ALL IRS AGENTS ARE NOT CREATED EQUALLY

 

BY: ANTHONY N. VERNI, ATTORNEY AT LAW, CPA

FEBRUARY 23, 2025

© 2025

ALL IRS AGENTS ARE NOT CREATED EQUALLY

THE IMPACT OF MENTAL ILLNESS, ALCOHOLISM AND ADDICTION

The Internal Revenue Service would have you believe that every one of its employees is beyond reproach. In other words, every IRS Agent is free from mental illness, alcoholism or substance abuse as well as gambling addiction. They would also have you believe that each employee is competent, loves their job and has a genuine interest in assisting taxpayers in a manner that is consistent with the IRS Mission Statement.

Ask anyone who has ever encountered a belligerent IRS Agent during an audit or has been subject to aggressive collections tactics and they will validate the proposition that: “Not all IRS Agents are Created Equal.”

IRS employees, come in all shapes and sizes, and are no different than the taxpayers they oversea.  As such, among its ranks, there exist IRS agents who suffer from a variety of personal issues, which may impair their ability to carry out their duties in a professional manner.

The suggestion that all IRS employees are free from the effects of mental illness, alcoholism, substance abuse or gambling addiction, strongly suggests that the Agency lives in an alternate universe. Consequently, The IRS is likely to turn a blind eye when it comes to taxpayer complaints of aggressive and intimidating audit measures as well as “Mafia Style” collection practices.

Unfortunately, the taxpayers most likely to come into contact with these Agents are low income taxpayers, who are often times uneducated, struggle with the English language and lack the financial resources to take on an abusive IRS agent.

While the Internal Revenue Service will never concede the point, some of its Agents should not be working with the public.  Mental health professionals will tell you, that this type of behavior suggests a DSM V personality disorder, alcoholism, substance abuse or a gambling addiction.

While there are instances where an Agent is going through a rough patch due to divorce, illness or death in the family,  more often than not, abusive conduct and intimidating behavior suggests something far more  sinister,  likely attributable to mental illness, substance abuse, alcoholism or a problem with gambling.

The following discussion will examine the factors that can cause an IRS employee to deviate from standard IRS protocol and engage in abusive behavior as well as the Agent’s motivation for working for the Internal Revenue Service. We will also discuss which taxpayer group is more likely to come in contact with this type of IRS Employee. Finally we will examine specific criminal conduct on the part of IRS employees that supports the proposition that IRS employees are just likely to engage in bad behavior as a taxpayer.  It also is consistent with the notion that there are troubled players in every profession.

While the majority of IRS employees adhere to ethical standards and are well balanced, there are IRS Agents whose behavior underscores the necessity for continuous oversight and robust internal controls to prevent and address misconduct within the agency. Here are some key considerations:

1. Decision-Making and Judgment-Substance abuse and mental illness can impair judgment and critical thinking, leading to inconsistent or overly aggressive audit practices. Agents struggling with addiction may exhibit mood swings, irrational decision-making or heightened stress responses.
2. Increased Stress and Workplace Pressure-The IRS auditing environment is already high-pressure, with strict deadlines and quotas. Mental health struggles and addiction can exacerbate stress, making agents more likely to take out frustrations on taxpayers.
3. Ethical and Legal Concerns-Addiction (especially gambling or financial struggles from substance abuse) may make some agents more susceptible to unethical behavior, including bias in auditing or even corruption. Alcohol or drug use on the job could also impair an agent’s ability to conduct fair audits, leading to excessive penalties or unnecessary scrutiny.
4. Aggression and Workplace Behavior-Substance abuse can heighten aggression, making interactions between IRS agents and taxpayers more confrontational. Mental health issues like anxiety, depression, or PTSD can also manifest as irritability or hostility.
5.  Working from Home: The long-term effects of working from home (WFH) have been extensively studied, revealing a complex list of challenges across productivity, well-being, and organizational dynamics.
6. Productivity: Research indicates that the effect of WFH on productivity is not uniform. Studies have reported a range of outcomes, with productivity changes varying from a 19% decrease to a 13% increase. This variability is often attributed to differences in measurement methods and the nature of tasks across industries.
7. Well-being and Mental Health: Social Isolation: Extended periods of remote work can lead to feelings of isolation and loneliness, potentially impacting mental health. A  December 2024 N.Y. Post Survey revealed that 25% of remote workers experienced a decline in social skills, particularly among millennials.
8. Work-Life Balance: While WFH offers flexibility, it can also blur the boundaries between work and personal life, leading to overwork and stress. This imbalance may have long-term adverse effects on mental health if not managed properly.
9. Organizational Dynamics: Agency Culture: Remote work can pose challenges to fostering and maintaining a cohesive Agency culture. The lack of in-person interactions may impede team-building efforts and the reinforcement of organizational values.
10. Collaboration: The shift to remote work has altered collaboration patterns, with increases in virtual communications. However, the absence of face-to-face interactions can affect the quality of collaborative efforts and the building of trust among team members. The transition to remote work has introduced challenges related to supervision, impacting both managerial practices and employee experiences.
11. Challenges of Remote Supervision: Reduced Face-to-Face Interaction: The absence of in-person oversight can make it difficult for supervisors to provide immediate feedback or support.
12. Communication Barriers: Remote settings may hinder the transmission of nonverbal cues, essential for effective communication, potentially leading to misunderstandings and reduced managerial effectiveness.
13. Impact on Employee Behavior and Performance: Decreased Engagement: Lack of interactive supervision can diminish employees’ self-efficacy, leading to reduced work engagement and increased likelihood of deviant behaviors.
14. Proximity Bias: Remote employees may face disadvantages during downsizing or promotions due to a bias favoring in-office workers, affecting job security and career progression.
15. Impact on Audit Outcomes-An Agent struggling with personal issues may either be excessively harsh or, conversely, overly lenient in their audits. Bias and emotional instability can lead to inconsistent enforcement of tax laws.

While the IRS has Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) to help agents manage addiction and mental health issues, employees are all too often reluctant to participate due to shame and the fear of being stigmatized. Having stated the obvious, why would anyone want to work for the IRS?

 WHY INDIVIDUALS SELECT THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AS A PLACE OF EMPLOYMENT

People may join the IRS for various reasons, including stability, benefits, and a genuine interest in tax law. However, there are also some unhealthy motivations that might drive certain individuals to work for the agency, including:

1. Power and Control: Some individuals may be drawn to the IRS because they enjoy exerting authority over others, particularly in high-stakes financial situations. The ability to audit and penalize taxpayers can appeal to those with a controlling or authoritarian mindset.
2. Personal Grievances and Resentment: People with a history of financial struggles, resentment toward the wealthy or personal tax issues may join the IRS as a way to “level the playing field” or take out frustrations on others. Some may see it as a way to enact revenge on a system they feel wronged by.
3. Job Security Over Passion: Government jobs, including the IRS, offer stability, pensions, and benefits. Some individuals may take the job purely for security despite hating the work, leading to burnout, resentment, and toxic behavior.
4. Enjoyment of Bureaucracy and Red Tape: Certain personality types thrive in bureaucratic environments where rules, regulations, and technicalities dictate outcomes. These individuals may take pleasure in making things difficult for others.
5. Unresolved Psychological Issues: People with personal insecurities or struggles with authority may join as a way to feel important or gain validation. Those with aggressive tendencies may find satisfaction in enforcing rules with little room for flexibility.
6. Financial Motivations (Unethical or Otherwise): Some individuals may seek IRS positions for insider knowledge on how to manipulate the tax system for personal gain. While corruption is rare, those with gambling or financial problems may be tempted to engage in unethical behavior.
7. Lack of Other Career Options: Some join the IRS because they lack the qualifications or skills for other careers and settle for a government position that they don’t truly care about. This can result in poor work ethic, resentment toward taxpayers, and a general sense of dissatisfaction.

While many IRS employees are professionals dedicated to enforcing tax laws fairly, unhealthy motivations can lead to negative workplace cultures and poor treatment of taxpayers.   The following case illustrate that IRS employees are just as likely to suffer from emotional issues and addiction as any taxpayer.

CRIMINAL CASES INVLOLVING IRS EMPLOYEES

The IRS has been involved in numerous high-profile criminal cases, particularly through its Criminal Investigation (CI) Division, which investigates tax fraud, money laundering, and other financial crimes. In addition, prosecutions for other criminal acts also occur from time to time. Here are some notable examples:

1. Convictions of IRS Agents for Corruption & Fraud: While the IRS investigates tax fraud, some of its own agents have also been caught in criminal activity:
2. Willie G. Green (2022): Former IRS agent convicted for stealing taxpayer identities to file fraudulent tax returns.
3. John Perry (2017): IRS agent sentenced for taking bribes to reduce taxpayer liabilities.
4. Ndeye Amy Thioub (2024): Filing False Tax Returns. In March 2024, IRS revenue agent Ndeye Amy Thioub was arrested for allegedly filing false personal tax returns over three years. She was indicted on multiple counts, including filing false tax returns as an IRS employee. Thioub’s case highlights concerns about integrity within the agency.
5. Sandra D. Mondaine (2024): Preparing Fraudulent Tax Returns. Former IRS employee Sandra D. Mondaine pleaded guilty in November 2024 to aiding in the preparation and filing of false tax returns. Mondaine assisted at least 11 individuals in filing 39 fraudulent returns between 2018 and 2021, resulting in a tax loss of approximately $237,329. Her actions violated the trust placed in IRS personnel.
6. John Anthony Castro (2024): Tax Fraud Conviction. John Anthony Castro, a tax consultant and former IRS employee, was convicted in May 2024 on 33 counts of tax fraud. Castro’s scheme involved promising clients inflated tax refunds by fabricating deductions and then retaining a significant portion of the refunds. His fraudulent activities led to over $15.5 million in losses to the U.S. government.
7. Widespread Tax Noncompliance among IRS Employees: Reports have also revealed that nearly 6,000 IRS employees, approximately 5% of the workforce, owed around $50 million in unpaid taxes as of August 2024. Despite their role in tax enforcement, many did not have repayment plans. Between October 2021 and April 2023, only 20 out of 139 employees caught cheating were terminated, raising concerns about internal accountability.

These cases underscore the importance of stringent oversight and ethical standards within the IRS to maintain public trust in the tax system.

IRS Complicit in Identity Theft and Refund Fraud: While the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is primarily tasked with combating identity theft and refund fraud, there have been instances where IRS employees have been implicated in such activities. Cases, though relatively rare, highlight vulnerabilities within the system. For illustration purposes, consider the following:

1. Atlanta, Georgia (2018): An IRS employee pleaded guilty to aggravated identity theft for participating in a scheme that involved filing fraudulent tax returns using stolen identities. This insider access facilitated the theft of taxpayer information, leading to significant financial losses.
2. Unnamed Former IRS Employee (2022): Tax Evasion. In July 2022, a former IRS employee was sentenced to 13 months in prison after pleading guilty to filing false tax returns and providing fabricated records to the IRS in an attempt to obstruct an audit of those returns. This case underscores that even those within the agency are not above the law.
3. COVID-19 Relief Fraud Scheme (2023): In May 2023, six defendants, including a former IRS revenue officer and his brother, were sentenced to prison terms ranging from 12 to 30 months. They were convicted on charges of fraudulently obtaining millions of dollars in COVID-19 pandemic relief funds through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). This case highlights the involvement of an IRS insider in exploiting relief programs.

Domestic Violence: While instances of IRS agents being convicted specifically for domestic violence are rare, there have been notable cases:

1. Robert Clarkson (2008): Criminal Domestic Violence Charges. Robert Barnwell Clarkson, a known tax protester and former IRS agent, was arrested in September 2008 in Anderson, South Carolina, along with his wife. Both were charged with criminal domestic violence. During a court hearing, Clarkson pleaded not guilty and claimed his wife had become addicted to drugs he had provided. He admitted to giving her cocaine to address her “chronic fatigue.” Subsequently, Clarkson faced additional charges, including violating a trespass order, unlawful use of the 911 emergency phone service, and first-degree harassment.
2. Former IRS Agent Charged in 2023 Deaths: In 2023, a former IRS agent was charged in connection with the deaths of his wife and another man. While this case involves severe allegations of violence, it is essential to note that the individual was a former agent at the time of the incident

IRS Agents Convicted of Vehicular Manslaughter: While instances of Internal Revenue Service (IRS) agents being convicted specifically for vehicular manslaughter are rare, there have been notable cases involving IRS employees in fatal incidents:

1. James Farley (2023): Fatal Crash in Ohio. In March 2023, James Farley, a retired IRS agent, was involved in a fatal car accident in Ohio. Farley, driving a Bentley, rear-ended a Jeep driven by 22-year-old Samantha Nelson, causing the Jeep to roll over and resulting in Nelson’s death. Farley pleaded guilty to aggravated vehicular homicide, a third-degree felony, and was sentenced to 30 days in county jail, followed by three years of probation.
2. Larry Edward Brown Jr. (2023): Shooting Incident in Arizona. In August 2023, Larry Edward Brown Jr., an IRS Special Agent, was involved in a shooting incident at a gun range in Phoenix, Arizona, resulting in the death of fellow agent Patrick Bauer. Brown was charged with involuntary manslaughter but was acquitted in February 2025. The incident occurred during a training exercise when Brown accidentally discharged his firearm, fatally wounding Bauer.

These cases highlight the serious consequences of negligent behavior, regardless of the individual’s profession.

IRS Agent Convicted of Drunk Driving: Jeremy Spencer (2022) – Fatal Crash in Texas. In 2022, Jeremy Spencer, an IRS employee, was involved in a fatal car accident in Collin County, Texas. Spencer was driving under the influence of alcohol when he crashed his vehicle, resulting in the death of his passenger. At the time of the crash, Spencer did not have an eligible driver’s license due to a previous DWI conviction. He was arrested and charged with intoxication manslaughter.

TAXPAYERS LIKELY TO INCUR THE WRATH OF IRS AGENTS

Low-income taxpayers frequently rely on straightforward tax forms and use tax credits and deductions designed to alleviate financial burdens, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). Any discrepancies or issues arising from these filings can attract the attention of the IRS, prompting audits and inquiries to ensure compliance with tax obligations.

In contrast, wealthy taxpayers and affluent corporations often engage in more complex financial dealings. These intricacies can include investments in international markets, real estate transactions, and sophisticated tax avoidance strategies. While these strategies can be legal, the law is often ambiguous, leaving room for interpretation. This ambiguity creates challenges for the IRS regarding the allocation of resources for enforcement. However, the wealthy taxpayer will almost always engage a competent and legitimate tax professional, such as an attorney or CPA, lending credence to the return. Moreover, the wealthy taxpayer is not afraid of the IRS and has the resources to do battle with them.

One of the most significant reasons the IRS focuses on low-income taxpayers lies in resource allocation. The IRS operates under a budget constrained by government appropriations. As a result, it must prioritize its audit and enforcement strategies to maximize efficiency and revenue generation.

Low-income taxpayers represent a lower risk in terms of audit complexity (“Low Hanging Fruit”). Auditing these individuals usually involves straightforward assessments regarding simple income and credit discrepancies. In particular, in the case of the fraudulent return preparer, who generally not a Circular 230 tax professional, will not respond to any adjustment to a client’s tax return for fear of being detected and investigated.

Consequently, the disallowance of a credit or deduction will, very rarely, result in the taxpayer opposing the IRS. In contrast, wealthy taxpayers involve more significant resource implications. Audits may necessitate extensive legal and financial expertise, along with resources that the agency does not always have at its disposal.

Focusing on lower-income brackets allows the IRS to close the tax gap, namely, the difference between taxes owed and taxes paid more efficiently. The perceived return on investment in auditing low-income taxpayers often appears more favorable compared to the lengthy and resource-intensive process required to audit wealthier individuals and corporations, whose tax strategies might involve aggressive planning and sophisticated loopholes.

Consequently, low income taxpayers are likely to encounter a troubled IRS Agent and may be subject to abusive behavior.

If you have been subjected to aggressive and unreasonable tactics on the part of an IRS agent, you should strongly consider retaining the services of a tax attorney, who often times can intervene causing the Agent to fall into line. In extreme cases, it may be wise to have an Attorney lobby for a change in Agents to handle your case.

The hope that the IRS has evolved to a point where its employees will have the courage and resolve to acknowledge their shortcomings and take steps to remedy unacceptable behavior is altruistic.  The Agency work environment is not conducive to open dialogue between employees and members of management.

If you have been subjected to abusive or aggressive behavior by an IRS agent, it would be wise to retain an experienced and knowledgeable tax attorney who could intervene on your behalf.  It is amazing to see what happens when an agent suddenly has to deal with a legal representative. In most cases, there is an immediate change in attitude. In cases, where the agent’s behavior does improve, there are remedies including contacting the territory manager and having the Agent replaced. In more severe cases, an Attorney can file a formal complaint.