capable to hacking both Android and Apple phones. Moreover, it can extract data from programs such as WhatsApp, Instagram and Facebook. This data-extraction ability covers encrypted messages.

According to Cellebrite’s website, its software would allow the IRS to “go beyond texts, call logs and photos with a comprehensive toolset that effectively accesses data from the widest variety of digital sources.” Furthermore, “advanced capabilities help you bypass passwords, overcome locks and encryption challenges to extract and decode complete data from the most devices, operating systems and applications. You can also extract and preserve public and private data from social media and other cloud-based sources, providing an unparalleled amount of forensically sound digital evidence.”

IRS Phone-Hacking Software: IRS Is Not the Only Federal Agency to Use It

The IRS is not alone in its usage of phone-hacking software. US Secret Service, US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Federal Bureau of Investigation and other government agencies have acquired phone-hacking abilities, including from Cellebrite. One of the most famous examples of a government agency using phone-hacking software occurred with respect to a mass shooter’s iPhone. After Apple refused to cooperate with the FBI, the Bureau reportedly used an “outside party” to unlock the iPhone used by the San Bernardino shooter (the FBI has denied it, but it appears that the rumors are true).

Also, this is not the first time that the IRS used Cellebrite software. It appears the IRS has had contracts with the firm all the way back to 2009. In those instances, the IRS simply paid Cellebrite for its services to unlock a specific phone. This time, however, the IRS wants the software license, equipment and maintenance support.

IRS Phone-Hacking Software: Privacy Invasion Concerns

The fact that the IRS will acquire the capability to directly hack into taxpayers’ phones raises all kinds of privacy concerns. When will the IRS use it – only in criminal investigations or also in civil ones? Will there be a judicial review of the IRS usage of this software? Who will authorize the hacking and under what circumstances? How will the privacy rights of innocent taxpayers be protected? Will the information obtained by the IRS be shared with other federal agencies? What about state agencies? What kind of safeguards are in place to prevent the usage of the discovered data (especially when it is not relevant to tax compliance) for political vendetta purposes?

All of these questions are highly-important concerns in our world of rapidly-disappearing privacy rights. This is a concern that should be shared by all members of our society.

Sherayzen Law Office will continue to follow these recent developments with respect to expanding IRS capabilities to investigate US taxpayers.