[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE'S INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MODERNIZATION EFFORTS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 4, 2017
__________
Serial No. 115-OS08
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Ways and Means
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
33-655 WASHINGTON : 2019
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS
KEVIN BRADY, Texas, Chairman
SAM JOHNSON, Texas RICHARD E. NEAL, Massachusetts
DEVIN NUNES, California SANDER M. LEVIN, Michigan
PATRICK J. TIBERI, Ohio JOHN LEWIS, Georgia
DAVID G. REICHERT, Washington LLOYD DOGGETT, Texas
PETER J. ROSKAM, Illinois MIKE THOMPSON, California
VERN BUCHANAN, Florida JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut
ADRIAN SMITH, Nebraska EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon
LYNN JENKINS, Kansas RON KIND, Wisconsin
ERIK PAULSEN, Minnesota BILL PASCRELL, JR., New Jersey
KENNY MARCHANT, Texas JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
DIANE BLACK, Tennessee DANNY DAVIS, Illinois
TOM REED, New York LINDA SANCHEZ, California
MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania BRIAN HIGGINS, New York
JIM RENACCI, Ohio TERRI SEWELL, Alabama
PAT MEEHAN, Pennsylvania SUZAN DELBENE, Washington
KRISTI NOEM, South Dakota JUDY CHU, California
GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina
JASON SMITH, Missouri
TOM RICE, South Carolina
DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona
JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana
CARLOS CURBELO, Florida
MIKE BISHOP, Michigan
David Stewart, Staff Director
Brandon Casey, Minority Chief Counsel
______
SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
VERN BUCHANAN, Florida, Chairman
DAVID SCHWEIKERT, Arizona JOHN LEWIS, Georgia
JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
CARLOS CURBELO, Florida SUZAN DELBENE, Washington
MIKE BISHOP, Michigan EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon
PAT MEEHAN, Pennsylvania
GEORGE HOLDING, North Carolina
C O N T E N T S
__________
Page
Advisory of October 4, 2017 announcing the hearing............... 2
WITNESSES
Jeffrey Tribiano, Deputy Commissioner for Operations Support, IRS 4
Gina Garza, Chief Information Officer, IRS....................... 4
Mr. Danny Verneuille, Assistant Inspector General for Security
and Information................................................ 13
Technology Services, Treasury Inspector General for Tax
Administration (TIGTA)......................................... 26
Mr. David Powner, Director, IT Management Issues, Government
Accountability Office (GAO).................................... 27
QUESTIONS FOR THE RECORD
Questions from The Honorable Vern Buchanan, to Jeffrey Tribiano.. 58
Questions from The Honorable Jackie Walorski, to Jeffrey Tribiano 87
Questions from The Honorable Mike Bishop, to Jeffrey Tribiano.... 90
Questions from The Honorable Vern Buchanan, to Danny Verneuille.. 93
Questions from The Honorable Vern Buchanan, to David Powner...... 98
PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW)......................... 105
The National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU)..................... 107
IRS REFORM: CHALLENGES TO MODERNIZING IT INFRASTRUCTURE
----------
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2017
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Ways and Means,
Subcommittee on Oversight,
Washington,DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:01 a.m., in
Room 2020, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Vern Buchanan
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
[The advisory announcing the hearing follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman BUCHANAN. The Subcommittee will come to order. We
have Members that are running late, but I thought we would get
started with this. Welcome to the Ways and Means Oversight
Subcommittee hearing on IRS Reform: Challenges to Modernizing
IT Infrastructure. Today's hearing will focus on the current
state of the IRS IT, the challenges faced as the IRS seeks to
modernize itself, and areas where the IRS could improve its
efforts. The importance of this topic cannot be understated. A
modern, efficient, IT infrastructure is essential to effective
tax administration, something that we would all like to see in
the near future.
While I am sure today we will hear a lot about the idea of
budgetary needs, this is not just simply a budgetary issue.
Budget is one aspect of running a successful enterprise.
However, as a guy that ran businesses over the years, I don't
always have the money for everything I would like to do.
Instead, I have to make tough decisions and set priorities in
terms of my business moving forward in the future.
Work from both the GAO and the inspector general has shown
many instances where the IRS decision-making has led to
significant IT problems. For example, in 2010, the IRS was
instructed by the USCIO to pursue a cloud-first strategy.
However, the IRS did not begin to work on the cloud strategy
until 2016, and could not readily produce a full inventory of
its clouds. The IRS has also spent millions of dollars
procuring an IT system that later determined cannot be used.
Again, examples such as these are not budget failures. They
are management failures. But I am first to agree that we need
to have a long-term vision in this area. As we examine tax
administration reform, we welcome a discussion on changes to
the IRS, its budget. However, changes to the budget must be
coupled with better management and governance of its resources
the IRS already has.
As I have said before, we would like to see the IRS work to
improve how it procures and implements its IT systems. We also
want to see the IRS be good stewards of the resources that we
have already given them. To that end, I look forward to hearing
from the witnesses today on ways we might improve the
management, the IRS, and IT investment.
The Ranking Member is not present today, so we will move
forward with witness testimony. Without objection, other
Members' opening statements will be made part of the record.
Today's witness panel includes four experts: Jeffrey
Tribiano, Deputy Commissioner for Operating Support at the IRS;
Gina Garza, Chief Information Officer at the IRS; Danny
Verneuille, Assistant Inspector General for Audit for Security
and Information Technology Services at TIGTA; David Powner
Director of IT Management Issues at the GAO.
The Subcommittee will have received your written
statements, and they will be made part of the formal hearing
record. You each have five minutes to deliver your oral
remarks.
We will begin with the gentleman here to the left. You may
start when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF JEFFREY J. TRIBIANO, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR
OPERATIONS SUPPORT, ACCOMPANIED BY SILVANA GINA GARZA, CHIEF
INFORMATION OFFICER, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
Mr. TRIBIANO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Buchanan, members of the subcommittee, my name is
Jeff Tribiano, and I am the Deputy Commissioner for Operations
Support at the IRS. I appreciate the opportunity to testify
today.
In my position at the IRS, I oversee internal operations
and administration, which includes information technology,
human capital, finance, privacy, procurement, planning,
facilities, security, enterprise risk, and the Office of Equity
Diversity and Inclusion. Joining me at the witness table is Ms.
Gina Garza, the IRS's Chief Information Officer.
Providing outstanding taxpayer service is an ongoing high
priority for the IRS. A safe, secure, and efficient, and up-to-
date information technology system plays an increasing
important role in our efforts to sustain and improve taxpayer
service. The most visible taxpayer service the IRS provides is
the delivery of a smooth, problem-free tax filing season, so
people can file their returns and receive their refunds as
quickly and easily as possible.
Our IT systems process more than 150 million individual
income tax returns, and we pay out more than $300 billion in
refunds to individuals each year. During the filing season and
throughout the year, we provide taxpayer services through a
variety of delivery channels to help taxpayers file their
returns accurately and on time. Hereto, our IT systems are an
essential component of our service efforts.
For example, IT supports our call center operation, which
is one of the largest in the country, with which we answer over
60 million taxpayers' calls in 2016. Our IT systems also
support our ability to offer online services, which we continue
to expand in response to increasing taxpayer demand.
The agency has been working for several years on longer
term improvements to taxpayer experiences, and to tax
administration. In this effort, the IRS relies heavily on
information technology to help carry out these improvements. A
major part of the initiative is developing an online account
where taxpayers, or their representatives, can log on securely,
get information about their account, and interact with the IRS
as needed, including self-correcting some issues.
Last year, we took the first step towards this when we
launched an application on IRS.gov that provides information to
taxpayers who have straightforward balance inquiries. Since its
launch, this new tool has been used by taxpayers more than 1.7
million times.
Providing outstanding taxpayer service also involves
ensuring the information taxpayers provide to the IRS will be
kept secure. We are constantly working to protect our main
computer systems from cyber incidents, intrusions, and attacks.
Our core tax processing systems remain secure and currently
withstand more than 1 million attempts to maliciously access
the system each day.
Another important area that IT supports is our battle
against stolen identity refund fraud. Over the past years, we
have made steady progress in protecting against this crime.
That progress has accelerated since 2015, thanks to the
collective efforts of the Security Summit Group and the
implementation of the Return Review Program, or what we call
RRP. The efforts of this strong, unique partnership between the
public and private sectors, combined with RRP's ability to
enhance our fraud filters has produced real results. In fact,
the number of people reported to us that they are victims of
identity theft declined from 698,000 in calendar year 2015 to
376,000 in 2016, a drop of more than 47 percent, and that
decline has continued in 2017.
For the IRS to improve, even to maintain all these
services, it is critical for our IT systems to be up to date.
But they have long been operating with antiquated hardware and
software. Approximately 64 percent of the IRS hardware is aged
and out of warranty. And 32 percent of the software is two or
more releases behind the industry standards, with 15 percent
more than four releases behind.
The IRS needs to upgrade its IT infrastructure not only to
help ensure reliable and modern taxpayer service, but also to
mitigate the risk to the system. This is a high priority for
us. We are concerned that the potential for a catastrophic
system failure is increasing as our infrastructure continues to
age. But in working modernization of our IT systems, the IRS
faces a number of challenges. None is more critical than our
budget. The IRS budget is currently about $900 million below
what it was in 2010. And modernizing at a faster pace will
require significant and substantial additional resources in the
IT area.
Along with providing adequate funding, Congress can also
help us by reauthorizing streamline critical pay authority. The
loss of this authority has made it very difficult and time
consuming to recruit, retain employees, and expertise in highly
technical areas in IT, such as cybersecurity, architecture,
engineering, and operation.
Chairman Buchanan and members of the subcommittee, this
concludes our opening statement, and we are happy to take your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Tribiano and Ms. Garza
follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman BUCHANAN. Thank you.
Ms. Garza, you are recognized.
Ms. GARZA. I have no opening statement. It was with Jeff.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Okay. Let's see. Mr. Verneuille, you are
recognized.
STATEMENT OF DANNY VERNEUILLE, ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR
AUDIT, TREASURY INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR TAX ADMINISTRATION
(TIGTA)
Mr. VERNEUILLE. Chairman Buchanan, members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss
challenges to modernizing the IRS infrastructure. The IRS will
spend about $2.9 billion, or 26 percent of its fiscal year 2017
appropriations on information technology. About $500 million of
this was allocated to business systems modernization. The IRS
has faced significant challenges in modernizing its legacy
systems.
For example, the Customer Account Data Engine 2, referred
to as CADE 2, is to plan replacement of the Individual Master
File that is based on a 50-year-old program and architecture.
Although CADE 2 has been under development since 2009, the
previous CADE initiative dates back to the late 1990s. IRS has
attributed the problems with developing CADE 2 to annual filing
season, resources being provided for other system development
projects, and the lack of key subject matter experts.
Currently, there is no planned completion date for CADE 2
development.
For the 2017 filing season, the IRS replaced the fraud
detection capabilities of its legacy systems with the Return
Review Program, which enhanced its capabilities to prevent,
detect, and resolve criminal and civil noncompliance. However,
the enterprise case management solution being developed to
provide case management functions for the Return Review Program
has stopped development efforts due to technical limitations in
the commercial off-the-shelf product. We have an ongoing audit
that will evaluate the IRS development of an enterprise case
management solution and expect to issue the report in February
2018.
The IRS has been slow to modernize its operations and
deploy online applications. Our audit of the IRS's
implementation and use of cloud technologies and services found
that the IRS does not have an enterprise-wide cloud strategy.
In July 2016, the IRS created an integrated planning team with
an overall goal of developing a cloud strategy. However, there
is no timetable for implementation of a cloud strategy.
We also recently reported that the IRS successfully
deployed four web applications as part of its future-state
initiative. However, the deployments were delayed because of
inconsistent governance, and lack of project funding, and
incompatible workflow processes.
In addition to challenges in modernizing legacy systems,
the IRS's current hardware architecture is getting older and is
in need of upgrading. At the beginning of fiscal year 2017, 64
percent of the hardware is aged. This level far exceeds the
acceptable level of aged hardware of 20, 25 percent. IRS
management explained that its budget, over the past 5 years,
has impacted their ability to reduce the aged hardware.
In conclusion, TIGTA believes the IRS needs to improve its
project planning prior to starting development activities. This
should include more clearly defined requirements and scope, and
a well-designed architecture and comprehensive assessments of
commercial off-the-shelf products to be used. The IRS also
needs to ensure that it follows established methodologies to
guide project development.
In addition, the IRS has more information technology
demands that can be addressed with the skilled resources it has
available. The IRS should focus on fewer projects and provide
sufficient resources to ensure the completion of its highest
priority projects. From a budget perspective, we have seen the
IRS have success when appropriations are designated for
specific programs such as when additional fiscal year 2016
funding was provided for cybersecurity enhancements and
identity theft prevention.
In addition, we agree with the IRS's request in the fiscal
year 2018 President's budget submission for additional
operation support account funds to be available for 2 years.
Given the length of the information technology life cycle
process, 2-year funding will provide the IRS an opportunity to
utilize appropriated funds before they expire.
Chairman Buchanan, that ends my statement. I look forward
to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Verneuille follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman BUCHANAN. Thank you.
Mr. Powner.
STATEMENT OF DAVID POWNER, DIRECTOR, IT MANAGEMENT ISSUES,
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE
Mr. POWNER. Chairman Buchanan, members of the subcommittee,
thank you for inviting us to testify on IRS's efforts to
modernize its antiquated IT systems and infrastructure. IRS
spends about $2.7 billion annually on IT. Currently, about 1.9,
or 70 percent, of this goes towards operational or legacy
systems, and about $800 million, or 30 percent, goes towards
new development or modernization. This proportion of spending
on modernization is nowhere near ideal, and IRS's situation is
a common Federal IT problem, as the Federal Government as a
whole spends 80 percent of its IT spend on operational systems.
Recognizing this problem, GAO put IT acquisitions and
operations on our high-risk list in 2015, and we are tracking
more than 800 recommendations across all agencies related to
this area. Several of these are to IRS on how they prioritize
and report performance on their IT modernization efforts.
This morning, I would like to discuss, one, IRS's
operational systems; two, efforts to modernize these systems;
and, three, steps to address this situation.
IRS's legacy, or operational systems, are critical assets
that are essential to the annual collection of over $3 trillion
in taxes. Some are newer systems, like the fraud detection
system, which, this past filing season, prevented over $4
billion in fraudulent payments. But IRS also has some of the
oldest systems in the Federal Government, including the
Individual Master File, which is over 50 years old.
Our main concern with the Individual Master File is that we
don't see a solid plan with realistic costs and milestones to
replace it. Overall, IRS maintains over 20 million lines of
assembly code. These millions of lines of archaic software and
hardware that is no longer supported becomes more difficult and
costly to maintain each year, and poses significant
cybersecurity risks.
To IRS's credit, it keeps these old systems running during
the filing season. But relying on these antiquated systems for
our Nation's primary source of revenue is highly risky, meaning
that the chance of having a failure during the filing season is
continually increasing.
Now turning to IRS's efforts to modernize these systems, I
would like to discuss the Fraud Detection System, the Foreign
Account Tax Compliance Act known as FATCA, ACA, and CADE 2.
CADE 2 is the system plan to replace the Individual Master
File. Efforts continue to improve the Fraud Detection System.
Congressional mandates like FATCA and ACA once consumed a large
portion of IRS's modernization dollars, but that is no longer
the case. CADE 2 is the number one modernization investment in
terms of dollars. Having spent over $170 million in fiscal year
2016, and 120 in fiscal year 2017, but our ongoing work is
showing that IRS is not delivering on this modernization effort
as planned, nor is there a solid plan here to eventually
deliver CADE 2.
We have made specific recommendations to IRS regarding
modernization, but history tells us that congressional
administration involvement could greatly help here starting
with IRS. IRS needs to deliver on the priority modernization
efforts like CADE 2. We are spending significant money here,
and we are not delivering at an acceptable rate. IRS also needs
to set clear modernization priorities and develop plans with
accurate budgets and milestones. So, for instance, on IMF and
CADE 2, we need to see exactly what it will take to convert the
IMF to modern languages and replace it with CADE 2.
Again, to be clear, we need to know how much money and a
date when we expect to be done. No doubt, there will likely be
gaps between needs and budget realities, but we need to know
how much we are off, discuss it, and get realistic, achievable
plans. Congress needs to hold IRS to the plan by receiving
quarterly, or at least 6-month progress reports, to make sure
they stay on track, and GAO can help with this effort.
Turning to the administration. The administration has
established the American Tech Council chaired by the President
and the Office of Innovation, aimed at improving and
modernizing Federal IT. Recently, these groups have set bold
direction for the Department of Veterans Affairs to address
tech improvements to better serve our vets. Leveraging these
groups and setting similar direction for IRS modernization
efforts are needed.
Also, last fall, the comptroller general, Gene Dodaro, held
a forum on IT high risk where former and current Federal and
agency CIOs told us that one of the things that is important
for these large modernization efforts is having the Federal CIO
involved in our Nation's most important modernization efforts.
In conclusion, when IRS focuses on priorities, we tend to
get good results. Continued attention needs to occur with the
filing season, congressional mandates, and fraud detection. But
more needs to be done on replacing the Individual Master File.
Modernizing these tax processing systems should be a top
priority for our country. This concludes my statement. I look
forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Powner follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chairman BUCHANAN. Thank you for your excellent testimony,
all of you. I will now proceed to the question-and-answer
session. In keeping with my precedent, I will hold my questions
until the end.
I now recognize the lady from Indiana, Mrs. Walorski.
Mrs. WALORSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the
panel for being here.
Ms. Garza, on September 7th, nearly a month ago, we learned
of the single largest data breach with more than 140 million
individuals being impacted. When did the IRS learn of the
breach?
Ms. GARZA. So we learned it as part of the news that
evening. The very next day, we got together and started to talk
about what that impact to the IRS might be.
Mrs. WALORSKI. On September 8th, the next day, you were in
contact with Equifax about the scope of the breach, whether it
impacted the IRS data----
Ms. GARZA. That is correct.
Mrs. WALORSKI [continuing]. As you just said. In fact, IRS
sent a team of IT experts, criminal investigators, and the
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration to Atlanta,
to Equifax, to verify everything that Equifax had told the IRS,
correct?
Ms. GARZA. That is correct.
Mrs. WALORSKI. Did you have any reason to doubt Equifax or
what they had told you during that process?
Ms. GARZA. I had no reason to doubt them, but it is our
protocol to go and do a physical inspection to validate what we
are being told.
Mrs. WALORSKI. Did you learn anything that caused concern?
Ms. GARZA. So, in this case there were a couple of things.
One, we were able to verify, by looking at the forensics of
what the bad actor did and was able to access, that none of the
IRS data had been compromised. However, we did find that we had
gotten inconsistent information when we had first talked to
Equifax. We did find that in their network logs, along with
other companies' information, some of our information that we
had sent over was maintained. But, as I said, there was no
evidence that the bad actors were able to get to the network
logs. Their primary area to look at were the databases.
Mrs. WALORSKI. I read last night in the press that the IRS
had just signed a $7 million contract to have Equifax provide
identity proofing. That contract was just signed on September
29th, correct?
Ms. GARZA. That is what I have learned this morning.
Mrs. WALORSKI. So more than 20 days had passed since we
learned of the greatest data breach in history, and you just
signed a contract to pay Equifax to have access to IRS data for
identity verification purposes. Did you approve and sign that
contract?
Ms. GARZA. I did not.
Mrs. WALORSKI. Mr. Tribiano, did you approve and sign that
contract?
Mr. TRIBIANO. No, ma'am, I did not.
Mrs. WALORSKI. Who signed the contract?
Mr. TRIBIANO. Our procurement officer would have signed
that contract.
Mrs. WALORSKI. And who is that?
Mr. TRIBIANO. Ms. Shanna Webbers.
Mrs. WALORSKI. How many employees at the IRS have the
authority to sign a $7 million contract binding the IRS on IT
issues?
Mr. TRIBIANO. I would have to get back to you on that,
ma'am. I don't have that number.
Mrs. WALORSKI. Can you do that?
Mr. TRIBIANO. Yes, ma'am.
Mrs. WALORSKI. You know, I am floored to sit here this
morning. This is an abject failure. And I haven't been on this
Committee very long. But I think this is my third or fourth
hearing already on this issue of IT and who is responsible. And
we sit here this morning, we talk about all these issues we
have talked about before with no changes happening. The
American people are sitting there this morning saying, this is
beyond abject failure. This is a management failure. If
nothing, it shows that the IRS structurally needs some reform
and needs major change. This is why the American people hold us
accountable and we try to hold you accountable. And then we
have contracts being signed right in the middle of these
investigations of the biggest data breach in the history of
this country, exposing a massive amount of Americans now to
identity theft.
Frankly, the IRS should not be in the position to have
major IT acquisitions happening without you, Ms. Garza, or you,
Mr. Tribiano, even knowing that they are happening. I don't
think there is anything anybody can say at this point, other
than pointing the fingers now to a third person that signed the
contract.
Mr. Tribiano, did you want to say anything?
Mr. TRIBIANO. Yes, ma'am, if I can. I just want to clarify
a couple of things, if I can, and walk through this. And this
is not an excuse. This is just what happens. We had a contract
with Equifax. We had two different contracts. We had one that
was managed out of our privacy team, and that was for credit
monitoring. That contract was competed and awarded to a
different vendor. So that happened and went into effect October
1. We had the other contract, which was our eAuthenticated
service contract that was competed.
Mrs. WALORSKI. Okay. Excuse me. I know we are going to run
out of time here. I see the yellow light. And I know you have
got to get back to me the number of people that can sign these
contracts, but, obviously, Ms. Garza can, and you can, and the
woman that you just explained can. Who else can? That is three
right there. But who else has the authority to sign something
like a $7 million contract?
Mr. TRIBIANO. I will get back to you on that, ma'am, about
the numbers. But I want----
Mrs. WALORSKI. But you have to know the other people in the
office that can sign.
Mr. TRIBIANO. Well, there are certain procurement officers
that have warrants to be able to do that.
Mrs. WALORSKI. Are we talking 10 people? Are we talking 15
people? Are we talking five people?
Mr. TRIBIANO. The range of what procurement officers'
warrants are for are varied. Some procurement officers have
warrants up to a certain dollar amount. I have to be able to
get you that breakdown and show you who and what category can--
--
Mrs. WALORSKI. I appreciate it. And I know I am out of
time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will yield back.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Thank you.
Mr. Holding, you are recognized.
Mr. HOLDING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Garza, I think this is a question for you. As we know,
the Federal Acquisition Regulation, I think, is 12.101, sets
forth the acquisition principles, policies, procedures that
govern acquisitions of Federal agencies. And this regulation
governs the contracts, orders, and agreements entered into by
the IRS, obviously. And among things, the Federal Acquisition
Regulation requires prime contractors and subcontractors to
incorporate, to the maximum extent possible, practicable,
commercial items and components of items supplied to the
agency.
So my question to you is, to what extent do you feel you
are leveraging the new, more effective, and modern technologies
that are currently purchased by the IRS?
Ms. GARZA. So in developing our solutions for--especially
in our modernized projects, we look for COTS products that
might be available. RRP is a perfect example where we went out
and we looked at a suite of products for us to utilize to
deliver that capability. So we integrated those products. We
look for things best-in-class in order to deliver modernization
projects.
Mr. HOLDING. So do you believe that there is anything you
have currently purchased that you are underutilizing?
Ms. GARZA. There might be something. I don't have an answer
for that. I don't have full knowledge of that answer.
Mr. HOLDING. Is there a way that you could--do you maintain
some sort of inventory of products that you purchased, and, you
know, measure their effectiveness, measure whether you are
using them or not?
Ms. GARZA. We measure whether we are using them or not. We
have an inventory of those products to measure utilization. In
some cases, there are some products that are underutilized. By
that, I mean we don't have a lot of people using them. But some
of this is a dialogue between us and our business customers.
And there will be, like, groups of people that have unique
needs that are using that product. And so it really goes back
to, what is the business need? And is that product needed for
that need? In some cases, we are trying to consolidate the
products. We are trying to simplify our infrastructure, and we
are making some progress in that. But it all goes back to, what
is the business need? And does that product meet that need?
Mr. HOLDING. So would you be able to provide the Committee
with that inventory and with your analysis of what is being
utilized or underutilized for our edification?
Ms. GARZA. Sure.
Mr. HOLDING. Good. Thank you.
And, it came to light in a hearing last year, or the year
before, the amount of unionization in the IRS. I think the
Veterans Administration and the Internal Revenue Service are
the two most unionized government agencies. Do you know the
percentage of your IT employees that are unionized?
Ms. GARZA. I do not know that answer.
Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Tribiano, you are reaching for the mic
there. Do you----
Mr. TRIBIANO. No, sir. I do not know that answer. But those
are statistics that we have, and we can deliver that answer to
you.
Mr. HOLDING. I think I recall that your contracts provide
that you are able to spend something like 500,000 paid hours
per year in union activity at the IRS. Does that sound about
right?
Mr. TRIBIANO. That could be right.
Mr. HOLDING. I think Mrs. Walorski covered a couple of
these in her questioning. But I want to make sure that we have
got an answer for these for the Committee regarding the Equifax
contract. Was it approved by the Director of Privacy at the
IRS?
Mr. TRIBIANO. No, sir. What I was trying to explain before
is we had two contracts. The Director of Privacy had the one
for credit monitoring which is different than the contract for
eAuthentication. That contract for credit monitoring was
recompeted and awarded to a new vendor. The eAuthentication was
recompeted and awarded to a new vendor, but Equifax protested
the procurement. And that happened in July. So that is under
GAO right now for a decision about which way to go. So when we
came down to September 29th when the Equifax contract expired,
we had to either, one, stop the service, which means millions
of taxpayers would not be able to get their transcripts,
including those that are in need of it, like in the hurricane
disaster areas. They use those tools to get their transcripts,
or do a bridge contract with Equifax until GAO decides on the
protest, and we move forward.
Mr. HOLDING. All right. Mr. Chairman, I see I have run out
of time. Thank you.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Thank you. Mr. Bishop, you are
recognized.
Mr. BISHOP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I guess that I am not sure who to direct this to, Mr.
Tribiano or Ms. Garza. I am listening to the questions. And,
you know, Mrs. Walorski, I guess, I support the questions that
she asked and the tone in which she asked them, because that is
the tone in which my constituents are concerned about this.
Can you give us some assurances, after this Equifax breach,
that you have taken precautions, that there are steps that have
been taken, to address what could be one of the biggest
breaches in identity theft in the history of our country?
Clearly, there is a gap there. And we have got to do something
to address it. And I assume that the IRS has done something.
What can you tell us today that would provide this Committee
and our constituents assurances that we are going to do
something about this to ensure that nothing really, really bad
happens this tax filing season.
Ms. GARZA. So I can take that. So what we did immediately,
once we heard about the Equifax, we not only contacted Equifax,
but we sent a team over. The team went over, and we did
analysis of their data breach. We identified all of the
elements that had been compromised. And then, working with--
take the investigations. We went through all of that
information. And then we went through, on an application-by-
application basis, to determine if that compromise would put
our systems at risk. Our evaluation showed that the approach
that we have taken at the IRS is to have a multilayered defense
mechanism in our applications. And so, based on that, we
determined that we had other mitigating controls in place that
would protect the taxpayer information. Furthermore, there was
about 209,000 SSNs that we thought were at higher risk. And for
those 209,000 SSNs, we are in the process of receiving the SSNs
and we are going to protect those accounts specifically.
Mr. BISHOP. Have those SSNs and the owners of those SSNs
been informed of this situation?
Ms. GARZA. That would be an Equifax question to be asked.
We are going to tag the accounts to make sure that no one can
come in and----
Mr. BISHOP. But if my account is tagged, I would like to
know why it is tagged. And I would think as a taxpayer I would
have the right to know that.
Ms. GARZA. So I think that is a business decision, and we
will support whatever the business decision is.
Mr. BISHOP. Okay. A million and one questions to ask here.
Great concern. If a person--let me ask, Mr. Powner, did you
have something to add to that?
Mr. POWNER. Yeah. I would like to go back to the question
of approving IT contracts. There was a law passed December 2014
called the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform
Act----
Mr. BISHOP. Right.
Mr. POWNER [continuing]. FITARA. I do a lot of work on
FITARA at all agencies and departments. And one of the
provisions in that law is to strengthen CIO authorities. The
CIO should approve the IT budget. They should approve major IT
contracts. That is a provision in the law. And I can tell you
right now that was put in there because of this stuff that is
happening. The procurement shop, and the IT shop, and sometimes
the CFO organizations, there are walls between these
organizations. And if we would simply approve major IT
contracts by CIOs, it would help solve this problem.
Mr. BISHOP. So that is another question that I have.
Mr. Chairman, there has got to be a solution out there. In
this great country of ours, with all the great innovation, the
private sector has got to have a solution here. I know that the
commercial side and the criminal side of the IRS deal with
things differently. My understanding is the criminal side works
with a 1994 product to address these issues, which is
completely unacceptable to me. I may be wrong on that, on the
timing, on the name of the product, but it is at EFDS.
Ms. GARZA. So that is the system that RRP is replacing.
And, basically, at this point, we have retired the bulk of the
EFDS, the old system, and are using now the RRP system to do
the pre refront in identity theft.
Mr. BISHOP. How about the LCA system, the lead case
analysis?
Ms. GARZA. So that is part of the new RRP system, the link
analysis, and it is available to be utilized on that new
system. There are still components of the old legacy system,
primarily around the case management components, that still
need to be modernized. We made a decision in trying to simplify
our footprint to develop an enterprise case management system.
So rather than having RRP build its own case management system
and other parts of the organization building separate, there is
63 different case management systems that we are going to
consolidate into one platform of case management. And so we are
waiting for that platform to be developed so that then those
components of EFDS can be replaced.
Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Chairman, I see I am out of time. But I
would hope that at some point in time, we can get this group
together again and talk about what we have done and not what we
are going to do. Because this is a 1994 technology, and there
is too much technology in this country to not utilize.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Thank you.
Mr. Schweikert.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Powner, and I will tell you, we were going through some
of this late last night and early this morning, and there are
lots and lots of questions. So let's sort of go a different
direction. When you have actually looked over the agency, first
off, do you have a sense of how much of legacy systems are
still up and running? And when I say legacy, I mean things that
are maybe 15, 20, 25 years old, are still running in the
background.
Mr. POWNER. Yeah. There is a good portion as legacy spans.
There is real old stuff that is over 50 years old, going back
to the origination on the Individual Master File that processes
our tax returns.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. And are they just using bolt on, and bolt
on, and bolt on----
Mr. POWNER. And I think, as Mr. Tribiano mentioned, I mean,
a lot of those versions behind, and we got hardware that there
is no longer warranties on. That is the big issue. When you
really look at IRS, I think the big problem at IRS is the
Individual Master File. Because that is the system that
processes our tax returns. And they do a great job getting this
old system to work. But you know what is going to happen
eventually one filing season? It is going to stop. And what is
the plan to replace it? There isn't a good one.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Okay. My thoughts, let's do them out of
order. In your understanding, why is that master file not
running on a cloud-based system?
Mr. POWNER. Well, it is not running on a cloud-base or
anything close to modern because there has been other
priorities over the years. And it is not to say they don't work
on it some, because it is the number one investment. But we are
not getting enough return on it.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Isn't there translational software that
would basically do the migration?
Mr. POWNER. Yes, sir. You can translate those languages. I
mean, the issue with IRS now, they are multiple versions
behind, so you are going to have multiple layers of
translation. It is not an easy thing to do. But we need to
focus on it as a priority. And that is why I say----
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. No, no, no. It is a lot easier than running
around sticking thumbs in dikes. And I know I am interrupting,
but it is partially the time.
When you also looked at the agency and its multiple
subdivisions, did they have a commonality of platforms? They
were all running on a certain type of software? Or did lots and
lots, lots of little subdivisions within the agency, were they
purchasing different types of software?
Mr. POWNER. It is all over the board, depending on the
mission criticality of the app--and some things are newer
there. I think the RRP----
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. I am less concerned about the age of the
software. It is the commonality of the platform.
Mr. POWNER. It would not be completely common across. No.
There are probably opportunities to improve that.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Okay. And I am going to screw up the quote.
But I remember a year or two ago reading one of the biographies
of Steve Jobs, and within there was a real interesting
discussion when they had had a failure, a huge failure, trying
to move their accounting systems, and coming back in and
saying, we are going to try something new. We are going to
change our work methodology to match the software instead of
trying to force the software to match our work process.
And everything I am reading, you have lots of subdivisions
within the agency that are trying to make the software match
how they already do their workflow. Workflow is a lot easier to
change.
There is one other on my list that I need--did you see any
pattern of IT talent in the agency leaving the agency and
turning around and being rehired as a contractor in the agency?
Mr. POWNER. I don't have information on that. I will tell
you, though, this. When you--the difference between paying an
internal employee and a contractor to maintain that old
assembly code, it is a lot more expensive if you hire a
contractor.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Okay. This may be for a future
conversation, but we have someone who claims to be providing
information that there is some sort of pattern.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. In my last--and, I am sorry. I thought I
would go faster than this. I apparently haven't had enough
coffee. Why such great difficulty moving to the cloud when that
was--almost 10 years ago was going to be the major mission of
the agency's CIO?
Ms. GARZA. So although we do not have a cloud strategy
documented, we have, for the last several years, been taking on
elements of the cloud strategy. For example, our entire portal
service, which was replaced in 2012 and has been steadily--as
an infrastructure, as a service, private cloud strategy. We
also did--our enterprise storage capability is a cloud solution
that allows us to move data.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Are you housing the enterprise servers?
Ms. GARZA. I am sorry, what?
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Are you housing the enterprise servers?
Ms. GARZA. Enterprise service.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. The servers. The servers. Do you control--
--
Ms. GARZA. For storage?
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Do you control the hardware or is the
hardware distributed?
Ms. GARZA. For the enterprise storage capability, the
servers are in the cloud, and we move the data back and forth.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. And those servers in the cloud are owned by
someone on the outside or the agency?
Ms. GARZA. I don't have that answer.
Mr. SCHWEIKERT. Okay. Mr. Chairman, I think this is one of
those occasions where there is going to be a long letter to
follow.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Thank you.
Mr. Rice, you are recognized.
Mr. RICE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Who on the panel thinks that the modernization efforts of
the IRS are acceptable? Who on the panel is in charge, or is
anybody--any of you all the point person, the person who
directs modernization? Is it you?
Ms. GARZA. I am responsible for that.
Mr. RICE. Okay. And if nobody up here thinks it is
acceptable and you are the one in charge, how long have you
been doing this?
Ms. GARZA. So I became the CIO about 14 months ago.
Mr. RICE. Uh-huh.
Ms. GARZA. But I have been involved in the modernization
effort for some time. I will tell you that we have had a lot of
success, and I ask that you look at it from the bigger picture.
Our current electronic filing system was a huge success. The
Integrative Financial System was part of the modernization
program. At the same time, we have been delivering very
significant----
Mr. RICE. What----
Ms. GARZA [continuing]. Legislative mandates----
Mr. RICE. What is the Individual Master File?
Ms. GARZA. So the Individual Master File is the database,
the system, that holds every individual taxpayer's account. It
has a record of the account changes, the things that have
occurred to that account.
Mr. RICE. The system that holds that, it was designed 50
years ago?
Ms. GARZA. It was first implemented in 1962.
Mr. RICE. Okay. So the hardware that runs--that system runs
on, it can't be modern. That system----
Ms. GARZA. It is running on modern. The application, which
is the ALC code, was developed in 1962. However, the hardware
that it writes on is current technology.
Mr. RICE. All right. So if the code was written that long
ago, then you must have folks on your payroll that are
continually maintaining that. Is that correct?
Ms. GARZA. Yes. And the number of people that know and
understand ALC is dwindling. So we do have a sense of urgency
that we need to get the ALC, especially the core components of
the master file modernized.
Mr. RICE. It is only 55 years old.
Ms. GARZA. That is correct.
Mr. RICE. That is a heck of a sense of urgency.
Mr. Powner, you said that part of the problem is that
Congress needs to set goals and hold people accountable. Is
that right?
Mr. POWNER. I think that would be very helpful. And I have
just seen it work over the years.
Mr. RICE. We can't go in there ourselves and write code and
convert files. That is not our job, and we are not capable. But
can you help us come up with a----
Mr. POWNER. Where I think you could help is this: Ask Gina,
Ms. Garza, how much money it will take, and how many years to
replace the Individual Master File. We need a clear answer on
that. Is it 5 years at $100 million each year, whatever it is,
we need that----
Mr. RICE. What is the answer, Ms. Garza? What is the
answer?
Ms. GARZA. So there are two major components of the IMF
that we have developed----
Mr. RICE. How much money and how long will it take?
Ms. GARZA. So we believe that we can deliver a system
replacing those core components in 5 years if we can get 50 to
60 FTEs and the funding associated with it, with some direct
hire authority so that we can hire the right skills, and about
$85 million each year. We----
Mr. RICE. $85 million a year?
Ms. GARZA. Yes, sir.
Mr. RICE. Well, you got $2.9 billion now, right?
Ms. GARZA. So a lot of that fund, those funds, are going to
do the unfunded legislative mandates, to do tax filing season,
to run all of our current operations.
Mr. RICE. But this $2.9 billion is for IT, right?
Ms. GARZA. Yes.
Mr. RICE. Isn't it more expensive, at some point, to
maintain 55-year-old software than it is to just buy new and
convert it over? I mean, wouldn't it be cheaper?
Ms. GARZA. Actually, the IMF is very efficient.
Mr. RICE. Mr. Powner, wouldn't it be cheaper?
Mr. POWNER. Yes, I think over time it would be cheaper, and
I think it is efficient. The issue is, I think, the human
capital scenario where we are running out of programmers that
know this stuff. You know, we are training young programmers
who know modern languages this old assembly code to keep it
running. I just think it is highly risky, and I think what we
heard here is they need $85 million over a 5-year period----
Mr. RICE. So if your programmer has a heart attack, nobody
is going to be able to get their tax refund. Is that what you
are saying?
Mr. POWNER. You know what, we have had examples like this.
Last year I highlighted all the old systems in the government.
This is right up there along with the 8-inch floppy discs that
DoD is using on our nuclear command system. So we got problems,
but this is one of the top five.
Mr. RICE. Mr. Chairman, I sure would like to keep going,
but I see my time is up.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Thank you. You know, our goal in this
Committee, we are trying to do the overall Committee tax reform
sometime this year ideally. We are hopeful. And then IRS reform
we would like to do, it has been 20 years. But I guess my
question, and a lot of us--at least I was motivated, to think
that we have equipment out there--I got out of college in the
mid 1970's, we would sell many computers. I mean, just to think
that we have got equipment from 1970s and 1980s out there is
mind-boggling. But I guess the question I would have initially
as a business guy over the years, is do you have an IT plan in
terms of going forward? Because I think one of the things is
when we do IRS reform, we have to take a look at the whole
thing on IT, and identity theft, and there are a lot of
different things. But do you have a plan? Has that plan ever
been presented to a committee? Because if someone came in to
me--and we had this situation--what I would do is I would have
the best and brightest, present a plan, and then get some sense
of the return that we would get as shareholders or whatever. So
let me just ask all of you. Do you feel like you have a plan?
Is there a buy-in to the plan? We will start with the gentleman
there.
Mr. TRIBIANO. Yes, sir. We do have a digital roadmap on how
we would get from where we are now to where we want to be. I
don't know if we shared it with the committee. I have to go
back and take a look.
Chairman BUCHANAN. How long is that plan? Is that a five-
year, 10-year plan?
Mr. TRIBIANO. It depends on what--there is a lot of
components to it, and there are certain milestones that you
have to reach. One of the major things we have to get to is
stabilizing the infrastructure as we see it now so we can
continue at least delivering filing season as we modernize from
that point. So my concerns have been focused on the delivery of
the filing season part of it. So we can have that----
Chairman BUCHANAN. The thing is, you have got to have a
vision. You have got to have a sense of the future, because,
you know, otherwise, I think that is probably why we are in the
situation we are in. We are just trying to react instead of
being proactive.
Mr. TRIBIANO. Absolutely. And we would love to sit down and
go through that plan with the committee, with your staff,
whatever you deem necessary, roundtable discussion, and have
that back and forth and explain where we are going and how we
think we can get there and get the input. I mean, as our
partners at GAO are stating, we want congressional engagement
on this. We want you to understand the concerns and issues and
how we need to get to where we need to go.
Chairman BUCHANAN. What is your thought on that? Do you
feel like we have got a workable plan going forward? I mean,
you know, it is not just about throwing a lot of money at it.
It just seems that we can be a lot more efficient going forward
in terms of personnel costs and everything else. And I will get
into that in a minute. But do you feel like there is a plan? I
mean, you are the one that is kind of heading this up.
Ms. GARZA. We have what we have called a technology
roadmap. And that technology roadmap was developed in concert
with a future-state vision for the IRS. And so as part of that
document, you will see the evolution and the migration of
current-state IT to future-state IT.
A- subset of that is the digital roadmap, which is what we
are really focused and have prioritized right now. We want to
be able to get out and provide services to taxpayers. But those
documents are in place. We do utilize them. And as we talked
earlier, the enterprise case management system is one of those
things that came out of the technology roadmap where we are
trying to consolidate 63 legacy systems that have been around
forever into a single COTS platform in the cloud so that we can
provide case management capabilities across the board.
One of the things that we did with RRP, we did not let them
create their own case management system. That was a conscious
decision on our part because we needed to stop creating
stovepipe solutions.
Mr. RICE. Mr. Chairman, can I make a suggestion?
Chairman BUCHANAN. Yeah.
Mr. RICE. Why don't we ask Mrs. Garza, the CIO, to give us
a plan from here to modern----
Chairman BUCHANAN. Uh-huh.
Mr. RICE [continuing]. And have regular meetings, you know,
quarterly, or whatever, and ask what the progress is on those.
Chairman BUCHANAN. That is a good point. Do you feel like--
is this a plan you have shared with anybody in terms of Members
of Congress or anywhere else?
Ms. GARZA. I don't know if we have shared the technology
roadmap and the digital roadmap, is certainly something that we
can do. And we would be happy--I remember--and Dave Powner and
I go back to when we used to come up and brief, on a quarterly
basis, congressional staff on the progress against----
Chairman BUCHANAN. This is going to be an area where I
think all of us are going to be interested going forward
because it is not acceptable.
But, Mr. Verneuille, I want to run through all of these.
What is your sense? Is there a plan? Or is there a vision? What
are your thoughts on it?
Mr. VERNEUILLE. Like Ms. Garza mentioned, there is a
technology roadmap, and we have seen it. The challenge we see
is that the priorities change every year. So there is a
strategy and a roadmap, but the details of what they deliver
every year, the requirements that are going to be developed and
delivered every year change annually based on priorities,
resources, and other requirements coming in for that year. So
it is a plan, but what they deliver is going to change every
year.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Mr. Powner, would you want to comment on
it?
Mr. POWNER. So to be balanced, I think there is a roadmap
they have used to deliver on some aspects of the technology at
IRS, but--and it is a big ``but''--there is not a workable,
achievable plan to replace the IMF.
Chairman BUCHANAN. The second follow-up question for all of
you is this: I have a gentleman who has run a good-sized
business, a lot of restaurants all over. He said to me, he
said, Vern, you know, if I hire a manager, $50,000, in one of
his stores--and then the cost today of supporting an individual
is another 42 percent, so it is $70,000. He said, I have gone
to much more automation, and as people retired out, I have just
been able--not even had to cut head count, but, he said, we
have been able to get a good return on our technology.
And I guess the question is, is that, you know, as a part
of a plan, I would like someone to tell me, here is what we
need to invest, but here is the efficiency coming out of the
system. Because if we are dealing with software back in the
1970s and 1980s, and hardware, there has got to be a lot of
deficiencies as a result of that. And I think that is the
concern a lot of us have, just throwing more money at it. The
question is, is to have a plan, what is the return on that plan
in terms of the technology dollars being spent? We should have
a way of being able to get to those numbers, because there has
got to be an enormous savings.
I went into a facility the other day with robots and
everything. They have cut a lot of personnel out of this plant,
a big plant, Amazon. It is one of our new facilities in our
area. I was just shocked about it. They probably have three
times as many folks working there because of today's
capability. And that is something we need to think about. That
is why I am big on planning, personally, as a business guy.
Because if you don't have a vision, you perish. But we need to
have a vision, a plan, in terms of this space, in terms of the
IRS in general, before I would be willing to commit any
dollars, because I would like to see what the return on that
investment would be.
So I will give you a chance, all of you, just to make a
comment.
Mr. TRIBIANO. Yes, sir.
Chairman BUCHANAN. That is just my feeling. I am more of a
big picture guy.
Mr. TRIBIANO. Chairman, you are absolutely right. I mean,
we have a plan. We have to do a better job of articulating what
the results of that and the outcomes of those are. Now, there
are some measurements with that that are not as easy as dollars
versus costs.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Uh-huh.
Mr. TRIBIANO. But some of them is outcomes, meaning better
taxpayer service, less lines at our walk-in centers, less calls
to our call centers. But there are measurements that we can
articulate.
Chairman BUCHANAN. But my point is, is that it should also
have some savings in terms of personnel costs, I would think.
Because there is much more capability in terms of computing
power and everything else.
Would you like to add something, Ms. Garza?
Ms. GARZA. I agree with you. And, actually, as we spoke
earlier, we are looking to robotics ourselves. We believe that
there are a lot of business processes that can be automated,
and, therefore, decreasing the number of FTEs that the IRS
might need. There is also areas in testing and other areas
where automation would be very, very helpful. We keep looking
for places where we can be more efficient. Moving to cloud is
one of the strategies that we are pursuing. We believe that we
can either have a managed service or a cloud service, that then
we won't need to have the people in order to maintain those
systems, and then we can rely on them to make sure that all of
the hardware/software is being maintained. So this is part of
the conversation that we are having and the plans that we are
doing.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Well, one thing we are going to want to
do is get whatever plan that you do have, just talk about that,
where we are at and where we are going.
Mr. Verneuille?
Mr. VERNEUILLE. Yes, sir. Part of the return on investment
also involves retirement of systems that you are replacing. So
the issue with IMF not being completed or converted to CADE 2,
they cannot retire IMF until CADE 2 is completed. So that is a
loss of efficiency. They are spending millions of dollars a
year maintaining IMF. And if they complete CADE 2, that is more
savings. As well as on the RRP case management process, they
are currently spending millions of dollars maintaining the EFDS
case management until they get the enterprise case management
solution implemented. So there is more savings by retiring
legacy systems.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Mr. Powner.
Mr. POWNER. I would agree that there are huge efficiencies
with modernization. I think another key aspect, though, that
comes with the efficiencies is the improved security,
cybersecurity, with the modern technology.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Huge issue, obviously.
Mr. POWNER. Absolutely. So that is extremely important
going forward.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Mr. Bishop, did anybody else have a
comment or a question? I think we have a couple of minutes.
Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this hearing, and I
think it is very helpful. This is not a shot at the IRS. But I
think it would also be helpful for this Committee to bring in a
panel from the private sector to hear their solutions for this
issue. Because we have ample ingenuity out there, entrepreneurs
out there, who are working in this space every day of the week.
And when the IRS needs 35 FTEs, or $85 million a year, I think
before we do anything like that, we spend taxpayer dollars in
that way, we ought to be talking to the private sector to see
what their solutions are. And I know that Palantir, for
example, out in California, is one of the companies that has
provided the technology on the--I believe it is on the civil
side.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Yeah.
Mr. BISHOP. So it would be very helpful to be able to have
them come in as well.
Chairman BUCHANAN. Okay. I would like to thank our
witnesses for appearing today before us. Please be advised that
Members have two weeks to submit written questions, to answer
later in writing. Those questions and answers will be a part of
the formal record. And with that, the Subcommittee is
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 9:57 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Member Questions for the Record follow:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]