The IRS issued a news release on June 11 saying that they will, in conjunction with “preparation and software firms, payroll and tax financial product processors and state tax administrators,” undertake “a sweeping new collaborative effort to combat identity theft refund fraud and protect the nation's taxpayers.” Read the whole thing here.
Via TaxProf Blog.
0 Comments
It has come to light that the information that was obtained by whoever hacked into the federal government’s employee records apparently includes applications for security clearances.
This event is starting to get more attention, perhaps for some of the reasons articulated in this profane but worthwhile commentary on the significance of the problem. SO DO THEY WANT TO HIRE MORE PEOPLE TO ANSWER THE PHONE? OR IS IT TO PURSUE UNCOLLECTED REVENUE?6/12/2015 How about if the IRS uses the resources it has to shore up cybersecurity, instead of to hinder the activities of the administration’s political adversaries (I don’t think there’s much serious dispute about that fact anymore)?
No, the first things we hear about when a cut to the IRS’ budget is proposed is that they won’t be able to hire enough people to answer the phone, or that it will negatively affect their tax collecting efforts. So, tell me, IRS proponents, which is it? Why is it that every time a government agency is faced with budget cuts, the first thing they do, or threaten to do, is cut the most visible services? How about not paying bonuses to employees who don’t pay their taxes? How about no more training junkets and in-house video productions? Via today’s Drudge Report, the latest is that whoever it was who infiltrated the Office of Personnel Management’s computer records now has the personnel data of every single federal employee. The attack has been attributed to “the Chinese,” but it’s not clear whether that means the Chinese government or individuals in China.
From my vantage point, it seems pretty unlikely that individuals in China would be able to carry out an operation like that without the knowledge and at least implicit support of the government. For a few days there it looked like the news of this event was going to fade from view. While I’m alarmed by the news, I’m also hopeful that this will bring more lasting attention to the problem. The city of San Francisco wants to warn you about the dangers of sugary soda, via a proposed “Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Warning Ordinance.”
That ordinance apparently would not be aimed at the six new frappuccino flavors just announced by Starbucks. Those flavors include: red velvet cake, cupcake, cinnamon roll, and cotton candy. Google says they will report every time one of their autonomous vehicles is involved in a crash. There have apparently been a few.
The announcement that they will do this reporting tells me that they have confidence in the performance of their product. Via Instapundit. For some reason I’m less interested in the fact that The federal Office of Personnel Management’s computers were hacked, reportedly exposing the personal data of at least four million current and former government employees, than I am in the reports that the hacking originated in China. Who says espionage is dead?
Apparently this isn’t the first time that particular government agency has been hacked by the Chinese. So I guess the Instapundit’s comment on the agency head’s professed concern is really pretty pertinent. You don’t have to take my word for it. Read what an expert says: there is no “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment, no matter what a prosecutor in Montana thinks.
The defenders of the IRS (did I really write that? Are there really defenders of the IRS?) have taken to trotting out the (purely partisan) excuse for the agency’s many failings that it doesn’t have enough money to do its job, because that dastardly Congress keeps cutting its budget.
I suppose that the latest news won’t stop the IRS and its partisan defenders from making that claim, but when specific security recommendations were made four years ago, the IRS failed to implement those recommendations, and the result was the recently revealed large-scale identity theft from the IRS’ own records, I don’t see how poormouthing is really an excuse. I posted an item on this subject a few days ago. Here’s more commentary on the issue of whether altering prairie dog habitat affects interstate commerce.
As a lawyer, I understand the reason that the issue is important. But looking at it as a non-lawyer, I think my reaction would have to be: Huh? |
AuthorThe contents of this blog, this web site, and any writings by me that are linked here, are all my personal commentary. None of it is intended to be legal advice for your situation. Archives
November 2023
Categories
All
|