Putting your tax return up for sale

At first, this seemed like something that couldn’t possibly be true. Maybe the reporter got confused. Maybe it was a big misunderstanding. Alas, it’s true.

The IRS is quietly moving to loosen the once-inviolable privacy of federal income-tax returns. If it succeeds, accountants and other tax-return preparers will be able to sell information from individual returns – or even entire returns – to marketers and data brokers.

The change is raising alarm among consumer and privacy-rights advocates. It was included in a set of proposed rules that the Treasury Department and the IRS published in the Dec. 8 Federal Register, where the official notice labeled them “not a significant regulatory action.”

Bush’s Treasury Department defends the changes as simple “housecleaning” revisions. Everyone who takes privacy rights seriously feels differently.

“The normal interaction is that the taxpayer just signs what the tax preparer puts in front of them,” said Jean Ann Fox of the Consumer Federation of America, one of several groups fighting the changes. “They think, ‘This person is a tax professional, and I’m going to rely on them.’ ”

Criticism also came from U.S. Sen. Barack Obama (D., Ill.). In a letter last Tuesday to IRS Commissioner Mark Everson, Obama warned that once in the hands of third parties, tax information could be resold and handled under even looser rules than the IRS sets, increasing consumers’ vulnerability to identity theft and other risks.

“There is no more sensitive information than a taxpayer’s return, and the IRS’s proposal to allow these returns to be sold to third-party marketers and database brokers is deeply troubling,” Obama wrote.

Stunning. The IRS can’t explain it and tax-preparation companies such as H&R Block don’t want to talk about it.

As Kevin put it, “Welcome to George Bush’s IRS. Your whole life is now for sale as long as it benefits someone who’s a Republican campaign contributor.”

‘As Kevin put it, “Welcome to George Bush’s IRS. Your whole life is now for sale as long as it benefits someone who’s a Republican campaign contributor.” ‘

This isn’t the first time that strange things have happened in the name of influence–I think Driftglass only a short while ago noted that the reason Catholics eat fish rather than meat during Lent is because a particular pope wanted to help out the family fishing fleet (or fishermen in general). Which goes to show how some of the most cherished traditions have bizarre origins.

http://driftglass.blogspot.com/2006/03/save-your-soul.html

  • This is really, really horrible.

    It is also potentially hugely expensive. The losses from identity theft are already hitting the credit industry. Can’t they see the need to shut this down?

  • What’s interesting is the newfound willingness of Republicans to allow more and greater intrusions on personal privacy. Bill Clinton proposes potential gun owners submit to a three-day background check, and the right goes batshit. Bush suggests private companies with which you do business have the right to buy and sell your personal financial information, and there’s hardly a peep from the right. I’m having a hard time seeing why you’d oppose one but not the other .

  • Lot’s of people use the refund from their federal taxes as a savings of sorts. I’m sure that the marketeers are just frothing at the mouth wanting to get their mitts on all this cash. The amount of targeted advertising would probably be in direct proportion to the amount of your return. The people that owe money to the IRS would most likely be safe in this respect.

    What I want to see is how the free market is god crew tries to spin this in their favor.

  • I don’t think this one will fly. I think the people will not stand for this. The opperative word in this story is quietly. I think once the public finds out about this one there will be an outcry that makes the UAE ports deal seem small. Maybe someone ought to share this story with Lou Dobbs. He’ll probably have fun with this one for at least a week. Does Bush have a tin ear or what? How can he defend this in the name of Housekeeping? Is this still the USA?

  • Interestingly, there are national security aspects about this. I’m surprised that no savvy Democrat has yet seized on this as exposing the nation’s books to slant eyed, swarthy skinned fur-n-ers…

    Personally, I wish that it would get the outrage that it deserves without xenophobia, but that would require the MSM to pull it’s nose out of the GOP’s @$$.

    -jjf

  • What makes this doubly outrageous to me is the contrast between the exponential increase in classified government documents under Bush, the sealed records of Cheney’s Energy Commission, etc… and the contempt they show for an ordinary individual’s privacy.

    This may be another foul-up that bites them in the ass, though. Most people don’t want anyone, much less strangers, nosing around in their financial records. The Dems ought to grab this one and run with it.

  • I just checked the CNN Website and Lou Dobbs has picked up on the story. Let’s see what he says. I hope some smart Dem introduces a bill to block this one. Is smart Dem an oxymoron?

  • According to one news item I read yesterday, the tax preparer would have to obtain permission from his/her client before any of the client’s info could be sold.

  • Sounds like another “tone deaf” issue ready to blow up in Bush’s face.
    You gotta hand it to him… to keep cranking out blunder after blunder is political self destruction taken to a new level.

  • This is the height of the Bush administration’s utmost incompetence and gross callousness and sheds light on the administration’s hypocrisy regarding its well-known ideas of “smaller government” and “less government intrusion.” Instead of helping average Americans with needed adequately financed security and economic measures, this would only make government more intrusive and the citizens less secure as individuals and as a nation.

    It would assist immensely–rather than hinder–those delving in illegal identity theft. The administration has caused, rather than solved, major long-term security and economic problems of our citizens, the effects of which would take a long time to undo.

    Congress should show courage and give adequate and effective oversight to this administration whose actions are destructive–rather than constructive–before it’s too late.

  • Comments are closed.