Because our whistleblower lawyer blog (http://www.whistleblowerlawyerblog.com/irs_rewards_program_tax/) has followed closely the development of the new IRS Whistleblower Program since Congress authorized it in December 2006, I will summarize here some of the key points about the IRS Whistleblower Program, which is still taking shape. By experimenting and using this "blog" as an old-fashioned seminar paper--with the interactive features of the web--NELA lawyers (and others) may be able to "link to" other pertinent topics on the web, such as the various IRS materials discussed here.

Overview

Until December 2006, the Internal Revenue Service had no effective program to encourage whistleblowers to report tax fraud and tax violations. Rewards to "IRS Whistleblowers" were rare, slow, discretionary, and small--and could not exceed 15 percent of the amount recovered by the IRS. As a result, the "old" program was ineffective--even though the IRS historically has made good use of information from informants.

The new IRS Whistleblower Program provides the first meaningful rewards to whistleblowers who report substantial tax violations when at least $2 million is owed to the IRS. The amended IRS Whistleblower statute, 26 U.S.C. § 7623, doubles the rewards available to 15-30% of the government's recovery, and for the first time creates an enforceable right for the whistleblower to receive a reward. Not only taxes, but also interest and penalties, count in calculating the whistleblower’s reward.

Many challenges nonetheless remain in representing IRS Whistleblowers. Perhaps the greatest is convincing an overburdened IRS that your client's case is worth the investment of its limited resources. The IRS already has many other cases awaiting investigation, and would-be whistleblowers continually add to that "pile" by submitting hundreds of other potential cases.

Background--Why Now?

The new IRS Whistleblower rewards were inspired by another whistleblower statute, the federal False Claims Act. The successes of the False Claims Act over the past two decades convinced Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and others in Congress that meaningful whistleblower rewards are an effective tool for the government to recover public dollars obtained by fraud. Since the False Claims Act was amended in 1986 to increase the size of rewards and otherwise encourage "qui tam" lawsuits that expose fraud against the government, the federal government's fraud recoveries have grown dramatically--from less than $100 million in 1987, to more than $3 billion in 2006.

Tax violations, however, fall outside the False Claims Act, which expressly “does not apply to claims, records, or statements made under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.” 31 U.S.C. § 3729(e). As a result, there was no meaningful incentive for tax whistleblowers to come forward to the IRS before December 2006.

With a "tax gap" of more than $200 billion in estimated unpaid taxes each year, the old IRS program brought in less than $100 million annually--even though information from "insiders" historically has been quite productive for the IRS. In fact, the June 2006 Report of the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) noted that, based on past experience,"examinations initiated based on informant information were often more efficient and effective." (See June 2006 Report of Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration--which predated Congress' creation of the new IRS Whistleblower Rewards Program, entitled "The Informants Rewards Program Needs More Centralized Management Oversight," No. 2006-30-092. (
http://www.treas.gov/tigta/auditreports/2006reports/200630092fr.pdf).

Quoting former Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’ famous observation that “[t]axes are what we pay for a civilized society,” Nathan J. Hochman, the Tax Division’s Assistant Attorney General, announced the "National Tax Defier Initiative," or "TAXDEF." Its purpose is to "investigate, pursue and, where appropriate, prosecute those who take concrete action to defy and deny the fundamental validity of the tax laws."

According to the Tax Division, this TAXDEF initiative will:

--"Strengthen and expand coordination" among the Tax Division, the IRS, and U.S. Attorneys’ offices "to ensure that both criminal and civil enforcement tools are fully considered and utilized."

--"Leverage expertise and resources" so that agents and attorneys across the country may "efficiently detect, investigate and where appropriate, prosecute tax defiers," from a national perspective.

--Expand the government's use of injunctions to stop "tax defier activity. Since 2001 the Tax Division has obtained over 300 civil injunctions against tax promoters and preparers, over a third of which directly involved tax defier activity." The government views injunctions as a "powerful method of stopping the promotion of tax defier activity at the earliest possible moment," and estimates its collections at more than $600 million from these efforts.

--Maximize the government's use of technology to "detect, develop and prosecute cases." According to the Tax Division, the Internet in the last decade has "greatly facilitated tax defier activity and turned what was once a paper–based local or regional enterprise into a click and download national operation."

--"Alert and educate the public to the falsity of tax defier claims and publicize the consequences of tax defier conduct." The government says it wants "to pull back the curtain and show the public that the promoters of these schemes are not wizards imparting the secrets of a 'tax-free universe' but are nothing more than garden variety hucksters and modern day snake oil salesmen peddling tax evasion schemes."

Our whistleblower lawyer blog agrees with the government's theme today that tax cheats place a greater burden on the vast majority of honest Americans who pay their taxes. For this reason, those who expose tax cheating should be thanked for their efforts.

The government's announcement is at http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2008/April/08_tax_275.html.

Our whistleblower lawyer blog has written extensively about the False Claims Act, the qui tam statute that allows private citizens to report fraud as whistleblowers or "relators," and to share in the government's recovery of damages. We have followed the development of the new whistleblower law amendments, the False Claims Act Correction Act (S. 2041), since it was introduced last September by a bipartisan group of Senators (Grassley, Durbin, Leahy, and Specter).

The advocacy group Taxpayers Against Fraud (with which I am proud to be associated) describes the new law as "A Better Rat Trap" designed to put more "snap" into the False Claims Act, and summarizes its key provisions as follows:

--to clarify that False Claims Act liability protects all federal funds;

--to solely vest the Government with the power to dismiss whistleblower- filed False Claims Act lawsuits that are based on public allegations;

--to remove confusion over the statute of limitations period;

--to explicitly clarify that the False Claims Act applies to those who discover an overpayment and decide to pocket the funds; and

--to provide strengthened employment protection for whistleblowers.

According to Jeb White, President of Taxpayers Against Fraud, "[t]his is common sense legislation that we expect to sail through the House and Senate. . . . It's hard to be opposed to building a better rat trap to catch corporate cheats, chiselers, and con artists."

The bill passed the Judiciary Committee overwhelmingly, and moves forward in the legislative process.

We congratulate everyone who had a part in moving the new law forward, so that these loopholes for dishonest contractors may finally be closed.

Our whistleblower lawyer blog has followed the development of the new IRS Whistleblower Program since its infancy. The new tax whistleblower provisions are extremely important in the fight to protect taxpayer funds from fraud and other violations of the law.

In this March 27, 2008 announcement, Notice 2008-43, the IRS announced interim rules that would apply until it amends section 10.27(b) of Circular 230.

Citing the revised IRS Whistleblower statute, the interim rules state that "[a] practitioner may charge a contingent fee for services rendered in
connection with a claim under section 7623 of the Internal Revenue Code."

This is the second IRS announcement just this week about the new IRS Whistleblower Program. On March 25, 2008, the IRS announced temporary regulations concerning disclosing information to whistleblowers under contracts among the IRS, whistleblowers, and their attorneys.

We congratulate the IRS on moving forward with the new Whistleblower Program's development.

On March 25, 2008, the IRS announced new, temporary regulations permitting "disclosure of [tax] return information . . . to a whistleblower and, if applicable, the legal representative of the whistleblower, to the extent necessary in connection with a written contract among the IRS, the whistleblower and, if applicable, the legal representative of the whistleblower, for services relating to the detection of violations of the internal revenue laws or related statutes."

If return information is disclosed to the whistleblower and the whistleblower's attorney under such an agreement, the information must be kept confidential. It "may not be disclosed or otherwise used by the whistleblower or a legal representative of a whistleblower, except as expressly authorized by the IRS."

How much the IRS may communicate with whistleblowers, and still fulfill legal requirements about privacy of taxpayers' returns, has been an interesting topic of discussion since the new IRS Whistleblower Program was created in December 2006. We look forward to discussing the new provisions with the very capable IRS officials who administer the new Whistleblower Program.

The new temporary regulations may be found at 26 C.F.R. § 301.6103(n)-2T(b)(1).

The settlement concludes that the Besler firm counseled hospital clients to improperly increase charges to Medicare patients, so that they would obtain enhanced reimbursement from Medicare.

Medicare pays supplemental reimbursements or "outlier payments" to hospitals when the cost of care is unusually high. Congress enacted the supplemental outlier payment system to ensure that hospitals possess the incentive to treat inpatients whose care requires unusually high costs.

The Justice Department's announcement alleged that, "between January 2001 and August 2003, Besler & Company advised hospitals to purposefully inflate charges for inpatient and outpatient care to make these cases appear more costly than they actually were, and thereby augment their outlier reimbursements."

We congratulate those involved for bringing about this result!

The new IRS Whistleblower Program for tax whistleblowers is an exciting development. It has brought together a team of extremely qualified professionals at the IRS, and has provided them the legal means to create an effective whistleblower program.

This Notice (CC-2008-011) addresses what contacts IRS employees may have with (1) informants with information about their current employer; and (2) informants who act as a taxpayer's representative in an IRS examination or other IRS matter.

The IRS's dealings with whistleblower or informants can present sensitive issues of privilege and confidentiality of information, as our whistleblower lawyer blog has discussed previously (and as I have discussed in a panel discussion last Fall with IRS Whistleblower Office Director Stephen Whitlock.)

This Notice from the IRS Chief Counsel's Office recognizes the need to protect "privilege issues that may be present when an informant is a current employee and/or the taxpayer's representative. It should be assumed that a current employee or a taxpayer's representative has access to information that may be privileged and there has been no affirmative waiver by the taxpayer of applicable privileges. The use of potentially privileged information by the Service can also have the same effect of tainting an issue or an entire case."

The IRS Notice reiterates the "one-bite" rule that permits the government to use information from a private party, "even if the private party obtained the information in an illicit or illegal manner as long as the government is a passive recipient of the information and did not encourage or acquiesce in the private party's conduct." This "one-bite" rule is derived from a 1921 Supreme Court decision, Burdeau v. McDowell, 256 U.S. 465 (1921).

Our whistleblower lawyer blog has written previously about the "False Claims Act Correction Act." The Act is one of the most significant developments in whistleblower law since the 1986 amendments that created the modern False Claims Act.

This is a bipartisan bill designed to restore the government's "primary" tool for fighting fraud against taxpayers, the False Claims Act, to its intended usefulness. Several court decisions have weakened the False Claims Act and inhibited its effectiveness in fighting fraud.

The publication Legal Times contacted me last week to discuss the bill's importance. In its February 25, 2008 issue, Legal Times (http://www.law.com/jsp/dc/PubArticleDC.jsp?id=1203508156014&hub=TopStories) includes only one comment from a "whistleblower" lawyer, my comment that:

"'This would remove a series of technicalities for those who get away with stealing taxpayer funds,” says Michael Sullivan, a plaintiffs lawyer at Atlanta’s Finch McCranie."

What was edited out is that those who have succeeded in defrauding the public now often take advantage of a series of "technical" defenses that allow them to escape accountability--defenses that were never intended by Congress in enacting the current version of the False Claims Act.

No contractor who has not committed fraud will have any concerns about the new bill.

We will continue to report on the bill's progress!

The growing number of state False Claims Acts has been a frequent topic of this whistleblower lawyer blog. In 2007, New York, Georgia, and Oklahoma joined the 16 other states that have enacted versions of the federal False Claims Act, the government's primary weapon for fighting fraud against taxpayers.

New Jersey enacted its new False Claims Act in January 2008. It became the 20th state with such a qui tam whistleblower law.

We applaud Louisiana's progress with its new False Claims Act!

As this whistleblower lawyer blog has written about extensively, the federal False Claims Act is the government's "primary" weapon for combating fraud. As health care expenditures have grown as a share of the federal budget, health care fraud now accounts for more than 70% of the government's annual fraud recoveries.

It was encouraging to see the new "Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control Program Annual Report For FY 2006." This report by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the Department of Justice, summarizes both organization's FY 2006 results in battling Medicare and Medicaid fraud and recovering money improperly obtained from these programs.

In 2006, DOJ and OIG surpassed their 2005 recoveries totalling $1.47 billion in cases involving health care fraud and abuse.

This report cited 836 new investigations begun during 2006, for a total of 1,677 active investigations. 547 defendants in heath care fraud cases were convicted in criminal prosecutions in 2006.

In civil cases, DOJ took on 915 new health care fraud cases, which raised the total to more than 2000 in 2006.

The largest single recovery was a $900 million settlement Tenet Healthcare Corp. Whistleblowers came forward to report that Tenet was abusing Medicare and paying kickbacks to physicians to send patients to Tenet hospitals.

Other notable recoveries from hospital systems in FY 2006 included St. Barnabas Health Care System in New Jersey ($265 million), Beth Israel Medical Center in New York ($73 million), the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Hospital Authority in Tennessee ($37 million), University Hospitals Health System in Ohio ($13.8 million), Our Lady of Lourdes Regional Medical Center in Louisiana ($3.8 million) and the Milton S. Hershey Medical Center in Pennsylvania ($2.9 million).

Pharmaceutical fraud recoveries included $704 million from drug manufacturer Serono, and $435 million from Schering-Plough.

Durable medical equipment (DME) fraud also resulted in significant recoveries.

For those wishing to review the complete report, it is at http://oig.hhs.gov/publications/docs/hcfac/hcfacreport2006.pdf.

We congratulate OIG and DOJ on their successful efforts in recovering more than $2 billion of money fraudulently obtained from health care programs in FY 2006.

The Cato Institute oftentimes blogs about government fraud, abuse and waste. There are many entries in that firm’s website about federal give-away programs and “unnecessary” or wasteful subsidies. Many federal subsidies are doled out without any follow-up accounting and/or audit of whether the entity or person applying for the subsidy is entitled to receive it and/or is entitled to receive a subsidy in as great an amount as is involved. This lack of administrative oversight, therefore, opens up virtually every federal subsidy program to fraud, waste and abuse.

Any person with knowledge of such fraud could qualify for a reward under the Federal False Claims Act if they blow the whistle on fraud in connection with federal subsidy programs. Since there is little federal oversight in many of the federal subsidy programs, it is apparent that fraud occurs in these federal programs, as in any other, and that whistleblowers would be doing all taxpayers a service if they came forward exposing it.

The new whistleblower law is intended to protect all defense contract employees to come forward in good faith so that they need not fear reprisal if they do so. If the employee who blows the whistle on contractor fraud is retaliated against, the affected employee may file a complaint with the Inspector General of the Agency and unless the complaint is determined to be frivolous, the Inspector General will conduct an investigation. If the employee is not satisfied with the Inspector General’s handling of the complaint, the employee may bring an action in federal court and is entitled to a jury trial. If the complainant is retaliated against for bringing legitimate good faith complaints of government contract fraud out in the open, then his or her remedies would include reinstatement, back pay, compensatory damages, attorneys fees and costs.

This new law is a giant step forward when it comes to protecting whistleblowers who are brave enough to come forward and expose defense contractor misconduct. By protecting such employees from retaliation, the law is intended to encourage their coming forward to expose waste, fraud and mismanagement. If the employee who does come forward is retaliated against as a result of blowing the whistle, this law is intended to make sure that they will be fully compensated for any damages sustained as a result of such retaliation including reinstatement of the job taken from them or reimbursement for wages and benefits lost as a result of any retaliation. As stated, the employee is also entitled to have his or her attorneys fees and costs paid should they be retaliated against for blowing the whistle.

This is an excellent piece of legislation which is good for the country and hopefully will help to reduce defense contractor fraud and abuse.

Attorney Graham R. Taylor of Tiburon, Calif., pleaded guilty last week, shortly before a trial scheduled in Salt Lake City before U.S. District Court Judge Tena Campbell. Certified Public Accountants Stephen F. Petersen of Coalville, Utah, and Reed H. Barker of Littleton, Colo., pleaded guilty to the tax fraud a week earlier, and Petersen also entered a guilty plea to aiding in the preparation of a client's false tax return.

The alleged $20 million fraud scheme included using phony documentation for fictitious currency transaction losses, false insurance expense deductions, and "bogus" capital losses for the purpose of fraudulently offsetting taxable income for clients, according to the government. The defendants used offshore companies, offshore bank accounts, the services of offshore nominees, and opinion letters that allegedly gave legal authority for the fraudulent transactions.

CPA Petersen of Coalville also admitted that he and an attorney who still faces charges would typically receive a fee of up to 30 percent of the tax evaded by the clients.

Attorney Taylor admitted that he devised, marketed and implemented a tax shelter known as "The Hybrid" to assist others in evading income taxes. Taylor also admitted that he prepared tax opinion letters with fraudulent misrepresentations; that he used persons in the Cayman Islands as nominees for his clients; and that he falsely disguised client funds through fraudulent transfers.

The three defendants who pleaded guilty, together with alleged co-conspirators attorney Dennis B. Evanson of Sandy, Utah, accountant Brent H. Metcalf of Cottonwood, Utah, and investment broker Wayne F. DeMeester of Sammamish, Wash., had been indicted in late 2005 for conspiracy to defraud the United States, conspiracy to commit mail fraud, and wire fraud. Five of these defendants also were charged with tax evasion and assisting in the filing of false tax returns.

The case was investigated by the IRS Criminal Investigation division. It is being prosecuted by the Department of Justice's Tax Division and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Utah. Jury selection for the remaining defendants began yesterday.

Of the $458 million settlement, $23 million is being paid to the United States under the federal False Claims Act, and $40 million will go to Massachusetts under its state False Claims Act, as a result of qui tam whistleblower litigation. (As we have written about extensively on this whistleblower lawyer blog, more and more states are enacting state versions of the federal False Claims Act to recover damages for fraud against the government. Private citizen whistleblowers or "relators" can receive up to 25 or 30% of the recovery.)

Congratulations to Massachusetts and the Justice Department for concluding this settlement.

The tax whistleblower section of our whistleblower lawyer blog has followed the expanding probes and increased scrutiny of hedge funds, including our segments on "IRS to Scrutinize Derivatives--Do They Allow Offshore Investors to Avoid Withholding Taxes on U.S. Stock Dividends?" in July 2007, and on "IRS Whistleblower Program: Hedge Funds and Private Equity Firms Under Increasing IRS Scrutiny for Tax Abuses" in November 2007.

Subpoenas from the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations reportedly have been issued to Citigroup Inc., Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Morgan Stanley, and Swiss bank UBS AG, according to this week's Wall Street Journal reports, relating to use of derivatives by hedge funds and other offshore investors. (January 15, 2008 WSJ).

Clients in the hedge fund industry who have contacted our firm often occupy sensitive positions that require them to exercise great care in not subjecting themselves to legal sanctions, as they witness apparent improprieties that trouble them.

We appreciate the predicaments that persons in high positions of responsibility can face. As former federal prosecutors who have litigated (and defended) criminal tax cases, we know that they need counseling first on avoiding exposing themselves to criminal or civil liability, as they weigh whether to report these improprieties through the IRS Whistleblower Program.

Since most people who contact us are honest persons who are troubled by abuses of the tax laws, we applaud their integrity--and congratulate those who are reporting these improprieties that defraud other taxpayers.