close X

Search Results for: inspector general

Cause of Action Defeats Treasury IG Tax Office in FOIA Lawsuit

September 30, 2014 by

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                                           CONTACT:      

September 30, 2014                                                Mary Beth Hutchins, 202-400-2721

Cause of Action Defeats Treasury IG Tax Office in FOIA Lawsuit

Court Rules that TIGTA Must Process FOIA Request Regarding Investigations Into

Tax Records Improperly Shared with the President

WASHINGTON –The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled Monday that the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) must process an October 9, 2012 Cause of Action Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request seeking documents about investigations into unauthorized disclosures of taxpayer information to the Executive Office of the President.

Cause of Action’s Executive Director Dan Epstein said:

The court has ruled that the federal government cannot hide behind confidentiality laws to prevent Americans from knowing if our President has gained unauthorized access to their tax information. This is a decisive win for all Americans and for government transparency and accountability. The public already knows the President uses FOIA to shield his targeting of the press and this ruling prevents the President from using FOIA to shield his targeting of taxpayers.

Under section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, tax returns and taxpayer return information are to be kept confidential. An unauthorized disclosure under 6103, even if to the President, is not only a prosecutable offense, but warrants a prompt investigation by TIGTA. Cause of Action’s request sought information as to what confidential taxpayer information was being reviewed by the White House. In an unprecedented decision, the court determined that 6103 does not authorize the government to shield such information under an exemption to FOIA and that TIGTA’s investigations are not themselves confidential. This victory for transparency forces the agency to process documents in response to Cause of Action’s FOIA request that could show the White House accessed tax return information illegally.

Read the full decision from the court here.

About Cause of Action:

Cause of Action is a non-profit, nonpartisan government accountability organization that fights to protect economic opportunity when federal regulations, spending and cronyism threaten it. For more information, visit www.causeofaction.org.

To schedule an interview with Cause of Action’s Executive Director Dan Epstein, contact Mary Beth Hutchins, mary.beth.hutchins@causeofaction.org

###

 

Filed Under: Press Release Tagged With: ,

Cause of Action Submits Statement to House Oversight Committee Demonstrating IRS’s Improper Use of Tax Code to Block Transparency

August 7, 2014 by

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                     CONTACT:

August 7, 2014                                 Mary Beth Hutchins, (202) 400-4232

Cause of Action Submits Statement to House Oversight Committee
Demonstrating IRS’s Improper Use of Tax Code to Block Transparency

Washington, DC – Cause of Action (CoA), a government accountability organization, submitted a Statement for the record today to the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (OGR) highlighting the Federal Government’s inconsistent and overbroad application of taxpayer confidentiality laws, therefore blocking transparency.  The Statement accompanies an OGR hearing on the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) abuses and targeting of conservative and libertarian groups.

“It’s alarmingly clear that the IRS improperly interpreted the tax code in order to hamper government transparency,” said Cause of Action’s Executive Director Dan Epstein.  “The IRS is picking and choosing when and how the law is convenient for its purposes, which is just wrong. Its actions are frustrating public access to records that may demonstrate wrongdoing by Federal officials. Therefore, Congress needs to start us down the path of meaningful reform by preventing agencies from continuing to use laws intended to protect taxpayers as a sword against political enemies and shield for political allies.”

Cause of Action’s Statement for the Record addresses a number of key issues:

  • The IRS chooses when and how to release records based on the agency’s level of interest in keeping the subject matter hidden from scrutiny.
  • The IRS at times misuses law that was intended to protect confidential taxpayer information as a shield to prevent access to records that could show wrongdoing by Federal officials.
  • The IRS, when confronted with its inconsistent use of the law, shockingly stated that the agency is not bound by the actions of its managers.
  • The IRS and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration denied access to records about the unauthorized disclosure of taxpayer information to the White House, relying upon an overbroad interpretation of the law.

Read the Statement for the Record here.

About Cause of Action:

Cause of Action is a non-profit, nonpartisan government accountability organization that fights to protect economic opportunity when federal regulations, spending, and cronyism threaten it.  For more information, visit www.causeofaction.org.

To schedule an interview with Cause of Action’s Executive Director Dan Epstein, contact Mary Beth Hutchins, mary.beth.hutchins@causeofaction.org

Filed Under: Press Release Tagged With:

Cause of Action Demands Investigation of CPSC for Waste, Abuse and Mismanagement Relating to Buckyballs Matter

July 24, 2014 by

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                       CONTACT:      

July 23, 2014                                                    Mary Beth Hutchins, 202-400-2721

 

Cause of Action Demands Investigation of CPSC for Waste, Abuse and Mismanagement Relating to Buckyballs Matter

WASHINGTON – Cause of Action (CoA), a government accountability organization, sent a letter Wednesday to the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)’s Inspector General (IG) seeking an investigation of CPSC for improprieties related to its investigation of Mr. Craig Zucker, the former CEO of the company that sold Buckyballs.  The CPSC’s investigation led to waste of taxpayer dollars and forced Mr. Zucker to expend considerable resources to defend himself.

“The CPSC’s actions regarding Craig Zucker were never about consumer safety, they’re about punishing an entrepreneur who spoke out against the agency’s overzealous, overreaching activity,” said CoA Executive Director Dan Epstein. “The IG’s role is to prevent and root out fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement.  Therefore, it must investigate the CPSC’s behavior concerning Mr. Zucker.”

CoA’s request centers on 3 primary allegations:

  • CPSC Made Material Misrepresentations in its Amended Complaints – Former CPSC Executive Director Kenneth Hinson and CPSC Assistant General Counsel Mary B. Murphy claimed that they obtained Commission authorization to amend CPSC’s original Complaint against Mr. Zucker’s company and to potentially hold Mr. Zucker personally responsible for conducting a recall.  But they never obtained such authorization, in violation of CPSC regulations and Mr. Zucker’s due process rights.
  • CPSC Retaliated Against Mr. Zucker for his Exercise of First Amendment Rights.  Mr. Zucker aggressively defended his actions in numerous forums, and CPSC responded by pursuing the complaint against Mr. Zucker personally in an attempt to deter him and other corporate officers from exercising their rights to free speech.  Never before in the history of CPSC had an action been filed to require an officer or former officer of a company to personally conduct a recall.
  • CPSC Failed to Comply with the IQA and FOIA.  In connection with this matter, CPSC’s actions demonstrated its failure to comply with its information collection, dissemination and quality requirements under the Information Quality Act (IQA) and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).  CPSC made public statements that failed to include information required by the IQA and/or were inconsistent with the facts.  CPSC also failed for months to respond to a FOIA request for records relating to the Buckyballs investigation and the prosecution of Mr. Zucker.  As a result, CoA was forced to file an IQA petition (on Mr. Zucker’s behalf) and a FOIA lawsuit.

Read the letter here.

Read the exhibits here.

About Cause of Action:

Cause of Action is a non-profit, nonpartisan government accountability organization that fights to protect economic opportunity when federal regulations, spending and cronyism threaten it. For more information, visit www.causeofaction.org.

To schedule an interview with Cause of Action’s Executive Director Dan Epstein, contact Mary Beth Hutchins, mary.beth.hutchins@causeofaction.org

###

 

Filed Under: Press Release Tagged With:

Cause of Action Files Amicus Brief Before Supreme Court in Yates Case

July 7, 2014 by

Cause of Action, joined by Southeastern Legal Foundation and Texas Public Policy Foundation, has filed an amicus brief calling on the Supreme Court to overturn the conviction of a commercial fisherman who was prosecuted under Sarbanes-Oxley’s anti-shredding provision for throwing fish overboard.  According to CoA’s Executive Director Dan Epstein, “the government’s conduct in this case is quintessential Executive Branch overreach.  Congress never imagined, much less intended, that the law it passed to deter corporate financial scandals would be used the way it was here.  If the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s actions stand, then the regulatory floodgates will open more Americans to government abuse.”  CoA and the amici are represented by Gus Coldebella of Goodwin Procter LLP.

In the brief, CoA and the amici argued that if Captain Yates’ conviction is upheld, then a person who “conceals evidence of a surfboard being used on a beach designated for swimming, throws away a bag of chips from a workplace restroom prior to an OSHA inspection, fails to declare an item on a customs form at the airport, gets rid of a bat used in a teenager’s game of ‘mailbox baseball,’ or discards an empty container of medicine purchased from a foreign pharmacy” has violated SOX and faces up to twenty years in prison.

CoA and the amici also noted that Captain Yates’ case raises troubling questions about the government’s inconsistent application of the law, given the multiple cases of document destruction by federal officials.  For example, in 2011, during the course of an Inspector General investigation into NOAA’s Office of Enforcement, then director Dale J. Jones, Jr. actually shredded documents to conceal evidence.  Jones was not prosecuted—instead, he was given a different job. Similarly, Charles Edwards, former Department of Homeland Security Inspector General, allegedly destroyed documents to impede a federal investigation. Edwards, too, was reassigned to another federal job.

According to Epstein: “This is an obvious double standard: a taxpayer subsidized employee who destroys documents to obstruct an investigation (conduct clearly covered by the statute) is reassigned, while a taxpayer who throws fish overboard is sent to prison.  No system that treats government employees differently than average citizens engenders respect for the law.”

Yates v US Amicus Brief by Cause of Action

Filed Under: Press Release Tagged With:

Charles Edwards Under Investigation by CIGIE for Misconduct

April 24, 2014 by

Cause of Action, a government accountability group which has investigated former Department of Homeland Security acting Inspector General Charles Edwards, issued the following response to the report released today by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs (HSGAC), Subcommittee on Financial and Contracting Oversight:

In addition to being the subject of Thursday’s report released by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Charles Edwards is still under investigation today for allegations of misconduct by the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency (CIGIE).

Cause of Action’s own two-year investigation into Charles Edwards prompted us to raise concerns to President Obama about the destruction of records and complaints filed about his misconduct that would warrant Edwards’ removal from office and potential criminal liability. We know that the Office of Special Counsel forwarded at least one complaint about Edwards to CIGIE. Additionally, we sued the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (DHS OIG) for failing to produce documents related to these misconduct complaints under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).  This lawsuit could have been avoided, as DHS OIG voluntarily provided such information to HSGAC. This transparency failure is now costing time and resources in court for what could have been a simple compliance with FOIA.

Under federal law, knowingly destroying records with the intent to obstruct an investigation or the proper administration of any department or agency of the United States is punishable by a fine, imprisonment, or both. Accordingly, CIGIE should complete its investigation as expeditiously as possible and refer evidence of criminal conduct to the Department of Justice, especially since Edwards remains employed at DHS in a managerial position.

Filed Under: Press Release Tagged With:

Opinion: Despite Pledge of Transparency, Obama Is Clogging Information Flow

April 15, 2014 by

This op-ed originally appeared on NationalLawJournal.com, April 15, 2014

Administration’s overuse of FOIA exception blocks legitimate requests for records.

Daniel Z. Epstein and Mark J. Rozell, The National Law Journal

When President Barack Obama issued a memorandum on his first day in office on the Freedom of Information Act encouraging transparency, it was a promising first step toward being the “most transparent administration in history.” Three months later, however, the president’s chief lawyer secretly advised government agencies to send to the White House all records involving “White House equities” that are identified in response to any document request, FOIA or otherwise.

The largely elusive and undefined term “White House equities” greatly expanded what the White House has access to. Previously its access was limited to documents that originated within the White House.

Consequently, federal agencies are sending politically sensitive requests to the White House for review, delaying the release of records to the media, public requesters and even to Congress, violating the letter and spirit of FOIA.

It is crucial that the public knows what the White House is doing to hinder transparency. For example, in 2010, an Associated Press investigation found that the White House screened the Department of Homeland Security’s FOIA requests related to the economic-stimulus plan, as well as requests for the calendars of cabinet members. Making matters worse, Homeland Security applied extra scrutiny to FOIA requests and congressional requests that sought politically sensitive information. Political staffers at the department demanded to know information about requesters, including their occupations and where they lived.

That the White House proactively seeks to screen requests suggests that the administration is more concerned about negative press than transparency. In April 2012, the media reported that the General Services Administration (GSA) had squandered $822,000 on a posh conference in Las Vegas. The scandal drew heavy criticism for the administration.

A FOIA investigation conducted by Cause of Action, a Washington-based nonprofit government watchdog group, found that only a few weeks later, Seth Green­feld, a senior assistant general counsel at the GSA, forwarded five FOIA requests related to the conference to Jonathan Su at the White House Counsel’s Office. According to documents Cause of Action procured via FOIA, Greenfeld wrote to Su, “Per your request, here are the five FOIA requests that in some manner ask for the 2010 Western Regions Conference website and its contents.” The president is effectively using the notion of “White House equities” to turn the FOIA process on its head. Although Congress designed FOIA to allow the public to know what the government is up to, the White House review process allows the government to know what the media are up to, potentially chilling the free press.

SIGNIFICANT DELAYS

A number of agencies target media requesters for extra review, including the departments of the Treasury, Defense, and Housing and Urban Development, often delaying production to well past FOIA deadlines. A March 23, 2010, request from Cox Television was significantly delayed after the GSA provided records to the House of Representatives and the White House for “comment,” according to a report from the GSA inspector general. The request sought e-mails “between the GSA and the staffs of U.S. Representatives Nancy Pelosi, Silvestre Reyes, and Zack Space.” At the time of the inspector general’s September 2010 report, the request had been pending for 118 days. The response deadline for FOIA, however, is 20 days, or at most 30 days in “unusual circumstances.”

The use of “White House equities” to screen document requests also hinders congressional oversight. Records from the Department of Interior, for example, show that the National Park Service failed to respond to a March 27, 2013, congressional document request, instead sending the documents to the White House, Office of Management and Budget, and Department of Justice for review. When the documents had still not been produced after six months, the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee was forced to issue a subpoena. Similarly, emails obtained by Cause of Action from the Environmental Protection Agency indicate that White House review delayed an April 10, 2013, document request from the House oversight committee to the agency. In response, the committee sent a Nov. 8, 2013, subpoena to the EPA for communications with White House officials concerning the delay.

The Obama administration cannot credibly claim to be transparent when it publicly issues memoranda advocating for openness in the FOIA process, but then secretly instructs agencies to refer all records with “White House equities” to the White House for review. Not only is the FOIA process significantly and illegally stalled by White House review — a fact that agencies zealously guard from requesters — but it permits the political interests of the administration to trump the important policy goals of FOIA. The White House’s attempts to subvert the purposes of FOIA by demanding to review potentially damaging and politically sensitive requests may protect the President’s own interests, but at the expense of the governmental transparency and accountability he had promised to advance.

Daniel Z. Epstein is executive director of Cause of Action, and Mark J. Rozell is acting dean of the School of Public Policy at George Mason University and author of the book “Executive Privilege.”

Filed Under: News Tagged With:

Washington Examiner: Complaint suggests HUD may have inappropriately promoted Obamacare

April 15, 2014 by

Read the full story: Washington Examiner

Cause of Action also alleges that HUD may have violated prohibitions against using appropriated funds “for publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized by the Congress,” as listed in the third edition of “Principles of Federal Appropriations Law,” volume one. None of the suggested Obamacare promotion is specifically mentioned in HUD’s appropriations.

 

In its letter to HHS Inspector General Daniel Levinson, Cause of Action alleged the agency may have “improperly augmented its appropriation by inducing or accepting HUD’s improper use of appropriations.”

 

“[I]f HHS was an active participant in the creation of materials or strategies the White House distributed to other agencies, including HUD, then HHS was complicit in the appropriation violations committed by those other agencies,” Cause of Action said.

Filed Under: News Tagged With: ,