IRS Gives $356 Million to Companies that Owe Taxes

IRS Gives $356 Million to Companies that Owe Taxes

Businesses owing $3.8 million in back taxes to the IRS received $356 million in contract work from the tax agency in 2009.

The inspector general for the IRS discovered this fact as part of a recent audit that also revealed companies owing taxes earned a total of $3.7 billion in work from various departments in the federal government.

Businesses were able to collect new deals from the IRS while disputing their tax liability, a process that takes an average of eight months to resolve and can last as long as nearly two years.

According to the IRS, 11% of the 535 companies with contracts at the agency (or 61 businesses) were delinquent in paying federal taxes totaling $10.6 million.

http://www.allgov.com/Where_is_the_Money_Going/ViewNews/IRS_Gives_356_Million_Dollars_to_Companies_that_Owe_Taxes_110316

If you owe them it's a different story. Sick lame or lazy, blind crippled or crazy, if you owe them a dime they will shake you up and down.

Don't pay taxes and still get the government to give you money? Ingeniously criminal.

I would get caught if I missed something on my taxes.

and end up in jail.

Only in the sense of "awarding a contract." Rather like giving work. "GE gives its employees $25/hour." The kind of thing that makes unions entirely apoplectic. Moving on...

The publication this crucially relies on for some of the more egregious numbers (cited in the link) is a kind of screed against a particular bit of law. The law says that while the IRS is investigating claims the demand for payment is suspended. Since no judgment's been issued there can be no guilty party; if there's no guilty party, there's no punishment. Granted, it's nice to think that an accusation should entail punishment; still, that's not the law, however reprehensible the idea of due process by the federal government.

Even the claim against my MIL was essentially suspended (under different provisions) while she produced more information and documentation and the IRS did its investigation.

Bankruptcy and liquidation can also be factored in.

I also have to wonder about the numbers. The report is dated 2/11, the companies are cited as of 3/10. There's nothing special about the numbers, on their face: Numbers from 4/10, 5/10, 10/10 could easily have been tracked down and inserted in a fairly quick, 2-3 hour editing session. Since the report is intended to push for altering policy, I tend to suspect the numbers were chosen on purpose: Had the inspector's aide chosen a later date the numbers would have been less; had he chosen a date further back in time in order to get sufficiently large numbers, he might have had to risk irrelevance.

:mad:

trying to collect tax on a gift from her grandfather.