Recently,
the
Trump
administration
announced
that
massive
layoffs
were
coming
to
the
IRS.
Right
now,
it
is
the
middle
of
tax-filing
season
so
the
timing
couldn’t
be
more
awkward.
According
to
various
sources,
up
to
15,000
IRS
employees
will
be
targeted
for
termination
and
6,000
have
already
been
terminated.
Most
of
the
impacted
employees
are
on
probationary
status
—
new
hires
with
less
than
one
or
two
years
of
experience.
The
IRS
will
also
lay
off
about
3,500
employees
from
its
Small
Business/Self-Employed
(SB/SE)
division.
This
division
focuses
on
businesses
with
less
than
$10
million
in
assets.
As
the
name
implies,
this
division
focuses
examination
and
collection
enforcement
on
self-employed
small
businesses.
Some
layoffs
will
come
from
the
Office
of
Appeals
which
generally
resolves
disagreements
between
taxpayers
and
IRS
staff.
The
Taxpayer
Advocate
Service
(TAS)
is
also
subject
to
layoffs.
TAS
is
an
independent
division
at
the
IRS
that
helps
taxpayers
resolve
issues
when
they
are
unable
to
do
so
through
normal
channels.
Large-scale
layoffs
or
“reductions
in
force,”
as
the
government
calls
it,
are
rare
at
the
IRS.
It
last
happened
in
1996
when
the
IRS
proposed
cutting
5,000
jobs
although
it
later
cut
4,500
through
the
use
of
buyouts,
transfers,
and
early
retirement
incentives.
When
IRS
funding
is
reduced,
the
agency
generally
does
not
lay
off
people.
Instead,
they
implement
hiring
freezes
and
employees
who
leave
or
retire
are
not
replaced.
And
it
is
generally
the
IRS
senior
management
who
decide
which
divisions
are
cut.
Public
reaction
to
the
layoff
announcement
seems
to
be
mixed.
Some
question
why
the
government
would
cut
IRS
funding
when
its
job
is
to
enforce
tax
laws
and
protect
government
revenue.
This
sentiment
is
shared
by
prior
IRS
commissioners
who
served
under
every
administration
since
President
Ronald
Reagan
in
a
guest
essay
to
the
New
York
Times
condemning
the
layoffs.
They
said
the
move
would
not
lower
taxes
(that
is
up
to
Congress.)
Instead,
it
would
impede
efforts
by
the
IRS
to
modernize
customer
service
and
simplify
the
tax-filing
process
for
everyone.
Others
praise
the
move
by
citing
anecdotal
experiences
of
harassment
and
unfair
treatment
from
IRS
auditors
and
collection
agents.
Many
tax
professionals
who
represented
small
business
in
audits
and
collection
disputes
can
also
attest
to
dealing
with
unnecessarily
aggressive
behavior
from
some
IRS
employees.
The
supposed
goal
of
the
layoffs
is
to
improve
government
efficiency
and
reduce
expenses.
Obviously
cutting
staff
is
one
way
to
reduce
expenses.
But
laying
off
newly
hired
probationary
employees
seem
inefficient
as
they
are
likely
to
be
on
the
lower
end
of
the
GS
pay
scale.
Also,
the
government
as
employers
has
expended
time
and
resources
training
these
new
hires.
If
efficiency
is
the
main
goal,
then
employment
decisions
should
be
made
on
an
individual
performance
basis
rather
than
with
a
broad
brush.
Will
these
midseason
layoffs
mean
a
delay
in
issuing
tax
refunds?
Maybe.
There
are
no
indications
of
any
layoffs
at
the
IRS
service
centers
that
processes
tax
returns.
However,
a
former
IRS
commissioner
stated
that
laying
off
nearly
10%
of
the
IRS
workforce
in
the
middle
of
filing
season
is
extremely
risky.
What
is
likely
to
happen
is
that
for
most
people,
getting
hold
of
an
IRS
representative
will
take
longer.
Also,
tax
controversies
such
as
audits
and
collection
cases
will
take
longer
to
resolve.
In
audit
cases,
the
IRS
examiners
may
make
taxpayers
sign
a
waiver
that
would
extend
the
regular
three
years
to
audit
a
case.
Otherwise,
the
auditor
will
close
the
case
without
an
agreement
and
the
taxpayer
must
either
litigate
at
the
U.S.
Tax
Court
(usually
an
expensive
and
time-consuming
ordeal)
or
do
nothing
and
later
get
a
tax
bill.
In
collection
matters,
taxpayers
could
be
forced
to
accept
difficult
installment
agreements
or
be
subject
to
bank
levies
or
wage
garnishments.
And
what
happens
to
the
people
who
have
been
impacted?
Those
with
years
of
IRS
experience
could
be
competitive
candidates
at
the
private
sector.
But
since
probationary
employees
have
not
been
at
the
IRS
for
a
long
time,
their
experience
may
not
be
sufficient
to
transfer
over
to
the
private
sector.
Also,
they
may
have
trouble
obtaining
unemployment
benefits.
On
a
positive
note,
those
impacted
may
have
a
better
chance
at
obtaining
jobs
elsewhere.
Due
to
the
intense
publicity
of
the
layoffs
and
the
questionable
reasons
for
it,
potential
employers
(even
those
who
support
President
Donald
Trump
or
Elon
Musk)
are
less
likely
to
view
a
job
applicant’s
layoff
as
a
sign
of
poor
performance.
The
IRS
layoff
announcement
is
something
the
agency
hasn’t
seen
in
almost
30
years.
To
the
agency’s
credit,
they
have
regularly
dealt
with
setbacks,
although
usually
this
took
the
form
of
funding
cutbacks.
So
they
will
again
do
their
best
with
what
they
have.
Some
layoffs
are
probably
necessary
but
surprise
layoffs
on
a
large
scale
could
hurt
morale
and
overwork
existing
employees.
If
government
efficiency
is
the
goal,
Trump
and
Musk
should
also
look
into
improving
technology
infrastructure
such
as
computers.
Computers
should
be
up
to
date
so
that
IRS
representatives
can
get
taxpayer
information
quickly.
Also,
systems
should
be
set
up
so
that
taxpayers
and
IRS
staff
can
communicate
and
transfer
documents
more
efficiently
and
securely.
Steven
Chung
is
a
tax
attorney
in
Los
Angeles,
California.
He
helps
people
with
basic
tax
planning
and
resolve
tax
disputes.
He
is
also
sympathetic
to
people
with
large
student
loans.
He
can
be
reached
via
email
at
[email protected].
Or
you
can
connect
with
him
on
Twitter
(@stevenchung)
and
connect
with
him
on LinkedIn.