WASHINGTON - Ways and Means Committee Ranking Member Sander Levin (D-MI) released additional excerpts from an interview with an IRS agent that was disclosed yesterday by Ways and Means Committee Republicans. Rep. Levin also issued the following statement on the transcript excerpt released by the Ways and Means Committee Republicans:
"House Republicans are at it again trying to twist the facts to fit their political narrative. This particular screener is not singling out applications but rather sending all potential political advocacy cases for secondary screening out of an abundance of caution. The Republicans should stop trying to distort facts to gain a political advantage and instead focus on fixing the 501(c)(4) guidance problem. I call on Chairman Camp, in the future, to release the full context of any exchanges and not carve out parts around 6103 confidential tax information to try to fit the Republican narrative."
Additional Passages (excerpts previously released by Ways and Means Republicans included in bold):
COMMITTEE: Today, currently, how do you analyze advocacy cases. If, for example, Tea Party of Arkansas came in today, how would you handle it?
IRS AGENT: Well, the BOLO list doesn't exist anymore.
COMMITTEE: Sure.
IRS AGENT: If a political advocacy case came in today, I would give it -- or talk about it to my manager because right now we really don't have any direction or we haven't had any for the last month and a half.
------
COMMITTEE: Yeah. If you see a case today, and there is no reference to "Tea Party," but the applicant organization indicates in its application, the 1024, that it is going to engage in political activity, what would you do with that case?
IRS AGENT: I would send it to the secondary screening, political advocacy.
COMMITTEE: Okay. So you wouldn't take that case to your manager, would you?
IRS AGENT: Well, I don't know that the policy Well, if I saw one now, I would.
COMMITTEE: You would bring it to your manager?
IRS AGENT: The reason being, I would want her concurrence that this See, with the BOLO gone, I want to make sure I do the right thing when I am looking at a case. I would want to make sure that it is handled according to EO Determinations policy. Do you understand what I am trying to say?
COMMITTEE: I think what you are telling me is that out of an abundance of caution, you would bring this
IRS AGENT: Yes. Yes.
COMMITTEE: to your manager today. Okay.
COMMITTEE: If I could just follow up. So in the past when the BOLO existed, they would automatically go to Group 7822 [secondary screening group], correct?
IRS AGENT: Yes, uh huh. Prior to the 7823 being created.
COMMITTEE: Right. Replacing 7822. And now the process is sort of, as you say, out of an abundance of caution if it's a political advocacy case, including Tea Party cases, you will take it to your manager and then your manager will say send it over to 7823. Right?
IRS AGENT: That’s correct.
-----
COMMITTEE: If you saw -- I am asking this currently, if today if a Tea Party case, a group -- a case from a Tea Party group came in to your desk, you reviewed the file and there was no evidence of political activity, would you potentially approve that case? Is that something you would do?
IRS AGENT: At this point I would send it to secondary screening, political advocacy.
COMMITTEE: So you would treat a Tea Party group as a political advocacy case even if there was no evidence of political activity on the application. Is that right?
IRS AGENT: Based on my current manager's direction, uh-huh.
-----
COMMITTEE: Is it easy to distinguish between lobbying and political activity just sort of based on the application? Just your initial screening of an application?
IRS AGENT: It's not real easy.
COMMITTEE: And so that's why usually you would send that on to a secondary screening?
IRS AGENT: Yes. Advocacy.
COMMITTEE: Uh huh.
IRS AGENT: Are you talking political advocacy?
COMMITTEE: Sure.
IRS AGENT: Are you talking specific to a
COMMITTEE: Not specific to a group, just in general.
IRS AGENT: It's not an easy thing to determine.
