[Joint House and Senate Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




               OVERSIGHT OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
               
=======================================================================

                             JOINT HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

    SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS AND THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE

                                AND THE

           SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH CARE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES

                                 OF THE

               COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                            OCTOBER 24, 2023

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-71

                               __________

  Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability




                [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]




                       Available on: govinfo.gov,
                         oversight.house.gov or
                             docs.house.gov

                               ______
                                 

                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

54-068 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2023










               COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND ACCOUNTABILITY

                    JAMES COMER, Kentucky, Chairman

Jim Jordan, Ohio                     Jamie Raskin, Maryland, Ranking 
Mike Turner, Ohio                        Minority Member
Paul Gosar, Arizona                  Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of 
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina            Columbia
Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin            Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
Gary Palmer, Alabama                 Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia
Clay Higgins, Louisiana              Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
Pete Sessions, Texas                 Ro Khanna, California
Andy Biggs, Arizona                  Kweisi Mfume, Maryland
Nancy Mace, South Carolina           Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York
Jake LaTurner, Kansas                Katie Porter, California
Pat Fallon, Texas                    Cori Bush, Missouri
Byron Donalds, Florida               Jimmy Gomez, California
Kelly Armstrong, North Dakota        Shontel Brown, Ohio
Scott Perry, Pennsylvania            Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico
William Timmons, South Carolina      Robert Garcia, California
Tim Burchett, Tennessee              Maxwell Frost, Florida
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia      Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
Lisa McClain, Michigan               Greg Casar, Texas
Lauren Boebert, Colorado             Jasmine Crockett, Texas
Russell Fry, South Carolina          Dan Goldman, New York
Anna Paulina Luna, Florida           Jared Moskowitz, Florida
Chuck Edwards, North Carolina        Rashida Tlaib, Michigan
Nick Langworthy, New York
Eric Burlison, Missouri

                                 ------                                
                       Mark Marin, Staff Director
       Jessica Donlon, Deputy Staff Director and General Counsel
                      Bill Womack, Senior Advisor
                 Alex Rankin, Professional Staff Member
                 Reagan Dye, Professional Staff Member
      Mallory Cogar, Deputy Director of Operations and Chief Clerk

                      Contact Number: 202-225-5074

                  Julie Tagen, Minority Staff Director

                      Contact Number: 202-225-5051

                                 ------                                



    Subcommittee on Government Operations and the Federal Workforce

                     Pete Sessions, Texas, Chairman

Gary Palmer, Alabama                 Kweisi Mfume, Maryland Ranking 
Clay Higgins, Louisiana                  Minority Member
Andy Biggs, Arizona                  Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of 
Byron Donalds, Florida                   Columbia
William Timmons, South Carolina      Maxwell Frost, Florida
Tim Burchett, Tennessee              Greg Casar, Texas
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia      Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia
Lauren Boebert, Colorado             Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico
Russell Fry, South Carolina          Robert Garcia, California
Chuck Edwards, North Carolina        Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
Eric Burlison, Missouri              Jasmine Crockett, Texas
                                     Rashida Tlaib, Michigan



           Subcommittee on Health Care and Financial Services

                   Lisa McClain, Michigan, Chairwoman

Paul Gosar, Arizona                  Katie Porter, California Ranking 
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina            Minority Member
Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin            Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York
Russell Fry, South Carolina          Jimmy Gomez, California
Anna Paulina Luna, Florida           Greg Casar, Texas
Nick Langworthy, New York            Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
Eric Burlison, Missouri              Jasmine Crockett, Texas
Vacancy                              Vacancy









                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              

                                                                   Page

Hearing held on October 24, 2023.................................     1

                               Witnesses

                              ----------                              

Danny Werfel, Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service
Oral Statement...................................................     8
Jessica Lucas-Judy (Minority Witness), Director, Strategic 
  Issues, Government Accountability Office
Oral Statement...................................................     9

Written opening statements and statements for the witnesses are 
  available in the U.S. House of Representatives Document 
  Repository at: docs.house.gov.

                           Index of Documents

                              ----------                              

  * Press Release, IRS, ``Agency priorities''; submitted by Rep. 
  Mfume.

  * Letter, July 19, 2023, from a coalition to the IRS 
  commissioner in support of the IRS Free File Program; submitted 
  by Rep. Mfume.

  * Press Release, Treasury Department, ``Filing Season 2003, A 
  Report Card: IRS Delivered Significantly Improved Customer 
  Service''; submitted by Rep. Mfume.

  * IRS' Strategic Operating Plan, 2023-2031; submitted by Rep. 
  Mfume.

  * Statement, Nina Olson, and accompanying letter, June 21, from 
  the Center for Taxpayer Rights to Treasury Department and IRS 
  Commissioner Werfel; submitted by Rep. Mfume.

  * Study, Stanford Institute for Economic and Policy Research 
  Study on the Tax System; submitted by Rep. Lee.

  * Statement for the Record; submitted by Rep. Connolly.

Documents listed above are available at: docs.house.gov.









 
               OVERSIGHT OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

                              ----------                              


                       Tuesday, October 24, 2023

                     U.S. House of Representatives

    Subcommittee on Government Operations and the Federal Workforce

                                and the

           Subcommittee on Health Care and Financial Services

               Committee on Oversight and Accountability

                                           Washington, D.C.

    The Subcommittees met, pursuant to notice, at 2:21 p.m., in 
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lisa McClain 
[Chairwoman of the Subcommittee on Health Care and Financial 
Services] presiding.
    Present from Committee on Oversight and Accountability 
[Subcommittee on Health Care and Financial Services]: 
Representatives McClain, Foxx, Grothman, Fry, Porter, Lee, and 
Crockett.
    Present from the Committee on Oversight and Accountability 
[Subcommittee on Government Operations and the Federal 
Workforce]: Representatives Sessions, Palmer, Timmons, 
Burchett, Fry, Edwards, Mfume, Norton, Frost, Connolly, Garcia, 
Lee, and Crockett.
    Also present: Representative Raskin.
    Mrs. McClain. All right. This joint hearing of the 
Subcommittee on Government Operations and the Federal Workforce 
and Health Care and Financial Services Committee will come to 
order. Welcome, everyone.
    Without objection, the Chair may declare a recess at any 
time.
    I recognize myself for the purpose of making an opening 
statement.
    First and foremost, thank you all for being here in this 
crazy bit of times we are in, but nevertheless, what we are 
talking about is extremely important. The IRS has been plagued 
really with dysfunction for decades and complexity. The 
dysfunction is across the board, from data breaches, leaks, and 
identity theft to slow audits, backlogs, and really horrific 
customer service, at least from my constituents. Despite years 
of congressional oversight and government watchdog warnings, 
not a lot has changed.
    My colleagues on the other side of the aisle believe that 
more money and more power is the solution. In fact, in last 
year's Inflation Reduction Act, congressional Democrats dumped 
$80 billion into the IRS. With this influx of cash, the IRS 
plans to ramp up audits on all Americans. This funding spree 
prioritizes enforcement over improving taxpayer services. 
Taxpayer services, like processing taxpayer returns, receive a 
9-percent funding boost with enforcement receiving a 69-percent 
funding boost. The IRS needs stronger leadership, not more 
money and not more audits. The IRS needs to work on getting the 
American people their money back in a timely fashion, not 
auditing the lower-and middle-class Americans. The IRS, in my 
opinion, needs to invest in highly skilled experts, not simply 
hire more employees, but higher quality, not so much quantity. 
Put simply, the IRS just needs to do a better job. There needs 
to be consequences for their inaction.
    If a private business did what the IRS does on a daily 
basis, it would quickly go out of business. If a private 
business repeatedly left you on hold for hours, as my 
constituents, and actually myself has even experienced, at a 
time or did not answer the phone call, it really would go out 
of business, and the customer complaints would go through the 
roof. If a private business repeatedly left sensitive tax 
information unsecured or lost it entirely, it would face 
criminal penalties and go out of business. But since the 
government is involved, there is no accountability or yet any 
accountability that I have seen for its poor performance. And 
that is one of the things I would like to talk about is who 
owns it, what is the accountability, but also what are we doing 
to improve it, right?
    So even if we did give more money, what would the solutions 
look like, right, because we can sit here and complain, but we 
also have to focus on some solutions. Why do we accept this? 
Hardworking Americans accept this because they follow the law, 
and they know they face consequences, like penalties and fines, 
if they do not, and those penalties and fines are their money. 
It comes out of their pockets.
    If we make a mistake on our tax return returns, it costs 
us, right? In contrast, when the IRS makes a mistake, there are 
really no consequences, or if there are, I would like to talk 
about what those consequences are. Do people lose their job? 
Are they put on action plans? Do they get demoted? What are the 
consequences? And I really do not think it is too much to ask 
to have the Federal agencies play by the same rules as we 
expect the American people to play by. I mean, the IRS asks for 
more money to fund more mistakes, more data breaches, more 
ineptness. It should not be acceptable, and we have to hold our 
government agencies to the at least the same standards that we 
hold the American people to with their tax dollars.
    Instead of doing the job, the IRS is struggling to complete 
its basic functions. Instead of processing tax returns in a 
timely matter manner, Americans are waiting months and 
sometimes years for money that is rightly theirs. And the issue 
is, yes, we pay them, you know, interest on that money, but a 
lot of the businesses are going to go out of business by the 
time they get their rightly deserved money. Instead of serving 
taxpayers, the IRS can do something as simple as answering the 
phone. Instead of being trustworthy, the IRS carelessly leaves 
your sensitive information unsecure and vulnerable to leaks, 
fraud, and identity theft. Frankly, the IRS is the perfect 
example of bureaucracy failure, and there has not been a lot of 
accountability, if any accountability, for it.
    We talk about these issues today. We need to remember that 
these are real problems that impact real people with real 
money, their money. Since I entered Congress, countless 
constituents have approached my office asking for help with the 
IRS. I have constituents who have filed returns on time in 
April and have yet to receive their refunds. When they seek 
help from the IRS, they cannot get ahold of anyone on the phone 
to even to get an update, and I will cover those a little bit 
later, but often they wait hours to reach customer service 
representatives only to get disconnected due to an overloaded 
switchboard, which you can imagine incenses them, and the 
frustration goes through the roof. I have constituents who are 
business owners who have outstanding applications for the 
employee retention tax credit. One of these cases has been 
pending since February. These wait times are unacceptable, 
really, for small businesses because they depend on those 
dollars, especially through the pandemic. We are here this 
afternoon to demand answers and accountability on behalf of the 
American people.
    Commissioner Werfel, thank you for being here to the 
Subcommittee today. I look forward to your fruitful discussion.
    I now recognize Ranking Member Mfume for the purpose of 
making an opening statement.
    Mr. Mfume. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Good morning, 
is it still? Good afternoon. I am living in that other universe 
I see. Well welcome, everyone, and thank you very much, Madam 
Chair.
    Paying one's fair share is an important obligation in what 
is known as the American social contract. With an estimated 1.6 
or 168 individual taxpayers, in billions, who filed returns 
this year alone, processing high returns of volume and higher 
returns of paper requires sufficient personnel, modernized 
technology, and streamlined systems. A little over a year ago, 
President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act, or the IRA, 
into law. As most of you know, this groundbreaking legislation 
reached the IRS at a critical time right before the 2023 tax 
filing season, and it delivered $80 billion to the IRS over the 
next 10 years. The funds allow the IRS to hire new staff to 
modernize all of its technology and to audit wealthy tax cheats 
who had been getting away with murder.
    [Chart]
    Mr. Mfume. The poster board behind me illustrates that this 
is a win for low-and middle-class Americans. These IRA-backed 
improvements, as you can see, achieved 87-percent peak levels 
of performance and service success as a result of their 
implementation, 87 percent higher than in any other time. It 
was a dramatic increase from the previous tax filing year 
alone. IRS answered 6.5 million more calls than last year, 
cutting the wait times down by 86 percent, which I think is 
phenomenal. It served more than 140,000 additional taxpayers 
and cleared the backlog of unprocessed 2022 individual tax 
returns with no errors. Now, you got to be doing something 
right to have those kind of numbers that are certifiable and 
verifiable.
    So, these are real and tangible and immediate results that 
show that investment in the IRS improves taxpayer services. Do 
not take my word for it. The IRS pointed out in a sweeping 
release that, by the way, I would ask unanimous consent that it 
be entered into the record, showing that the Agency will 
continue to prioritize efforts of high-income individuals and 
companies without running away, turning a blind eye, or 
refusing to do what they should, in fact, do.
    Mr. Mfume. So, these are real. As I said before, they are 
tangible. They are immediate results that show that investment 
in the IRS improves taxpayer services. Unfortunately, after 
this year's tax filing season, in the budget negotiations, the 
Nation was forced to heed the Republicans' persistent call for 
rescinding the IRS funding. There were a lot of boogeyman 
stories that took place all over the Floor of the Congress 
about what was going to happen to almost virtually scare the 
American taxpayer into believing something that was not true.
    The reality is the Agency kept its promise, its commitment 
to the Nation, and its stated goal of cracking down on 
delinquent tax-evading millionaires who had been getting away, 
as I said before, with robbery. The Agency kept its commitment. 
And so, despite cuts to its funding and the persistent and 
dangerous mischaracterizations of IRS agents as sort of an army 
of boogeymen waiting to kick in your door and lock you up, we 
have got to stop playing games like that. And we have got to 
make sure that middle-class Americans know what the facts are, 
what the intentions were, and, more importantly, what the goals 
have been and the conclusions that bear those goals out have 
been.
    To the extent that IRS has collected nearly $160 million in 
back taxes from individuals earning over a million dollars 
speaks volumes about who they are trying to help and who are 
they trying to keep us from being taken advantage by. These 
millions of dollars in missing tax payments were not an 
accident. It was not manna from Heaven. It was a clear, 
deliberate effort to make sure that enforcement was the way it 
should be by that Agency and to make sure that tax cheats, 
particularly the wealthy, wealthy, wealthy ones, did not have a 
safe haven. For example, the IRS identified one individual who 
just last month was ordered to pay $15 million in restitution 
for falsifying personal expenses as deductible business 
expenses. I do not know what kind of neighborhood that person 
lives in, but when you can get that kind of fine, it suggests 
that you have been getting away with one serious crime and was 
caught. These efforts to defraud the Federal Government 
included financing of a 51,000-square-foot mansion.
    I am glad whoever the hell it was got caught. I really am. 
That is the affront and that is the tragedy here, and that is 
why we have got to find a way to make sure the IRS protects 
middle-income people by going after the high-income abusers. 
These sorts of greedy tax cheats exacerbate the $688 billion 
tax gap, highlighting the stark contrast between the amount of 
money owed and the amount of collected by the IRS on time. In 
other words, the more millionaires and billionaires who skirt 
around and play around with paying their fair share, the larger 
the burden that falls on hardworking, everyday Americans who 
pay their fair share every year on time. The IRS reports that 
even small declines in taxpayer compliance can cause the Nation 
billions of dollars in lost revenue, underscoring the need for 
simplicity and efficiency during the tax filing season.
    And that is why I co-led, with my colleague here, Ms. 
Porter, and with Mr. Connolly of Virginia, the Trust in 
Government Act, which directs the Department of Treasury to 
expand electronic tax filing and other customer support via 
email. We also led the Streamlining IRS Operations Act, which 
requires that tax returns filed on paper can be readily 
digitized. The IRS heeded that ask in that request by 
expanding--not reducing--by expanding its digital scanning 
efforts this tax season. So, Congress must continue to ensure 
that the IRS has the funding and the resources necessary to 
maintain its remarkable progress since IRA became law, progress 
that is unheralded in many respects and unnoticed by others who 
hide behind these fake characterizations. Make no mistake, 
further cuts will hamper the IRS' ability to execute 
transformative change.
    And so, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to 
preserve IRS funding as we move forward from our current 
stalemate and get back to the business of funding the 
Government's operations. I want to thank our witnesses, 
Commissioner Werfel and Director Lucas-Judy for your 
participation in today's hearing, and I am particularly looking 
forward to hearing from Commissioner Werfel about the status of 
the IRS' upcoming tax filing program, known as Direct File.
    We have the duty and the obligation in this Committee to 
ensure that the government operates at a top-tier level for all 
Americans, and I look forward to discussing, as Members of 
Congress, how we can work to support those efforts. I yield 
back, Madam Chair.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you. I now recognize Chairman Sessions 
for the purpose of making an opening statement.
    Mr. Sessions. Chairwoman McClain, thank you very much. I am 
sorry to each of you for being late. We have had business in 
another part of the complex. Commission Werfel, thank you so 
much for being here, and, Ms. Judy, thank you very much.
    The opportunity for us to meet today, that we spoke about 
yesterday, Commissioner, is one of natural inquiry that this 
Committee has. It is about the effectiveness of the Internal 
Revenue Service as it relates to their ongoing business that 
this Subcommittee believes is very important, but perhaps it 
goes into much deeper points, and that is why we are also here 
today. We need to make sure that the IRS in its performance 
does do its job. As Mr. Mfume says, we need to make sure they 
are properly funded. We need to make sure that they treat all 
people fairly, not just some that they would choose to. We 
believe that there have been reasons why you were brought on 
board the first time as Commissioner, Acting Commissioner. We 
believe that there are reasons why you are there today, perhaps 
a second view at the IRS. There are a lot of things that we 
will want to get into.
    But perhaps it is most important for me to say this, that I 
believe confidence in the IRS is what we are after. I spoke to 
you about this yesterday, about the sizing models, about the 
professionalism, about their ability to attention to detail for 
the American people to be able to get not just a good answer, 
but to be able to get through on the phone without having to 
wait for hours. The effectiveness of the IRS and ability to get 
their job done is important.
    We know that the IRS is going to cooperate with us, because 
you told me that yesterday, on sensitive matters. You and I 
spoke about that you actually did not want to get into actual 
information today, and I concurred, but we are going to talk 
today to get an idea that you will cooperate. And you will 
cooperate fully with us, that you will make sure that the 
questions that we ask, while you do not have to go into the 
specifics about those, certainly not names, certainly not 
times, certainly not about the investigation, but about your 
agreement that you will cooperate with this Committee and with 
Congress in those regards.
    So, we know that you have been given some extra $80 
billion. We are going to want to talk about that and the 
deployment of that, and how that is going to aid and do the 
things that would be necessary. I think it is important that 
you know that the IRS touches almost every single American, and 
so the information we get back, the things that we hear back 
comes at a time that you have got to defend a lot of ground.
    I want to thank you for being here today, I want to thank 
Mr. Mfume, and I want to thank Chairwoman McClain for allowing 
us to start this meeting without me. And, Madam Chairman, I 
yield back my time so we can go to opening statements.
    Mrs. McClain. I now recognize Ranking Member Porter for the 
purpose of making an opening statement.
    Ms. Porter. Have you heard of death by a thousand paper 
cuts? It is how to get rid of something by suddenly attacking 
it over and over until it is finally gone: death by a thousand 
cuts. For too many years, Washington politicians have worked to 
gut the Internal Revenue Service, and they found creative ways 
to cut the IRS time and time again.
    How do they do that? Phase one, they start by attacking its 
credibility. Look, I know that the Agency that collects our 
taxes is not easy to love. Believe me, opportunistic 
politicians know that, too. So they go on TV, and they give the 
IRS a verbal slash, falsely suggesting to the American people 
that the IRS is spying on us, targeting us for our political 
beliefs, or going after us to pay more money than we owe. What 
a bunch of B.S. But even though those claims lack any evidence, 
we might be inclined to believe negative things about an Agency 
that collects taxes. Look, even the Bible is not that kind to 
tax collectors. These politicians easily succeed in creating 
and spreading hostility, making it even easier to slash the IRS 
again.
    Cue phase two, full-on partisan investigations and attacks 
on the hardworking employees of the IRS. Look no further than 
the last time the Committee Republicans went hard after the 
IRS. Under the Obama Administration, Republicans falsely 
claimed the IRS was unfairly targeting conservative 
organizations more than progressive organizations applying for 
tax exempt status. The IRS spent $20 million and produced 1 
million pages of documents in response. Ultimately, Republicans 
did not prove anything. They instead used it to justify 
diverting resources from IRS customer service, IT, and 
enforcement. But that is what opportunistic politicians wanted, 
to turn people against the IRS, to divert resources so the 
Agency cannot do its job, and then to take one last slash.
    That brings us to phase three: budget cuts. When 
politicians tell us that our tax collector is after us, no one 
wants to fund the collector, and that is exactly what has 
happened. Opportunistic politicians have succeeded in cutting 
IRS staffing 20 percent lower than it was in 2010, even though 
the country has grown by 7 percent since then. The Agency has 
been so battered that we will need 52,000 new IRS employees 
just to meet the Agency's needs. That is how bad it has gotten, 
folks, year after year of politicians taking slashes at the 
IRS.
    Opportunistic politicians have not succeeded in totally 
killing the IRS by a thousand cuts, but the cuts have gotten 
deep, and the Agency is badly wounded. Who suffers from all 
this? We do. We all suffer. When we need help with our taxes 
and no one is available at the IRS to pick up the phone, blame 
a politician who slashed the IRS budget. When we want the IRS 
to make tax filing easier or work harder to make our 
information more secure, but the IRS cannot invest in 
technology with adequate cyber security, blame a politician who 
slashed the IRS. When we pay our fair share of taxes and just 
want the IRS to make sure billionaires do the same, but they do 
not have the staff or the resources to do it, blame a 
politician who slashed the IRS.
    Our current House Republican Majority has too many of these 
politicians who love to slash government institutions to their 
breaking points. As we sit in yet another Republican-led 
hearing to attack the IRS instead of making it work better, 
other Republicans are off slashing our entire Congress at the 
same time. They have stopped Congress from doing its work 
because they have not been able to elect the Speaker of the 
House, so we cannot pass any legislation. The most 
opportunistic Republicans have spent so long attacking our 
government that now Republicans do not even trust each other, 
but that is what the opportunists wanted: a weak Congress, a 
weak IRS. It is what they call smart government, but in 
reality, it is a Federal Government that cannot serve its 
people. Right now, the opportunists are creating that reality. 
A bipartisan coalition of reasonable Members of Congress can 
stop them.
    Today, everything that we do and say matters. Before my 
colleagues whack the IRS, consider that your whack might be one 
of the thousands of cuts over time that weakens our government 
and hurts the American people. Instead, we should all use today 
to determine what the IRS needs to serve the American people 
and how Congress can be an effective partner, that is, if 
Republicans ever elect a speaker so we can legislate. I yield 
back.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you. I am pleased to welcome our 
witnesses for today, Commissioner Danny Werfel and Jessica 
Lucas-Judy. Danny Werfel is a Commissioner of the Internal 
Revenue Service and Jessica Lucas-Judy is the Director of 
Strategy Issues at the Government Accountability Office. We 
look forward to hearing what you have to say on today's 
important subject.
    Pursuant to the Committee Rule 9(g), the witnesses will 
please stand and raise their right hands.
    Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony that you 
are about to give is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but 
the truth, so help you God?
    [A chorus of ayes.]
    Mrs. McClain. Let the record show that the witnesses 
answered in the affirmative. Thank you, and you can have a 
seat. We appreciate you being here today, and we look forward 
to your testimony.
    Let me remind the witnesses that we have read your written 
statement, and it will appear in full in the hearing record. 
Please limit your oral statements to 5 minutes. As a reminder, 
please press the button on the microphone in front of you so 
that is on, and the Members can hear you. When you begin to 
speak, the light in front of you will turn green. After 4 
minutes, the light will turn yellow. When the red light comes 
on, your 5 minutes have expired, and we would ask that you 
please wrap up.
    I now recognize Commissioner Werfel for his opening 
statement.

                       STATEMENT OF DANIEL WERFEL

                              COMMISSIONER

                        INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE

    Mr. Werfel. Chairman Sessions, Chairwoman McClain, Ranking 
Members Mfume and Porter, and Members of the Subcommittees, 
thank you for the opportunity to testify on IRS operations.
    I am pleased to report the IRS continues to make important 
progress in our effort to transform our Agency through 
implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act. Using IRA 
funding, the IRS has three objectives to help taxpayers and the 
Nation: first, ensure taxpayers can easily contact the IRS, 
whether in person, on the phone, or online, and get help 
navigating complex tax laws and accessing the credits they 
deserve; two, identify the growing number of wealthy taxpayers, 
including individuals, large corporations, and complex 
partnerships, who are shielding income to evade their tax 
responsibility and collect from them what is owed; and third, 
address the growing risk of tax scams and schemes by protecting 
honest taxpayers from them, and root out the nefarious actors 
that perpetrate them.
    Achieving this ambitious agenda will require that we 
rebuild areas in the IRS that have suffered from more than a 
decade of underfunding that preceded the Inflation Reduction 
Act. A critical change we are making involves providing our IRS 
workforce with the right tools, including training, technology, 
and smarter processes, so we are ready now and in the future to 
meet our core mission of supporting taxpayers and the Nation.
    With the IRA funding, we are clearly making a difference. A 
good example is phone service. At this point last year, we had 
an average level of service on the phones of about 14 percent, 
and we answered fewer than 9 million calls. This year, after 
hiring more than 5,000 additional phone assisters, our level of 
service exceeded 85 percent during the filing season, and we 
answered more than 15 million calls. We also improved in-person 
service at our Taxpayer Assistance Centers, or TACs. Since the 
infusion of IRA funding, we have hired more than 700 new 
employees at the TACs, reopened 46 centers, and opened four new 
ones. This has allowed us to serve more than 1.6 million people 
at our walk-in centers so far this year, which is 18 percent 
above last year. We also opened temporary walk-in centers to 
serve taxpayers who do not live near an in-person center, 
something we did not have the resources to do in the past.
    Modernizing our operations is the key to meeting many of 
our transformation goals, and we are making progress here as 
well. We are using IRA funding to upgrade our information 
technology infrastructure and to improve the taxpayer 
experience for those who choose to interact with us online. For 
example, we added new features to enhance our taxpayer online 
accounts, and we recently launched the business tax account, 
neither of which we were able to do before the IRA funding.
    The transformational changes we are making extend to 
enforcement as well. Before the Inflation Reduction Act, the 
IRS, for several years, was unable to audit a reasonable 
percentage of complex returns of high-dollar groups, especially 
wealthy individuals, large corporations, and complex 
partnerships, but with IRA funding, we are turning that around. 
We are hiring accountants, attorneys, engineers, economists, 
and data scientists needed to tackle these complex returns, and 
we are already seeing results. For example, in just the last 
few months, we have recovered more than $100 million from 
closing delinquent tax cases involving millionaires. As part of 
these efforts, we recently announced major new initiatives to 
step up audits of the largest corporations and partnerships. At 
the same time, we have been reevaluating our enforcement 
activities in other areas, and we will be reducing 
correspondence audits of returns that claim the earned income 
tax credit and other refundable credits.
    Another important area we are making progress, involves 
data security. While IRS has always prioritized protecting our 
systems and taxpayer data, IRA funding allows us to invest in 
additional controls to secure our systems. This includes adding 
new restrictions and limiting access to key data to protect 
against insider threats. Our data security posture has been 
strengthened to make taxpayer data safer now than ever before. 
To ensure transparency, we recently updated, on irs.gov, all of 
our latest improvements to data security. We will continue to 
do more to ensure that taxpayers and our own systems are 
protected.
    Chairman Sessions, Chairwoman McClain, Ranking Members 
Mfume and Porter, Members of the Subcommittee, that concludes 
my statement. I would be happy to take your questions.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you, Mr. Werfel. I now recognize 
Jessica Lucas-Judy for her opening statement.

                    STATEMENT OF JESSICA LUCAS-JUDY

                       DIRECTOR, STRATEGIC ISSUES

                    GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE

    Ms. Lucas-Judy. Thank you. Chairs McClain and Sessions, 
Ranking Members Mfume and Porter, Members of the Subcommittees, 
thank you for this opportunity to be here today. IRS has laid 
out an ambitious vision in its strategic operating plan. My 
written statement describes key findings from GAO's prior 
reports. I will focus my remarks this afternoon on open 
recommendations that will be important as IRS implements its 
strategic operating plan. These fall in three key areas: 
improving taxpayer services, efficiently processing tax 
returns, and protecting sensitive information.
    So first, taxpayer service. IRS was late in responding to 
more than half its correspondence in 2022, including amended 
returns and identity theft documentation. We recommended that 
IRS communicate timeframes for resolving its backlog. Delayed 
correspondence can prompt taxpayers to write again or to call. 
In 2020, we recommended that IRS identify performance goals for 
an improved taxpayer experience. Without such information, it 
will be challenging to assess progress made toward an improved 
taxpayer experience.
    IRS' attrition rate for critical filing season staff is 
high relative to the Agency's overall attrition. Additionally, 
IRS-wide data show the Agency loses about 23 percent of new 
recruits within 2 or 3 years. IRS faces challenges hiring 
employees and lacks information about where skills gaps exist 
and what skills will be needed in the future. In 2019, we 
recommended IRS fully implement its workforce planning 
initiative. IRS said it intends to do so by March 2024. Full 
implementation would provide a comprehensive inventory of IRS' 
current workforce that it could use to develop staffing 
requirements and address skills gaps. We are continuing to 
review all of these issues as part of our review of the 2023 
filing season.
    The second area I will cover is processing tax returns. In 
2018, we recommended that IRS digitize information from paper 
returns. To control costs, IRS was transcribing a limited 
amount of information from paper into its data bases. IRS 
recently announced an initiative to allow taxpayers to 
digitally submit all paper returns. By filing season 2025, IRS 
aims to digitize all paper-filed returns when received, 
consistent with our recommendation.
    IRS can also improve electronic filing for businesses. In 
2021, we recommended that IRS identify and address the barriers 
to e-filing, and in response, IRS identified barriers but has 
not taken action to address them due to competing priorities. 
Addressing these barriers can help IRS reduce the volume of 
more costly paper-based work and improved services to business 
filers. Congress can also help to improve return processing by 
broadening IRS' authority to correct simple tax return errors. 
This could facilitate correct tax payments and help avoid 
costly burdensome audits. In addition, Congress could allow IRS 
to establish professional requirements for paid tax preparers. 
This could increase the accuracy of tax returns that they 
prepare and potentially reduce the tax gap.
    And then the third area is protecting information. Strong 
protections are critical to maintaining public confidence and 
avoiding data breaches that expose sensitive information to 
fraudsters. As of October 2023, IRS had implemented 85 percent 
of the more than 450 recommendations we have previously made in 
this area, but others remain open. Increasing oversight of 
contractors who access taxpayer information, as we recommended 
in August 2023, will help IRS know when contractors are not 
meeting their training requirements. Providing guidance to 
employees responsible for contractor oversight will give 
assurance that those employees will report incidents timely and 
accurately. IRS generally agreed with these recommendations and 
said it plans to act on them.
    IRS also needs to address recommendations related to 
internal control over financial reporting that remain 
unimplemented following our Fiscal Year 2022 audit of the IRS' 
financial statements. And finally, as we reported in January 
2023, IRS uses a significant number of outdated or aging 
applications, software, and hardware assets. Reliance on these 
legacy assets can contribute to security risks, unmet mission 
needs, and increased costs. For example, IRS needs to replace 
its 60-year-old individual master file, the IMF. That is the 
authoritative data source for individual tax account data. IRS 
has been working to replace IMF for more than a decade, but 
suspended two related initiatives and has unclear timeframes 
for completing them. Implementing our recommendations to 
establish timeframes for disposing of IMF and other legacy 
systems would provide accountability and reduce risk. IRS said 
it will document a complete modernization plan. So, in summary, 
in refining and carrying out its Inflation Reduction Act 
strategic operating plan, IRS should work toward implementing 
our open recommendations.
    Chairwoman McClain, Chairman Sessions, Ranking Members 
Mfume and Porter, Members of the Subcommittees, this completes 
my statement, and I look forward to your questions.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you. I now recognize myself for 5 
minutes.
    I feel like I am watching a ``Dateline'' movie. One side 
says everything is going great, and the other side says it is 
going horrible, so let me talk about from my district because I 
represent the people from my district today. I would like to 
begin by just sharing more about the complaints that I have 
received in my short time period this year.
    I have four constituents who have contacted my office 
because they have yet to receive their 2022 tax refunds. Some 
have thousands of dollars stuck in limbo as they wait for their 
tax refund credits. Others cannot get assistance from the IRS 
via phone, despite waiting on hold for hours. They cannot get 
updates on their delayed refund status. The phone system really 
seems to be an issue. I have constituents who run small 
businesses and say they cannot get an answer on just the status 
of their employee's return or their tax credit applications.
    My office recently helped a constituent who had trouble 
with IRS releasing their deceased father's last tax refund. 
This refund, which totaled $30,000, was finally released after 
my casework team and the Taxpayer Advocate Service intervened, 
as well as the accountant. These are just kind of a handful of 
the frustration from my constituents. Maybe my office is alone 
on this and the people on the other side of the aisle have no 
issues, so just interesting. Although these cases are specific 
to my constituents, the underlying fact pattern is essentially 
the same across the country. It seems like the IRS is not 
performing efficiently or effectively.
    So, my question is, why can't the IRS provide taxpayers 
with quality phone service at least in my district.
    Mr. Werfel. Madam Chairwoman, I appreciate the opportunity 
to respond. First, I think we did have a tremendously improved 
filing season from 2022 to 2023 as a result of the infusion of 
Inflation Reduction Act funds. Specifically, we were able to 
immediately hire 5,000 new customer service representatives and 
put them on the phones. So, for those that called during filing 
season, and that is the end of January to mid-April, we were 
able to answer 87 percent of those calls with a 3-minute wait 
time.
    Now, there is more to do, and some of the issues that you 
were raising, I was ticking off in my brain different 
monetization plans that we have underway. So, for example, if 
you file your original tax return electronically and you give 
us a bank account that we can automatically debit, for those 
taxpayers, on average, you get your refund within 13 days. That 
is what we achieved. But if you do not file electronically, now 
you are in a paper process, and that----
    Mrs. McClain. Which takes longer. I totally understand 
that.
    Mr. Werfel. And look, American taxpayers should have a 
choice. We would love for them to file online, but if they 
choose to file on paper----
    Mrs. McClain. So is your assumption that they are filing on 
paper and if they just moved to the electronic----
    Mr. Werfel. I think that would incredibly improve their 
odds of getting their refund.
    Mrs. McClain. But I am talking about the phone service. So, 
whether you file electronically, or whether you filed paper, if 
I call you, I still need to get someone on the phone to speak 
with. I mean, I just met with a constituent that their 
information, or they have been trying to get information from 
you since February, they said that they would get an answer by 
October 20. Somebody would call him back with the status of 
just an answer. It is the 24th, we still have not had an 
answer.
    Mr. Werfel. I understand.
    Mrs. McClain. I mean, this is a small business in our 
community. That has to do with customer service.
    Mr. Werfel. And let me offer two things that will help.
    Mrs. McClain. OK.
    Mr. Werfel. Obviously adding more customer service reps, 
training them, that is all in process. The second thing that 
will help is modernizing our call center.
    Mrs. McClain. OK.
    Mr. Werfel. Investing in things like more callback options, 
like you can sign up, we will call you back, in the queue.
    Mrs. McClain. Yes.
    Mr. Werfel. It also means more automation. There are 
certain things that can be done by pressing buttons versus 
waiting for human, and maybe your constituents need the human, 
but if other people in the queue can be deflected to 
automation----
    Mrs. McClain. I got it. And one last point before my time 
is up.
    Mr. Werfel. I understand. Go ahead.
    Mrs. McClain. So, I think what you are saying is if we can 
modernize our systems, people would get a return call faster.
    Mr. Werfel. Yes, and then----
    Mrs. McClain. Directionally. OK.
    Mr. Werfel. Absolutely.
    Mrs. McClain. If that is the case, then why in the 
Inflation Reduction Act is only roughly $7 billion targeted to 
system modernization and taxpayer service, and the other, out 
of the $80 billion, I mean, if that is the problem, goes to 
enforcement and operational support? With that, I will yield 
back. Oh, I forgot. The Chair now recognizes the Ranking 
Member, Mr. Mfume.
    Mr. Mfume. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Mr. 
Commissioner, you do not have an easy job, and it goes without 
saying that the more that this Congress can help you do that 
job, the better the performance for all Americans. We seem 
sometimes to forget that we continue to increase in population 
and yet want to decrease the funds that are there to apply 
services to those people. So, because we represent all of them, 
770,000 in each of our districts, we are going to hear from 
time to time from people who, for whatever reason, would want 
better service, but am glad to be able to take the good news 
back, that things are improving as a result of the Inflation 
Reduction Act. And ``improving'' may not even be the right 
word. In some cases, they are absolutely astonishing, some of 
the peaks that IRS is achieving.
    Ms. Lucas-Judy, you said there were three things you 
thought should be highlighted: taxpayer service, performance by 
the IRS in performance goals, and protection of information, 
and you have passed this information along to the Commissioner. 
What are your early readings telling you? Does it look like the 
IRS is, in fact, trying to find a way to get to those 
achievable goals?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. Yes. As you have heard, the performance and 
the most recent filing season was significantly better than in 
prior years. It does come at a cost, though, because the same 
people who are answering the phones are the ones who are 
processing returns and correspondence. And so, we think it is 
important that there will be a long-term strategy in place for 
dealing with issues like that.
    Mr. Mfume. Thank you. Thank you. That is good news. At some 
point in time we ought to shout good news when it occurs. Madam 
Chair, I am going to yield the balance of my time to the 
Chairman of the full Committee, the distinguished gentleman 
from Maryland, Mr. Raskin.
    Mr. Raskin. Congressman Mfume, thank you very much for 
that. And thank you for your excellent remarks and for pointing 
out that it is only after decades of deliberate understaffing 
and underfinancing and political attacks that the IRS has grown 
so unresponsive and ineffective and vulnerable to rip-offs by 
big corporations and by the wealthiest people. But in the 
Inflation Reduction Act that we passed last year, unfortunately 
without any Republican support, the Democrats set about to 
increase the responsiveness of the IRS to improve the 
effectiveness and to advance equity there.
    [Chart]
    Mr. Raskin. The U.S. tax system has disproportionately 
targeted lower-income taxpayers, giving preferential treatment 
to the wealthiest filers. When we passed the Inflation 
Reduction Act, it provided the IRS with resources to make 
certain that billionaires and large corporations would pay 
their fair share. Early this year, our Committee held a hearing 
to examine GAO's 2023 High Risk List, which highlights the 
Federal programs and operations most vulnerable to waste, 
fraud, corruption, abuse, and mismanagement. Enforcement of our 
Federal tax laws has been on that list since 1990 for the last 
33 years. In this year's update, GAO presented startling data 
about IRS audit rates for individuals between 2010 and 2019. 
Now, the dotted red line shows the audit rate for tax filers 
making $5 million a year or more, and you see the dramatic 
reduction in audits taking place of the wealthiest American 
citizens, less than 1 percent of the American people.
    Ms. Lucas-Judy, GAO identified that audit rates decreased 
for everyone. In other words, the IRS was much less efficient, 
in general, but the dotted red line shows that it declined the 
most for people making the most money. Is that right?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. Yes.
    Mr. Raskin. OK. What has the Inflation Reduction Act done 
to your ability to actually do the audits and to crack down on 
tax-cheating schemes?
    Mr. Werfel. Well, I will take that question, Mr. Chairman. 
I appreciate it. It makes all the difference in the world. I 
mean, the emphasis of the Inflation Reduction Act is that if 
you are middle or low income, you will receive better service, 
but if you are wealthy or a bad actor of any wealth, you will 
receive more scrutiny. That is the agenda that we are 
undertaking under the Inflation Reduction Act. So, we are using 
the funds not to increase audits on middle-and low-income or 
small businesses. We are using the funds and are laser focused 
on----
    Mr. Raskin. Why do some people not want that? Why is there 
a whole political lobby trying to undermine the effectiveness 
of the IRS?
    Mr. Werfel. That is a big question, Mr. Chairman. I have 
been in and around the IRS for a long time. I find that we are 
often kind of the poster child of government, and when you are 
debating big government versus small government, we usually 
enter the argument, but I can tell you this. I have been at the 
IRS in this role now for 7 months. All I find when I get there 
are absolutely dedicated passionate public servants that want 
to do the right thing. They are not perfect, they do not always 
do it correctly, but they are trying to do the right thing, and 
we are rallying around this mission, this three-part mission 
that I have outlined.
    If you need to reach the IRS, you should be able to reach 
the IRS. For the wealthy and bad actors, we are increasing 
scrutiny. And third, we are going to help victims of tax scams. 
We are going to try to prevent them, and we are going to hold 
the perpetrators accountable. That is the agenda, and that is 
the focus. And I really want the American people to understand 
that a well-funded IRS can achieve great things along those 
three areas.
    Mr. Raskin. Thank you. I yield back.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Mr. 
Sessions.
    Mr. Sessions. Madam Chairman, thank you very much. I 
appreciate the Ranking Member for his questions. With that 
said, Mr. Commissioner, yesterday we spoke about the 
effectiveness of the IRS, their ability to adapt themselves to 
what might be near-term companies that offer wide services, and 
how they have adapted themself to technology to the things that 
would be necessary to be aware of them offering good customer 
service. I also talked to you about, and you and I spent a good 
bit of time talking about, questions that you do not want to 
answer that are extraneous to that matter, and you heard me 
agree with you. So, I am not looking for an answer now, but 
want you to know that I have penned a letter today to you that 
will be in the mail.
    And essentially it goes back to some hearings that we have 
held here in our Committee on testimony about IRS agents who 
were whistleblowers, and they brought up information that they 
had faced retaliation, and I want you to know that I am sending 
you a letter. We are going to ask you a series of questions 
about that retaliation, about your involvement, about the 
Agency. We are going to match up your answers with that, that 
we have received in detail from these IRS agents who came into 
contact on a regular basis with the Department of Justice, 
Department of Treasury, and were overridden on what seemingly 
could be described as perhaps an imperfect system, but they 
were held back what we also see as political reasons.
    Next, recent court documents talk about how the IRS 
contractors have released information of a number of high-
profile people, and we just want to make sure that you answer 
just as you have today about other things that are not going so 
well, about the steps that you have taken. GAO will be 
interested in that. Others will be interested in that. And even 
things like 3 years ago, the New York Times ran a story about 
the release of data and information, and we have yet to hear 
back of specific information pertinent to that about any 
investigation you may have made.
    Commissioner, please know this, that we do have problems 
with the IRS, and we also know the IRS has their own problems 
of trying to stay up with people and to do things. But we 
believe that this new money that is coming there should also go 
directly to fix the problems of people who are honest 
taxpayers, who are trying to get their work done, getting phone 
calls that come in, training that is necessary as to where an 
answer would be given, to where you strongly identify people. 
We talked yesterday about this dot-gov portal that perhaps you 
are relying on and how ineffective that is. Billions of 
dollars, hundreds of billions of dollars went out to people 
that probably should not have received them based upon data 
that you were counting on that is fraudulent about those 
individuals.
    So, I want you to know that we believe that you are under 
the gun. We believe you do not have the adequate resources, 
that your computer systems are outdated. With that said, we are 
also concerned about the integrity of high-value people that 
you just spoke about. You spoke about the number of people 
making $5 million not paying taxes. Do you not find out until 
the end of the year that you are not getting a regular 941, 
that you are not receiving the information that you receive? 
Why is it that you cannot look at those people who are these 
high-value people and make some determination earlier?
    Mr. Werfel. Well, we are trying to build the infrastructure 
to be able to do it more effectively. It is not one simple 
answer. The way in which taxes are evaded, sometimes they are 
set up in extremely complicated structures using offshore tax 
havens. Sometimes, as mentioned, it is overstating deductions. 
It comes in a variety of different forms, and what happened 
over the 12 years that predated the IRA is, due to budget cuts 
and lack of investment, we lost track. We fell behind. So, for 
those taxpayers that can hire an army of lawyers and army of 
accountants, we fell behind in terms of keeping pace with the 
complex methods they are using, in some cases, to shield their 
income, and now we are catching up. And we are catching up by 
investing in data scientists, and engineers, and economists, 
and subject matter experts that are going to help us now keep 
pace and identify at greater specificity and a greater accuracy 
where these issues are so we can select the right cases for 
audit and bring that those funds that are due back to the 
American people.
    Mr. Sessions. One last question, and then I will yield back 
my time. The gentlewoman, Ms. Lucas-Judy, referred to the 
recommendations and that the IRS has afforded themselves of 
looking at about 85 percent of the recommendations. Were 
recommendations made to you, Ms. Judy, to them about these 
high-value accounts, about how you look at that?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. We have recently issued a report on the 
Partnership Audit Program and made recommendations that IRS 
should improve its audit selection models and also make sure 
that it is defining large, complex partnerships and putting in 
place measures to assess the effectiveness of the audit 
program. Thank you.
    Mr. Sessions. And what was their response?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. I believe that they agreed with the 
recommendations.
    Mr. Sessions. Thank you very much. I yield back my time, 
Chairwoman.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Mr. 
Raskin.
    Mr. Raskin. Thank you, Chair McClain, for calling the 
hearing, and also Ms. Porter and Mr. Mfume for their thoughtful 
remarks today.
    Look, the American people want a tax system that is 
simpler, fairer, and more responsive, and I wish that we could 
have hearings on each of those. I mean, just to take a look at 
simplicity, for example. I have lived in foreign countries 
where they do not have a multibillion dollar business in H&R 
Block. And all of these companies that are trying to help 
people understand their taxes, and most people's taxes, you 
know, 90 percent of people's taxes could be done in 15 minutes 
or 20 minutes, which is what it is like in countries around the 
world. We should be having a hearing about why we have a $10-
billion-a-year-plus business in helping people do what the 
government should be helping them do instead. But what we have 
got is one more hearing to beat up on the IRS as part of the 
program to deconstruct the administrative state as Steve Bannon 
promised at the beginning of the Trump Administration, and we 
are right in the throes of it. One can only regard with 
amazement that any member of the Republican Party today would 
lecture the Commissioner of the IRS about efficiency or 
organization or anything else.
    Look at what the Republicans are saying about the 
Republicans today on Capitol Hill as we live through all of the 
reverberations of the Chaos Caucus. So, ``the world is burning 
around us. We are fiddling. We don't have a strategy.'' That is 
Representative Steve Womack, Republican from Louisiana. ``We 
are fractured,'' says a Member of this Committee, 
Representative Anna Luna from Florida. ``It is not a normal 
Majority,'' says Representative Tom Cole, Republican of 
Oklahoma. Here is Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene talking 
about the Republicans: ``This conference is absolutely 
broken.'' Here is Kevin McCarthy, who used to be speaker before 
he was deposed by the Republicans: ``This is embarrassing for 
the Republican Party. It is embarrassing for the Nation.'' Here 
is Representative David Joyce from Ohio, who probably sums it 
up best: ``We are a party that cannot govern.''
    Here is Representative Troy Nehls from Texas: ``We are a 
broken conference.'' Representative Tom Emmer said, ``If it 
were a family, we would be the most dysfunctional family on the 
face of the planet.'' Here is Representative Austin Scott, who 
ran briefly for Speaker in the speakership sweepstakes taking 
place right now: ``It makes us look like a bunch of idiots'' 
and Representative Mark Alford from Michigan, another 
Republican: ``We are a ship that does not have a rudder right 
now.'' So, it would be great if we could actually get a Speaker 
of the House and a functioning House of Representatives so we 
could deal with these issues.
    Now, the implementation of the IRA shows that providing 
adequate resources to the IRS dramatically improved services to 
our people and the effectiveness of the overall mission. In the 
2023 filing season, IRA investments allowed the IRS to create 
and adopt digital tools to process tax returns more 
efficiently. The Agency greatly improved in-person service, 
service over the telephone, and online customer service, but we 
know a lot more needs to be done. I have a constituent who came 
in to see us in August. He and his wife had filed their taxes 
in April. They got their refund from the state of Maryland in 2 
weeks. After 5 months and multiple attempts to get the IRS to 
send their tax refund, they still could not get it. They 
reached out to my office in desperation, and we were able to 
work with the Taxpayer Advocate to make it happen. But nobody 
should have to go through that experience of bureaucratic 
lethargy and frustration like that, but we know that you are 
making improvements. It is moving in the right direction, but 
you are writing against a background of decades of deliberate 
underinvestment.
    Well, the IRA is also making an administration tax system 
more equitable. You are hiring experts who can audit and 
enforce tax laws against big corporations and ultra wealthy 
filers who have been able to get away with a lot before that. 
Commissioner Werfel, how has the IRA allowed IRS to crack down 
on tax cheats? Is the investment the American people have made 
paying off in terms of the money we are getting back?
    Mr. Werfel. It is, Ranking Member Raskin. It absolutely is, 
and we are putting the money to work today to take a variety of 
different steps. We are increasing the number of audits on our 
largest corporations using analytics that we have invested in 
to make sure that we select the right corporations that are the 
highest risk of shielding income inappropriately. We have 
increased the number of audits on complex partnerships, 
something the GAO has pointed out, how anemic our partnership 
audit rate is. And again, we are using invested new tools and 
analytics to make sure that we are understanding the types of 
trends necessary to know where those complex partnerships are 
that are actually evading taxes, so we have improved the 
efficiency of our audit.
    And as mentioned earlier, we have launched an effort to get 
back taxes from millionaires and billionaires, and we have 
identified 1,600 high-priority targets, if you will, of 
millionaires and billionaires, and we have already collected, 
in the early months, over $100 million in back taxes. All of 
that is IRA money being put to work. And as you mentioned, on 
the services side, we have a lot of work to do, building block 
by building block. We are making changes to our services to 
make that story that you told a thing of the past.
    Mr. Raskin. Thank you very much. I yield back, Madam Chair.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the 
gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Palmer.
    Mr. Palmer. I know you keep talking about going after 
millionaires and billionaires, but you are also going after 
Taylor Swift fans who sold their tickets for over $600. The 
previous rule was if someone earned $20,000 and had more than 
200 transactions, you did it, but the bill lowered it to $600 
regardless of the number of transactions, so it is not just 
millionaires and billionaires. You are also going after 
auditing small businesses and others. And I just want to point 
out something to you. One of your predecessors, John Koskinen, 
testified before this Committee in 2015, and he said it would 
not be advisable to audit our way out of the tax gap, yet that 
is exactly what you are trying to do.
    I have a question for you, Commissioner Werfel. If a tax 
filer, if a private citizen willfully concealed or manipulated 
a tax document, would that be considered a form of tax fraud?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes. Based on the way you described, if they 
willfully manipulated to misdirect or misreport, that could be 
considered tax evasion.
    Mr. Palmer. Yes. And the penalty for that could be a fine 
up to $250,000 and up to 5 years in prison. Is that correct?
    Mr. Werfel. Well, each case differs, but they are----
    Mr. Palmer. And for a business, it could be up to $500,000 
and 5 years in prison. Let me ask you this. If government 
auditors were similarly found to be backdating or manipulating 
tax forms of private citizens, would that also be considered a 
form of tax fraud?
    Mr. Werfel. It is concerning and----
    Mr. Palmer. No, no. I asked you a direct question. If a 
private citizen altered information on a tax document, whether 
it is a date or a signature from a supervisor, it would be 
considered tax fraud and it would be prosecuted. It is a 
felony. They could have to pay up to $250,000 in fines, and 
they could serve up to 5 years in prison. So, what are the 
penalties for IRS employees who do the same thing and possibly 
jeopardize a private citizen on their tax filing? So, what is 
the penalty?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes, there should be accountability.
    Mr. Palmer. Yes, but what----
    Mr. Werfel. It----
    Mr. Palmer. No. What is the penalty?
    Mr. Werfel. If you will allow me to elaborate, I can 
elaborate.
    Mr. Palmer. Yes. I do not want a long answer. I want you to 
tell me, what is the penalty?
    Mr. Werfel. Well, there is no specific penalty. It depends 
on the circumstances, and it does expense on the circumstances 
with the taxpayers as well.
    Mr. Palmer. The Wall Street Journal reported on this. You 
are in court right now, Lakepoint II, LLC v. Commissioner. The 
Commissioner would be you where you had people who falsified 
documents, and that is not the only one. So, did anybody get 
fired?
    Mr. Werfel. Let me tell you what is going on. When any----
    Mr. Palmer. Did anybody get fired?
    Mr. Werfel. We are looking into the appropriate personnel. 
We are following the right process.
    Mr. Palmer. OK. Will anyone get fired? Well, if you find 
they did this intentionally, and the documents indicate they 
did, because there is an email chain. And maybe, Madam 
Chairman, Ms. Chairman, we need to investigate this on behalf 
of the taxpayers because I have major concerns about the tax 
gap, major concerns. The biggest problem with the Tax Code is 
its complexity. We need a simpler tax code. And I think we 
would collect more taxes. Rather than audit people, rather than 
manipulate tax documents so that somewhere down the line, 
somebody who filed a legal, accurate tax return does not face a 
tax bill and potentially a penalty because somebody at the IRS 
falsified the document. So, there has got to be some penalties.
    Mr. Werfel. Yes. I can assure you, Congressman, we are 
taking steps to correct the record, to make the taxpayer whole 
in any of those situations, and they are extremely limited, 
that we are taking all the right steps and all the right 
procedures to make sure that that situation is corrected.
    Mr. Palmer. Will anybody be fired?
    Mr. Werfel. If there is any accountability, we will follow 
the right procedures to ensure accountability.
    Mr. Palmer. Will anybody be fired? Thank you.
    Mr. Werfel. I am not going to comment on an employee 
process as to----
    Mr. Palmer. If you find out that it was done intentionally 
as the evidence indicates, keeping in mind the severity of the 
penalties that are imposed on private citizens, the least that 
anybody can expect is that someone be dismissed from their job. 
And I hate to say that because I hate to fire anybody, the 
consequences for their families, but think about the lack of 
trust that the American people have in the IRS, and put that 
first and foremost. I yield back.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes Ms. 
Norton for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Norton. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I appreciate this 
hearing.
    Mr. Werfel, when the American taxpayers reach out to the 
IRS for help with their taxes, a specific filing or 
troubleshoot identity theft, they rightfully expect and deserve 
prompt and helpful assistance. In the past, the IRS has at 
times fallen short of its duty to serve the American people 
through timely and accurate responses to taxpayers because of 
insufficient funding. But I am really pleased to see that the 
IRS markedly improved its customer service in the most recent 
tax filing season. Democrats' historic investments in the IRS 
through the Inflation Reduction Act have already improved 
taxpayer services.
    So, Commissioner Werfel, the IRS achieved an 87-percent 
level of success answering taxpayer phone calls, exceeding the 
ambitious 85 percent success Treasury Secretary Yellen set for 
your agency. Is that correct?
    Mr. Werfel. That is correct.
    Ms. Norton. Commissioner Werfel, the IRS also dramatically 
cut the average time that a taxpayer has to wait on hold to 
speak to the IRS or to an IRS employee. Is that correct?
    Mr. Werfel. That is correct.
    Ms. Norton. Commissioner Werfel, for taxpayers who are 
unable to reach a live assistance immediately, the IRS expanded 
its customer callback option, correct?
    Mr. Werfel. Correct.
    Ms. Norton. Commissioner Werfel, how was the IRS able to 
make these telephone and online customer service improvements? 
I understand the IRS expanded in-person service in 50 taxpayer 
assistance centers across the country.
    Mr. Werfel. That is correct.
    Ms. Norton. Commissioner Werfel, what help can IRS 
taxpayers expect to receive from one of these taxpayer centers? 
In addition to these permanent taxpayer assistance centers, the 
IRS started a new initiative, pop-up taxpayer assistance 
services, to assist filers in hard-to-reach areas who might 
have difficulty getting a permanent location.
    Mr. Werfel. Yes. We want to meet the taxpayers where they 
are. As I mentioned, not every taxpayer can afford an 
accountant, and not every taxpayer has the means to travel to a 
location where we have a walk-in center. So, we are going to 
where the taxpayers are, and we are setting up what we are 
calling pop-up walk-in centers where we are being as accessible 
as we can to taxpayers that need help. We are having Saturday 
hours for taxpayers that cannot make it during the week because 
they are working, and we are holding special sessions with low-
income taxpayers to help them with their refundable credit 
application so they get it right the first time.
    Ms. Norton. Commissioner Werfel, when Democrats enacted the 
Inflation Reduction Act, we prioritized the taxpayer 
experience. We focused on building an IRS that can meet the 
needs of taxpayers. From your testimony, Mr. Werfel, it is 
clear that the investment has already helped address the IRS' 
longstanding customer service issues, but everyone on this dais 
still hears from constituents who have problems getting the 
refunds they deserve. So, Commissioner Werfel, Inflation 
Reduction Act funding runs through Fiscal Year 2021. Briefly, 
what is your vision for how the IRS will serve the Nation in 
Fiscal Year 2031, and how do you plan to achieve this vision?
    Mr. Werfel. I appreciate that question. The vision is that 
taxpayers who need to reach us will be able to reach us 
quickly, get their issue resolved because they are either doing 
it in an automated way or with an effectively trained IRS 
agent, and that the supply is meeting the demand of taxpayer 
needs. That means that we have the right sized staff, that we 
have the right number of walk-in centers where people want to 
meet us in person, that we have the right sized staff in our 
call centers, and our call center is modernized with the right, 
for example, chat bots, the right callback options, the right 
call routing.
    So, that we are investing in technology for maximum 
efficiency benchmarked against the private sector's best call 
centers. And it means that our website is operating on private 
sector benchmarks for online banking so that you can go in, and 
you never have to talk to a person or walk into a walk-in 
center. You can manage everything and see everything you need 
and manage your taxes in your online account.
    And as I said earlier, brick by brick, we are building 
these functionalities. After 12 years of underfunding, we fell 
behind. Some of this stuff we can do immediately. Some of this 
stuff cannot be rushed. So, as you will see in filing season 
2024 that is coming up, there will be new functionality in the 
individual online account, new functionality in our new 
business online account. There will be new functionality in the 
call center, more callback options, more chat bots. Incremental 
change every filing season that a taxpayer arrives, they should 
see an increasingly better experience versus what the opposite 
was before the Inflation Reduction Act and before we had this 
funding, where each year it seemed to get worse. Those days are 
over as long as we can hold on to that Inflation Reduction Act 
funds and make smart investments, and I am accountable to make 
sure we are making smart investments.
    Ms. Norton. Thank you. I yield back.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the 
gentlelady from North Carolina, Ms. Foxx.
    Ms. Foxx. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I thank our witnesses 
for being here today. Commissioner Werfel, can you explain what 
the Applicable Federal Rate, or AFR, is?
    Mr. Werfel. I think you are referring to the overall tax 
rate for the public, if I understand correctly.
    Ms. Foxx. Well, the Applicable Federal Rate, as I 
understand it, is the minimum interest rate that the Internal 
Revenue Service allows for private loans. Is that correct?
    Mr. Werfel. I believe you are correct, ma'am.
    Ms. Foxx. OK. So, if someone gave his or her family member, 
including a brother, a loan, would that person have to charge 
an interest rate equal to or higher than the current AFR?
    Mr. Werfel. I do not believe they would have to charge an 
interest rate. But again, if you are going to walk me into a 
hypothetical, I would want to make sure that I am getting it 
right and consult with my team, but I do not think they are 
required to provide an interest rate. It depends on whether 
they are going to treat it as a gift or a loan, and there are a 
lot of implications there.
    Ms. Foxx. Well, then I have a follow-up. It is my 
understanding that there is an AFR and that it is to be 
charged. But if the rate is less than the AFR, so if somebody 
gives you a loan and they do not charge you an interest rate, 
then the loan is technically a gift, which carries certain tax 
implications. Is that correct?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Ms. Foxx. Yes. You answered yes?
    Mr. Werfel. Sorry. Yes.
    Ms. Foxx. OK. So, if someone gave his or her family member 
a personal loan of, say, $200,000, but an interest rate equal 
to or higher than the AFR at the time was not charged, would 
that loan then be considered a taxable gift?
    Mr. Werfel. Again, you are getting into a hypothetical 
where I would want to know a lot of other facts and have kind 
of expert accountants with me advising, so I think it is 
dangerous for me to say yes or no unequivocally on a fact 
pattern where I would probably need a lot more information. 
There might be other countervailing factors in play that would 
impact the----
    Ms. Foxx. Well, now, what kind of countervailing factors 
would you hypothesize?
    Mr. Werfel. Well, I mean, I am not sure where you are going 
with your fact pattern. I do not know----
    Ms. Foxx. Well, let us just----
    Mr. Werfel [continuing]. The circumstances, whether there--
--
    Ms. Foxx. I am just trying to be----
    Mr. Werfel [continuing]. Is someone that has been deceased, 
the timing of this issue.
    Ms. Foxx. Yes. I am just trying to determine if this loan 
does not have interest charge to it, then would that be 
considered a taxable gift, and other factors may come into 
play, but is it a taxable gift?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes. And again, I do not know the amount. For 
example, there is a----
    Ms. Foxx. Well, I used $200,000.
    Mr. Werfel. OK. Fair enough. Again, at the risk of walking 
through a hypothetical where I do not know the facts, as a 
general matter, yes, you are describing a situation that may 
have a taxable event.
    Ms. Foxx. OK. Great. Glad we were able to establish that. 
So next, the so-called Inflation Reduction Act gave the IRS an 
additional $80 billion in funding, and you have been talking 
about that. I think we can all agree that that is an incredible 
amount of money, right? That is a lot of money, isn't it?
    Mr. Werfel. It is.
    Ms. Foxx. Even in today's way of judging money.
    Mr. Werfel. I agree.
    Ms. Foxx. So even after Congress trimmed this amount down 
to nearly $60 billion in the Fiscal Responsibility Act, how 
many new agents does the IRS plan to hire?
    Mr. Werfel. So, we are hiring----
    Ms. Foxx. Your mic is not on.
    Mr. Werfel. We are hiring not just agents, we are hiring 
customer service reps, accountants, agents. We have published 
our 3-year view of staffing, which I am very confident on 
because I can make key assumptions about needs and market 
trends.
    Ms. Foxx. OK. Well, let me ask you----
    Mr. Werfel. So, we are at 90,000 today, and I think over 
the next 3 years, we should be over 100,000, but not much over 
100,000.
    Ms. Foxx. OK. So how many tax enforcement agents out of the 
ones that you have planned to hire would there be in that 3-
year plan?
    Mr. Werfel. I might have that number on me, Congresswoman.
    Ms. Foxx. I am about out of time.
    Mr. Werfel. Yes. We should be hiring about 8,000 total, if 
I am reading my charts correctly, by the end of 2025.
    Ms. Foxx. OK. So, you have previously stated the IRS would 
not target taxpayers earning below $400,000 per year. How can 
we be sure that the new IRS agents and tax enforcement 
resources will not go to targeting middle-class taxpayers and 
small businesses?
    Mr. Werfel. I appreciate the question. We publish our audit 
rates each year, and you can assess those audit rates by income 
level. So, it is a very transparent way of being held 
accountable that the audit rate for people earning less than 
$400,000 will not increase.
    Ms. Foxx. So, you are guaranteeing that you will not 
increase the number of audits of people making less than 
$400,000 a year?
    Mr. Werfel. That is my marching order to the IRS, and if we 
fall short of that, I will be held accountable for it, but we 
will publish those rates.
    Ms. Foxx. I noticed before you said your ``marching 
orders,'' and a little while ago you said you had control of 
the IRS. I am glad to know somebody in Federal Government feels 
that he or she has control of some agency, so we will come back 
to you with that. I am sure it is going to show up in the 
minutes that you are in control. Thank you.
    Mr. Werfel. Congresswoman, if you can indulge me, I just 
wanted to offer that a mentor of mine, Linda Combs, who is a 
constituent of yours, passed away recently.
    Ms. Foxx. Yes, sir, I am aware.
    Mr. Werfel. Wonderful public servant. I know she looked up 
to you as a mentor as well, and I just wanted to thank you for 
mentoring her as she mentored me in my career.
    Ms. Foxx. Well, what a nice thing for you to say, Mr. 
Werfel. Thank you. Linda was a very beloved person.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the 
gentlelady from California, Ms. Porter.
    [Chart]
    Ms. Porter. Washington spends a lot of time and energy 
scrutinizing how our Nation collects taxes. What do real 
Americans care about? They want their filings to be free, low 
effort, and mistake free. That is it. They want their filings 
to be free, low effort, and mistake free, and they want a good 
experience doing it. So, let us cut through the Washington 
noise and help people decide what tax filing method can get 
them there.
    Commissioner Werfel, let us say someone wants to file their 
taxes the old-fashioned way, by hand. I used to think that was 
fun when I had more free time. Would that be a free way to 
file?
    Mr. Werfel. It would be.
    Ms. Porter. That would be free. I cannot get this marker 
off. All right. Yes. So that would be free. All right. How 
about low effort?
    Mr. Werfel. No.
    Ms. Porter. No, it is a lot of work.
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Ms. Porter. You are going to read a bunch of documents. You 
got to try to----
    Mr. Werfel. Find----
    Ms. Porter [continuing]. Cross reference things.
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Ms. Porter. Exactly. Do filers who use this method make 
minimum mistakes?
    Mr. Werfel. No, more mistakes.
    Ms. Porter. More mistakes?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Ms. Porter. I have made a mistake and had one of your 
correction notices. One out of 3, not too good. So, let us look 
at tax preparation software. This is a multibillion-dollar 
industry, as my colleague, Mr. Raskin, mentioned. Would that be 
a free way to file?
    Mr. Werfel. Generally, no.
    Ms. Porter. Generally, no. They sell you a lot of things 
along the way, audit defense and, you know, all these different 
programs and the extra help that you can get so that you----
    Mr. Werfel. The software itself costs money.
    Ms. Porter. Yes. It all costs money. Does that method 
involve low effort?
    Mr. Werfel. It depends, but it can.
    Ms. Porter. Yes, I think usually----
    Mr. Werfel. It is easier.
    Ms. Porter. Easier. All right. So, let us put a box there. 
And how about filers' mistake levels? How are mistakes using 
taxpayer prep?
    Mr. Werfel. Fewer mistakes because the software catches 
your mistakes in real time.
    Ms. Porter. Yes. All right. Let us look at accountants. Is 
that free?
    Mr. Werfel. Definitely not.
    Ms. Porter. Definitely not. All right. Does that involve 
low effort?
    Mr. Werfel. It is a higher effort for the accountant, but 
low effort for the taxpayer.
    Ms. Porter. Low effort for the taxpayer. We all hear the 
stories about people dropping off shoeboxes full of paperwork. 
Do they make minimum mistakes?
    Mr. Werfel. They do, although I would love to talk to you 
about holding them more accountable for some of the things they 
do, but they do make fewer mistakes.
    Ms. Porter. I would like to talk to you about that, too, 
and I noticed that in your testimony, so I will be following 
up, all right, but generally, fewer mistakes. All right. And 
let us look at IRS Direct File. This is a new option that you 
are rolling out in 2024, a pilot program, correct?
    Mr. Werfel. Correct.
    Ms. Porter. Will this be free?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Ms. Porter. Yes. Will this require a minimum amount of 
effort?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Ms. Porter. Will people have the benefits of eliminating 
common mistakes?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes, because we are going to follow the same 
structure as the tax prep softwares and catch mistakes in 
midstream.
    Ms. Porter. All right. Three for three. That is what I am 
talking about, and so I am glad that some Americans are going 
to have this option the next time they file. But Commissioner 
Werfel, why is this just now becoming an option for taxpayers?
    Mr. Werfel. Well, you know, there is a long story here 
where we have tried a variety of different ways to get free 
electronic filing for eligible citizens. We have something 
called the Free File Alliance. It has had mixed results over 
the years where some of the software providers have offered 
free solutions, but Congress, in its wisdom, in the Inflation 
Reduction Act said to the IRS you need to study a direct 
solution. And, you know, frankly, I think it aligns with our 
mission to offer taxpayers more options.
    I think it is absolutely important as you walk me through 
these questions that all of these still should be options for 
taxpayers, if they want to do it by hand, if they want to hire 
a tax prep software, if they want to go with an accountant, but 
should they also have the option to file direct with the IRS? 
They do not have to if they do not want to, but should they 
have the option? You can make the case that a high-functioning 
tax administration agency would offer that option.
    Ms. Porter. All right, and it is the one with the best of 
the criteria we identified. It is the winner, winner chicken 
dinner here. It looks like the best thing. Who could possibly 
oppose the IRS doing its job this effectively and making it 
free and streamlined and lowering the effort for people to pay 
their taxes? Who is on the other side against this?
    Mr. Werfel. I think there is a concern that if we issue a 
direct file solution, it will be disruptive to the software 
industry that point to----
    Ms. Porter. Disruptive to the software industry. You mean 
these industries right here that are making billions of dollars 
off taxpayers to simply assist taxpayers in doing something 
that they should be able to do by working directly with our 
government?
    Mr. Werfel. That is the concern that I have heard 
expressed, yes.
    Ms. Porter. Does the IRS have any profit incentive?
    Mr. Werfel. No.
    Ms. Porter. Do tax preps software companies have a profit 
incentive?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Ms. Porter. Do accountants have a profit incentive?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Ms. Porter. The only interest the IRS has is in providing 
an option that is free and easy and reduces mistakes for people 
to be able to file their taxes. So now lawmakers have a choice: 
we can support and invest in the IRS, whose mission is to do 
right by the taxpayers and who we can hold accountable for 
delivering a free, low-cost, mistake-free option, or we can 
stand with special interests, who want to see an 
underperforming IRS so that they can profit to the tunes of 
billions of dollars off taxpayers. I know where I stand, and I 
yield back.
    Mrs. McClain. Thank you. The Chair now recognizes the 
gentleman from Minnesota, Mr. Grothman.
    Mr. Grothman. I was just explaining to people the other day 
how people from other states cannot tell the difference between 
Minnesota and Wisconsin. We are just alike. You got to say----
    Mrs. McClain. My apologies.
    Mr. Grothman. It is OK. It is a nationwide problem. OK. I 
was just thinking, in China they invest in power plants, in 
education degrees. In America here, we invest in IRS auditors. 
A grim sign for the future. Just a general question, say 
between 2010 and 2023, about what percentage of returns were 
paper and what percent were computer filed? I mean, I take it 
every year that the gap shrinks. I am not going to politifact 
you.
    Mr. Werfel. We are up over 90 percent at this point that 
are filed electronically.
    Mr. Grothman. And do you know what it was 15 years ago?
    Mr. Werfel. It was a lot lower. I think it was closer to 50 
percent.
    Mr. Grothman. Yes. So, when you go from 50 percent computer 
filed to 93 percent or something, you would expect to need less 
auditors, wouldn't you? I mean, there would be something wrong 
if you computerized to that degree and had the same number of 
auditors.
    Mr. Werfel. I think it depends on the complexity of the 
filing because some of the files that we receive electronically 
are thousands of pages long, and we are seeing a spike in the 
complexity of large multinational corporations.
    Mr. Grothman. OK. I will just rely on common sense. If we 
have more computerized returns, we would expect less IRS 
auditors. That is why we encourage people to file 
electronically, but we will go on to something else.
    I have had clients feel that political activity on their 
part leads to audits. I do not know whether that is true or 
not. We have talked on the Oversight Committee about the 
politicization of the FBI. I wonder, have you guys ever done a 
study? We do not do it in Wisconsin, but other states, people 
register Republican, Democrat. Is your employee pool about 50/
50, or are we tilting too much toward one political belief? Do 
you have any idea?
    Mr. Werfel. We absolutely do not ask that question. I think 
it would be inappropriate for us to ask that of our staff. We 
do make it clear that it is fundamental value of the IRS that 
politics has no place in our operations or our decision-making.
    Mr. Grothman. OK. Next question. We talk about wealthy 
people not paying taxes, we got to look into it, and sometimes 
they do not pay taxes because of foolish public policy 
decisions made by the people up here. I am thinking things like 
a tax credit for a fancy electric vehicle or Section 42 tax 
credits for wildly wealthy builders. Could you give us an idea 
of why wealthy people may not be paying taxes?
    Mr. Werfel. I think we see two trends. One is what I will 
call very aggressive avoidance, where they are looking for the 
best tax advantaged status, but because we have not been on an 
appropriate watch, they have pushed too far into the gray area 
and need to be pulled back. And the second is intentional: 
intentional evasion, moving money into offshore----
    Mr. Grothman. You think usually when wealthy people put a 
zero at the bottom of their tax return, they did something 
wrong?
    Mr. Werfel. Certainly not in every case. I would imagine in 
most cases, no, but the number----
    Mr. Grothman. Well, why do not you look into it or do a 
study of people, I do not know, people who would appear to have 
a lot of wealth who are not paying taxes and let us know why? 
What type of tax----
    Mr. Werfel. There have been studies done. I am happy to 
share some with you.
    Mr. Grothman. Good, good, good, good. Now, the next 
question. The Inspector General reports that the IRS 
erroneously issued $3.3 million advance child tax credits to 
1.5 million ineligible Americans. Can you explain how this 
happened, and if you also explain to us why one-for-one tax 
credits invite cheating?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes. There is always program integrity 
challenges with any Federal program where you are outlaying 
money to beneficiaries. Unfortunately, there are many who would 
look to exploit the complexity of our tax system, either for 
their own financial advantage or victimize someone along the 
way. It is stealing of credit. It is a problem.
    Mr. Grothman. I am sorry. Dollar-for-dollar credits, things 
like earned income tax credit, child tax credit, it is so easy 
to cheat and make a lot of money, right? Isn't that the problem 
with those things?
    Mr. Werfel. The one clarification I would offer is that a 
large amount of the error is more basic mistakes because of how 
complicated it is to apply for it, but there is a part of the 
error which is concerning. It is a small part, but it is a 
concerning part, which is intentional fraud.
    Mr. Grothman. OK. We will go over another one. If they are 
not going to stop me. Did the IRS see more child tax credit 
claims filed after the American Rescue Plan made an increase in 
the child tax credit? Did the number of claims go up?
    Mr. Werfel. I am not sure. I would have to get back to you 
on that.
    Mr. Grothman. OK. Be illuminating if they are. The IRS 
reported as of July 31--well, I will turn it back over to my 
substitute Chairman here.
    Mr. Sessions.
    [Presiding.] The distinguished gentleman from Wisconsin 
yields back his time. The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Frost, is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Frost. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our 
witnesses for being here.
    Republicans have spent more than a decade working to 
kneecap the IRS through funding cut after funding cut. At the 
same time, Congress has tasked the Agency with enforcing one of 
the most complex tax codes in the world on a growing population 
with increasing wealth inequality. The IRS has struggled for 
years to provide the level of service taxpayers deserves, 
whether that was processing people's tax refunds in a timely 
manner, performing audits against high-risk individuals, or 
enforcing tax law against fraudsters and those who made false 
business statements in order to get loans. The Agency struggles 
with customer service in several ways, but two that I am 
especially concerned about are the old IT systems that cannot 
digitize IRS forms and then the IT modernization blunders.
    Ms. Lucas-Judy, earlier this year, the Government 
Accountability Office, GAO, found that the IRS still uses 
massively outdated IT systems. How do these systems impact the 
taxpayers?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. Well, their legacy IT systems are at the 
heart of a lot of IRS operations on customer service side, on 
returns processing and accounts management, as well as 
enforcement, and so it is very important, and that also has an 
effect on accuracy and on speed of processing. So, it is very 
important that IRS have be able to implement its plans and 
prioritize the different modernization initiatives that it has 
in place, and that it be clear about the goals and the 
timelines and progress.
    Mr. Frost. So, it seems like it also contributes to 
security risks, unmet mission needs, and staffing issues, and 
increased cost, correct?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. Correct.
    Mr. Frost. You know, in May, one of my constituents reached 
out because she had waited for more than 6 months for her tax 
return which she desperately needed to pay rent. She was told 
that it would be 120 days, and then it was 60 days, and then 
she had to wait for a letter, and then she got the letter, and 
the letter said she would have to wait for a year. The IRS is 
operated with more than 600 legacy systems, including the 
Individual Master File, a 60-year old system, and the software 
written is written in a coding language that they do not even 
teach in schools anymore. This is one of the most central 
systems for tax processing.
    The IRS has set a goal to retire the Individual Master File 
between 2027 and 2029. Mr. Commissioner, what is the importance 
of the IRS meeting this retirement goal for that system, and 
does the IRS have the funding it needs to stay on track with 
that really important goal?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes, I am really glad. It is such an essential 
part of what I have been talking about. I have been mentioning, 
like, we are laying the bricks of a foundation to improve 
customer service. That Individual Master File is kind of the 
engine. It is the infrastructure. So, the example I often give 
is if you left here and went to the ATM machine and took out 
money, by the time you got home and logged onto your online 
bank account, it already knows you took money out, but that is 
not true in the IRS. It takes us time to process that 
information and move it into an online account, and that old 
system that is written on COBOL cannot move or communicate 
quickly enough with that online solution.
    Not only do we need to do it to move to the cloud and move 
to a smarter and more manageable architecture, it is also going 
to be more secure. It is a keystone for a lot of the efforts, 
and we do have some good news. The good news is in April, so 
after this filing season, we are going to turn on that modern 
system for the first time, and we are going to run it in 
parallel with our legacy system, work out any kinks, and 
hopefully get it up and running in filing season 2025. So, we 
are making progress.
    Do we have enough money? I am glad you asked. We have a 
modernization budget. As people have pointed out, it is 
currently at $60 billion, and it is very, very large and very, 
very impactful. The issue, however, is our base budget, our 
annual budget to run the trains every day, and that has been 
underfunded and is still underfunded. And in order to run those 
trains, we have to borrow from the modernization budget to pay 
for the base budget, and as we do that, we raid the 
modernization budget and then we might not have enough money. 
So, the answer your question is we have enough money. As long 
as Congress appropriates our base budget, gives us enough money 
to run the daily train schedules, then we have enough money to 
get our job done.
    Mr. Frost. Mr. Commissioner, how will these efforts that we 
have just spoken about improve the 2024 filing season for the 
people of Central Florida but also across the entire country?
    Mr. Werfel. Well, as I said earlier, my goal is that the 
improvements we are making are visible and can be felt by 
taxpayers because when they come to us in January to April to 
pay their taxes, we are making specific improvements. So, we 
are changing things for filing season 2024. For example, we are 
replacing old scanner and processing equipment, so we will be 
scanning more and processing paper more quickly. We have made 
changes to the online accounts, added more functionality to the 
individual online accounts. We have updated and are redesigning 
our notices so they are easier to read, easier to follow, more 
plain language. We are enhancing our outreach on tax scams. All 
of that happening in filing season 2024 and then a whole host 
of additional incremental improvements in filing season 2025.
    The idea is to each year get better and better, and where I 
see opportunities to accelerate, I will push for acceleration. 
The goal is to do things for taxpayers as quickly as possible, 
but as safely as possible.
    Mr. Frost. Thank you so much. My constituents cannot afford 
to wait a long time to get their tax returns, and I think it is 
more that every Member on this Committee be on the same page. 
We cannot defund the IRS. We need to modernize it. I also want 
to end by thanking all the hardworking Federal employees at the 
IRS who are serving their country. Thank you, and I yield back.
    Mr. Sessions. The gentleman yields back his time. Thank you 
very much. The gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Fry, is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Fry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Part of the IRS' duty is 
to ensure that taxpayers are treated fairly, are informed, 
receive quality service, and are ensured the protection of 
their privacy and confidentiality. I understand this is an 
important role for any agency to play. However, there are 
serious instances in which preventative measures failed against 
cyberattacks or tax information was mishandled, resulting in 
needless and very expensive damages to the American taxpayers. 
Since 2010, the GAO has made over 450 recommendations aimed at 
strengthening the safeguards for taxpayer information and 
access to tax processing systems.
    Director, I want to start by asking you, how many open GAO 
recommendations are there with the IRS currently?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. Well, as I mentioned in my statement, they 
have implemented about 85 percent of the recommendations. There 
are others that are still open, and some of the ones that are 
key include 40 recommendations from our financial statement 
audit related to information systems security.
    Mr. Fry. And related to some of those 40, what are most of 
them about?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. It is a range of different topics. Some of 
them have to do with identifying threats and being sure that it 
has systems in place for that, understanding and managing the 
risks to systems and the supply chain capabilities. There are 
some around protecting information as well as detecting 
breaches.
    Mr. Fry. How many recommendations have been given to the 
IRS since the appointment of Commissioner Werfel?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. That I would have to get back to you on.
    Mr. Fry. OK. In July of this year, the GAO sent a letter to 
Commissioner Werfel that encouraged Congress to hold hearings 
focused on the IRS' progress and withhold funds when 
appropriate and/or provide incentives. Director, are you 
concerned with the IRS' ability to keep pace with the GAO 
recommendations?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. Certainly, it is an ongoing conversation 
between GAO and IRS. We do have a rigorous follow-up process, 
and we have seen progress, particularly on those 
recommendations that we have identified as being related to the 
enforcement of tax laws, that high-risk area, and those that 
our Agency has designated as priorities. But there are others 
that are still remaining open including things about making 
sure that it has--excuse me, that it could be able to 
communicate information about the correspondence backlog; that 
it has a human capital strategy in place, as I mentioned in my 
opening remarks; that on the security side, that it is 
adequately protecting information; that it has got centralized 
monitoring of contractors who have access to taxpayer 
information; and that employees who oversee contractors know 
how to report if they see a breach.
    Mr. Fry. Thank you, Commissioner. Your website states that 
the IRS stops ``most fraudulent tax returns.'' When a fraud is 
suspected, the IRS will contact you via email with 
instructions. How long does it take for the IRS to identify 
fraud after a Form 14039 is submitted?
    Mr. Werfel. I unfortunately have to answer in this way: it 
depends. I mean, sometimes we can see just with what is 
submitted. We will run an algorithm, and we will say something 
is very, very off, and we will say there is a fraud situation. 
Sometimes someone will call with a tip into the tip line. 
Sometimes the GAO or the Inspector General will point something 
out to us that lets us know there is fraud. So, there are a 
variety of different ways in which it manifests itself, so 
there is no set time.
    Mr. Fry. Are you able to say whether that rate has 
increased under your watch or not?
    Mr. Werfel. It is too early to tell 7 months in. What I am 
trying to do right now is make sure that we are spending our 
money smartly on investments to improve fraud detection.
    Mr. Fry. Great. Commissioner, taking it to a different tack 
here. Has the IRS entered into any MOUs or any other agreement 
with the Treasury Department or the CFPB for the purpose of 
sharing consumer-level transaction data?
    Mr. Werfel. Not that I am aware of. I would have to get 
back to you on that.
    Mr. Fry. So, you are not aware of any MOUs or other 
agreements?
    Mr. Werfel. Not at my fingertips. I am not aware of that.
    Mr. Fry. When do you think that you could get back to us on 
that?
    Mr. Werfel. By tomorrow I will let you know.
    Mr. Fry. So, by tomorrow. And if there are any MOUs or 
other agreements, could you provide copies of those by 
tomorrow?
    Mr. Werfel. As long as I am authorized to do so, yes.
    Mr. Fry. Great.
    Mr. Fry. Mr. Chairman, with that I yield back. Thank you.
    Mr. Sessions. The gentleman yields back his time. Thank you 
very much. We now go to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania, Ms. 
Lee, recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Chair. To get to the core of what a 
nation values, all one would need to do is look at what its 
government encourages in tax credits and deductions, what it 
penalizes, and who it decides to audit. Unfortunately, the 
biases and inequities embedded in our institutions in history 
pervade much of the present-day United States Tax Code. Earlier 
this year, researchers at Stanford Institute for Economic and 
Policy Research released a study showing how our tax system 
disproportionately targets Black families. These researchers 
found that Black taxpayers were nearly three to five times more 
likely to be audited than non-Black taxpayers.
    Chair, I ask unanimous consent to enter this study into the 
record.
    Mr. Sessions. Without objection.
    Ms. Lee. The shocking thing about this report is that 
although IRS does not ask about race when a taxpayer is filing 
an individual tax return, IRS' automated selection system 
disproportionately selects Black taxpayers for audits. GAO has 
been looking into how IRS can better understand how tax 
provisions can affect individuals and families differently 
based on their race or ethnicity or their sex. Ms. Lucas-Judy, 
can you tell me about what the Government Accountability Office 
has discovered thus far?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. So, we have ongoing work looking at audit 
rates and audit selection and equity in audit issues, and that 
is something that we will be issuing a report later this year 
or early next year. But as far as the information that is 
available to IRS or Treasury or others to be able to look at 
the potential disparities by race more broadly, we have 
recommended that Congress help facilitate information sharing 
between Treasury and Census and others to be able to do studies 
on inequities, and also that Treasury consider things other 
than imputation models to be able to do some of those studies.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you. The racial disparity in audit rates is 
unacceptable, especially when IRS has chronically de-
prioritized audits on the wealthiest Americans. The number of 
people with incomes of $1 million has jumped 50 percent over 
the last decade, yet audits on millionaires has dropped by 92 
percent in the last 10 years. And in 2021, a team of academic 
economists and IRS researchers found that the top 1 percent of 
U.S. income earners fail to report more than 20 percent of 
their earnings to the IRS. Ms. Lucas-Judy, GAO is planning to 
conduct more audit work on this topic. Is that correct?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. That is correct.
    Ms. Lee. Commissioner Werfel, what data and evidence are 
you tracking to demonstrate equity as a priority at the IRS?
    Mr. Werfel. At first, Congresswoman, I want to acknowledge 
how important the question yours is raising.
    Mr. Connolly. Mr. Werfel, could you move the mic closer? 
Thank you.
    Mr. Werfel. First, I want to acknowledge how important your 
question is. Second, I want to acknowledge that our approach 
for case selection for refundable credits was racially biased, 
and we must change it. We have taken the immediate step of 
significantly reducing the number of audits of refundable 
credits and shifting that emphasis to high-end tax evasion. And 
we have also begun making changes to our case selection 
algorithms to refundable credits to promote equity against all 
demographics, and we stated publicly that we will be providing 
updates on how this is playing out. We are working with a 
variety of different external stakeholder groups, continuing to 
work with the researchers at Stanford. I am very motivated and 
very inspired to get this right.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you. What would you say makes auditing these 
top earners so much more difficult?
    Mr. Werfel. Those audits are very complicated. The 
financial structures are complicated. They hire lots of outside 
consultants, lawyers, accountants. They litigate. These things 
take a long time, and unfortunately, as we have been talking 
about, in the 12 years that predated the Inflation Reduction 
Act, we were not making the appropriate investments to keep up. 
Think about how different the world is in 2023 versus 2010 when 
our budget cuts started: cryptocurrency, you know, more 
international globalization of movement of funds. During that 
time, it became easier for wealthy individuals and 
organizations to work to shield their income. We have some 
catching up to do.
    Ms. Lee. Thank you. President Biden issued his first 
executive order to direct Federal agencies to examine their 
policies and actions and how they may create or perpetuate, 
however unintentionally, outcomes that are barriers to equal 
opportunity. Commissioner Werfel, I am pleased to see that IRS 
is taking this issue seriously. Earlier this year, you wrote a 
letter to our Senate colleagues assuring them that you take the 
racial tax gap seriously. You have already mentioned some of 
the steps that you all have taken, and I appreciate you sharing 
that for the record. And I look forward to continuing working 
with you and with my colleagues here in Congress to ensure our 
tax system is fair and equitable for all Americans, and not 
just the wealthy elite. I yield back. Thank you.
    Mr. Sessions. The gentlewoman yields back her time. The 
distinguished gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Connolly, is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Connolly. I thank the Chair. Mr. Werfel, welcome back. 
Great to see you. Ms. Lucas-Judy, what happened to the IRS 
budget between 2011 and 2019?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. Overall, the budget was decreased.
    Mr. Connolly. Can you be a little more specific, by a 
dollar?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. It went down significantly during that 
time. I do not have the numbers in front of me. I apologize.
    Mr. Connolly. Commissioner Werfel, perhaps you have that 
number?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes. In real terms, it went down roughly 20 to 
25 percent.
    Mr. Connolly. Twenty to 25 percent. Did that have any 
relationship at all in terms of the operational performance and 
capability of the IRS in that 8-year time period?
    Mr. Werfel. It had a significant impact.
    Mr. Connolly. Like in auditing?
    Mr. Werfel. Every dimension of our operation suffered from 
the lack of resources.
    Mr. Connolly. Customer service?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Mr. Connolly. Processing of refunds?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Mr. Connolly. So, Ms. Lucas-Judy, it seems to me if GAO 
wants to come here and testify about recommendations and 
compliance of the IRS, you want to take cognizance and be more 
specific in your awareness of what happened in an 8-year period 
and, by the way, all of it generated by this Congress. The very 
people who are here complaining about customer service do not 
want to mention that many of them or their predecessors voted 
for stringent cuts in the IRS, including their ability to 
replace legacy systems and IT, including ignoring--in fact, 
welcoming--the fact that were fewer audits because their 
friends were not audited. And it just seems to me we cannot be 
here and pretend history began with this Administration or this 
IRS Commissioner.
    Mr. Werfel, we have had testimony from your predecessors 
about money left on the table, money owed to the Federal 
Government in legitimate taxes but not collected because of 
this capability problem you described. We have usually used the 
figure, it is as high as $450 billion a year. Your immediate 
predecessor, appointed by then President Trump, actually said 
it could be as high as $1 trillion. What is the number you 
operate with in terms of money owed the Federal Government but 
not collected every year?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes. So, the latest information we have is that 
the gap that you are describing is about $540 billion.
    Mr. Connolly. OK. Let us take that figure.
    Mr. Werfel. OK.
    Mr. Connolly. Now, help me with math. You must be good at 
math because you are the IRS Commissioner, $540 billion a year, 
let us say. Let us take that out, as we often do, times 10 
years. What is that number?
    Mr. Werfel. Five-point-four trillion.
    Mr. Connolly. Could that reduce the deficit significantly?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Mr. Connolly. So, you think people who are deficit hawks 
might want to, before we talk about raising taxes, just make 
sure everyone who owes money to the IRS pays it, and, 
therefore, we need the IRS to have that capability. Would that 
be a sensible proposition, Ms. Lucas? Ms. Lucas-Judy. Excuse 
me.
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. Thank you. Now they are recommendations. We 
are hoping that IRS can work them into its strategic operating 
plan because we think it is important now that it does have the 
additional funding that it has now this opportunity to address 
some of these longstanding challenges in customer service, in 
IT modernization.
    Mr. Connolly. GAO does a great job of presenting every year 
high-risk categories to Congress, and one of which, by the way, 
is legacy systems and IT modernization, which I took up and 
worked very closely with the head of GAO to try to address 
that. And I think we have gotten pretty high marks to doing 
that, although IRS remains a case in point where we have lots 
of progress to make. Shouldn't the fact that IRS itself now 
estimates it is over $0.5 trillion a year left on the table 
uncollected, shouldn't that be a high priority for you and for 
us?
    Ms. Lucas-Judy. It is definitely a high priority.
    Mr. Connolly. A high priority. Well, let me just say, 
Commissioner Werfel, I want to work with you, and I hope this 
Committee wants to work with you. We can talk about tax cheats, 
but every American--if we are going to have voluntary 
compliance at the high rate we continue to have in America, it 
has got to be perceived as a fair system, that what is asked of 
me is also asked of him or her. And we have got to come up with 
concrete plans to bring that number down as close to zero as 
possible. And I am a Democrat willing to even say every one of 
those $540 billion ought to be first used for deficit reduction 
because it is money we do not have anyhow, so it is not a zero-
sum game. But we have got to do something about this, and the 
reason we have not been able to is because of the deterioration 
we consciously allowed and voted for.
    And final question. Speaking of resources, was your budget 
reduced in the debt ceiling agreement that was achieved a few 
months ago?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes. The modernization budget was reduced by 
$21 billion.
    Mr. Connolly. I am sorry. What did you say?
    Mr. Werfel. Twenty-one-billion-dollar reduction.
    Mr. Connolly. So here we are talking about your ability and 
inability and foibles and flaws and mistakes, and we cut your 
budget, again, by $21 billion. Is that your testimony?
    Mr. Werfel. That is.
    Mr. Connolly. I thank the Chair.
    Mr. Sessions. The gentleman yields back his time. The 
gentlewoman, Ms. Crockett, is recognized for 5 minutes.
    Ms. Crockett. Thank you so much. I am going to pick up 
right where Representative Connolly left off. Out of curiosity, 
do either one of you know the definition of ``insanity?''
    Mr. Werfel. I think you are referring to doing the same 
thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
    Ms. Crockett. OK. That is exactly what I was referring to, 
and it sounds like that is what this party is good at, but I 
want to talk about the theme of the day. Commissioner, you have 
said over and over and over the word ``complicated.'' I was not 
keeping a tally, but you said it a lot, so I want to work with 
this word a little bit. I have a list of items. I would like 
for you to let me know if you believe they are complicated or 
not. Tax returns?
    Mr. Werfel. Complicated.
    Ms. Crockett. Operating the IRS without proper investment?
    Mr. Werfel. Complicated.
    Ms. Crockett. Recruiting workers in this antagonistic 
environment?
    Mr. Werfel. Complicated.
    Ms. Crockett. Auditing millionaires and billionaires?
    Mr. Werfel. Complicated.
    Ms. Crockett. OK. So, it sounds like you have got a 
complicated job?
    Mr. Werfel. I do.
    Ms. Crockett. And it also sounds like you have to know 
something about math. My colleague brought that up as well. It 
sounds like you need to be at least somewhat decent at counting 
to be with IRS. Yes, you would agree?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes, I agree.
    Ms. Crockett. OK. You know, it is so weird because my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle wanted to call this 
hearing. This is not our first. It is not our second. I have 
actually lost count myself of how many IRS hearings we are 
having, and they seemingly feel like they can fix your very 
complicated issues, but somehow they are not good at simple 
math, simple math that would get them to a Speaker, you know, 
right? So, we have been 3 weeks without one.
    Let me ask you another question that may be another one of 
these when the math ain't mathin' situations. There was a 
looming government shutdown a few weeks ago, and interestingly 
enough, when I do the math, approximately a little bit more 
than 60 percent of the people that sit on this Committee 
actually voted to shut us down. Now, out of curiosity for 
everyone that claims to care about their constituents, do you 
think it is easier or more difficult to operate as the IRS 
when, say, there is a shutdown?
    Mr. Werfel. It is very disruptive to our operation.
    Ms. Crockett. Very disruptive. Let me give you another 
number that is very concerning to me. That number is 24. 
Twenty-four represents the number of days that we have before 
the continuing resolution that 60 percent of, and when I say my 
colleagues, I am talking about across the aisle, not on this 
side. We were about at 100 percent. Actually, we were 100 
percent on this Committee that voted to make sure that the 
government did not shut down. But if in 24 days we do not have 
a Speaker because they cannot figure out their math and we shut 
down, is that going to help you answer more phone calls or less 
phone calls?
    Mr. Werfel. A lot less.
    Ms. Crockett. OK. All right. So, it sounds like we have a 
lot of performative politics that is taking place because yet 
another number that was mentioned, and I believe you brought 
this number up, was $540 billion. You also talked about 
appropriations, and I want to be clear about this $540 billion. 
This $540 billion is a net number, correct? This is not a net 
zero. Like, it is going to cost $540 to go get it, and that is 
how much we are going to get. We are talking about netting $540 
billion, correct?
    Mr. Werfel. It is $540 billion--I would say we are on track 
under current course and speed to get about $70 back, so our 
hope is we will be at $470, but yes, it is $470 billion, which 
is what is owed versus what is paid.
    Ms. Crockett. OK. Very good. How is it that the American 
people should believe that the Majority party has the ability 
to solve your complex issues when, No. 1, they do not pay 
attention to history, which was defunding this organization has 
not helped their constituents but hurt their constituents, and 
let me add to that. The last time I checked, America is 
growing. So, you were defunding your organization as we were 
ending up with more people, which means that you have more 
work, correct?
    Mr. Werfel. Correct. More population, more filers, more 
changes to the Tax Code, and more complexity in how the economy 
operates. 2010 when our budget reduction started, we never 
heard of PayPal, Venmo, all these, you know, payment platforms. 
The gig economy changes, and it is great, but we have to invest 
and be ready to be effective tax administrators as the world 
changes. That is why it is important to keep our funding at 
pace.
    Ms. Crockett. I agree, and as the child of an IRS worker, I 
absolutely want to thank you for what you do, and obviously, I 
always must send love to my mama. I thank her for what she does 
for the American people as well. I will yield back.
    Mr. Sessions. The gentlewoman yields back time. The 
distinguished gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Timmons, is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Timmons. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It has been over a 
month since the House Oversight Committee launched our 
impeachment inquiry into the Biden family's domestic 
international business dealings to determine whether these 
activities compromised U.S. national security and, more 
importantly, President Biden's ability to lead. We have 
documented over $20 million in payments to Bidens from fees 
from Ukraine, from Romania, from China, list goes on. There 
have also been many whistleblowers alleging improprieties on 
behalf of Federal Government, what seems to be a two-tiered 
system of justice.
    So, this Committee's investigation is doing the job that 
the DOJ, IRS, and FBI were supposed to be doing. We initially 
were told there was no communication between President Biden 
and Hunter Biden about Hunter's business dealings. That was 
later determined to be false. Then we were told President Biden 
never communicated with Hunter Biden's business associates. 
That was determined to be false. Then we were told that 
President Biden did communicate with Hunter Biden's business 
associates, but it was only about the weather--that was 
probably my favorite one--also later determined to be false.
    Then we were told that President Biden may have 
communicated with Hunter Biden, Hunter Biden's business 
associates, and discussed business on multiple occasions, but 
President Biden never received a benefit. He said, ``Show me 
the money,'' and we recently have direct evidence of a $200,000 
payment from Jim Biden to his brother, Joe, but this is the new 
one: that is just a loan repayment. And as the White House 
seeks to continue feeding the American people a narrative that 
the President has done nothing wrong, perhaps a little advice: 
give this Committee the loan documents, show us the interest 
rates, and provide evidence that $200,000 was transferred from 
President Biden to Jim Biden in the preceding months or years. 
Document this alleged offense. And if you can do that, then 
help us understand how it is ethical, legal, or at all 
appropriate for the President's brother to leverage the 
President's influence to get hundreds of thousands of dollars 
from a distressed company while dangling a possible bailout for 
a Middle Eastern investor.
    As the White House tries to show the American people that 
the President did nothing wrong, do not forget that the 
Oversight Committee has received thousands and thousands of 
pages of bank records and fully expect thousands more as we 
uncover even more and more nefarious activities. This payment 
is the first of what I anticipate will be millions of dollars 
to the President.
    So now, to Commissioner Werfel, I simply have one question 
for you. Do you promise to act in a non-partisan manner, pursue 
justice, no matter where it takes you?
    Mr. Werfel. I do.
    Mr. Timmons. Thank you. But between the Lois Lerner scandal 
and multiple whistleblowers alleging improprieties within the 
IRS, it seems we have a problem, and we need to restore the 
American people's faith in our institutions. The Oversight 
Committee is doing the job that the DOJ, IRS, and FBI refused 
to do as it relates to Hunter and Jim Biden and possibly 
President Biden's activities, and we will continue to move 
forward, but we need your help to restore faith in our 
institutions. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Sessions. The gentleman yields back his time. Thank you 
very much. The gentleman from California, Mr. Garcia, is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
    Mr. Garcia. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to our 
witnesses, Administrator Werfel, I also want to just, if you 
can pass along my thanks to everyone at the Agency, especially 
the Taxpayer Advocate Service. My team back home has just been 
really impressed with working with the team and really 
dedicated servants. I know it is not always an easy job.
    Just recently, a constituent of mine from the city of 
Huntington Park--her name was Maritza--she had reached out 
because of identity theft issues, had not received tax returns 
in 2021 or 2022. We worked with your office and the Taxpayer 
Advocate Service and were able to secure over $16,000 back to 
her, and this is a story that we hear over and over again in 
our office. And so that would not be possible without the team 
of workers that you have, and so I just want to thank you and 
remind folks that, yes, this is a hard business, but there are 
people working really hard to get folks their earned dollars 
back. So, thank you for that.
    Now, I am glad that we are having this hearing, and I know 
that the IRS obviously oftentimes faces a very difficult task. 
But we all know that the work you all do is very necessary, and 
we should all want every government agency to be as efficient 
as possible and work as effectively as possible. A better IRS 
means better customer service, means better refunds. It means a 
better economy. I think everyone recognizes this, and 
obviously, when Congress passes a law, we should also be 
enforcing it. Enforcement is so important. It is something that 
I was very focused on when I was Mayor of Long Beach just 
before I got here about a year ago and enforcing matters in the 
IRS.
    Now, I am very glad that Congress and President Biden came 
together to fund the IRS Enforcement Division, especially to go 
after the very wealthy tax cheats that are very regular and 
very regularly are not paying their fair share in this country. 
The very rich should pay their fair share. If they do, we can 
reduce the deficit and inflation and fund better services that 
would all lead to this. And it is also very unfair, of course, 
the very rich, billionaires and millionaires cheat on their 
taxes and get away with it.
    [Chart]
    Mr. Garcia. So, I want to just point this out here in this 
poster, and I think we have been discussing this a little bit 
throughout the hearing. This goes to show you the IRS 
enforcement how depleted we have become just over between 2010 
and 2018 in the enforcers budget, enforcement personnel, the 
overall audit rate. I mean, you see the impact that this can 
have on an Agency. Now, Administrator Werfel, can you confirm 
that between 2010 and 2020, IRS enforcement funding was cut by 
24 percent in inflation-adjusted terms?
    Mr. Werfel. That sounds right.
    Mr. Garcia. And I know the Majority has made a lot of 
comments today, but this has also been a House Majority that 
has decided to actively work against the IRS and work against 
additional funding, and this chart shows the impact that this 
has had. Now, the audit rate for the largest corporations and 
millionaires has plummeted, and this is who the Majority, I 
believe, is working overtime to protect. It is to protect 
billionaires and millionaires who are cheating on their taxes, 
not working-class people and middle-class folks. And so, this 
chart should be of concern to the Agency, but it certainly 
should be a concern to the American public.
    Now, Administrator, is it correct also that the tax gap, 
which is the amount of taxes that are owed but not paid, comes 
to nearly $7 trillion just over the last decade?
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Mr. Garcia. And more than a quarter of that comes from the 
top one percent bracket. Is that right?
    Mr. Werfel. I have very specific numbers on that. You know, 
for example and what I just mentioned, individuals that earn 
more than $500,000 associate with $40 billion of the tax gap, 
and that is just from under reporting, and then when you add in 
under-payments, it is another $150 billion. So, you are roughly 
at about $200 billion for just those individuals who earn more 
than $500,000.
    Mr. Garcia. Well, thank you for that. Now, the IRS 
investments are expected to raise $124 billion. That is because 
IRS could not hire the tax experts who can catch wealthy tax 
cheats, but now, of course, they can, and we need to be able to 
do to do more.
    Now, President Biden has promised to grow the economy from 
the middle out and the bottom up, not the top down. We need to 
take on tax cheats, especially those at the very top. Lowering 
the deficit is good. Taxing the very wealthy and the rich is 
good. And ensuring that people pay their fair share of what 
they owe the government for the basic services that we all 
depend on as a country is also very important. I want to thank 
all of my colleagues for having this hearing. I want to thank 
both of you for your work, and I look forward to continuing 
ensuring that the very wealthy in this country pay their fair 
share. I yield back.
    Mr. Sessions. The gentleman yields back his time. 
Commissioner, there was a conversation with a Member about how 
the IRS looked at, perhaps identified, but treated people who 
may be of color. Do you gain information about people and their 
ethnicity or their race?
    Mr. Werfel. We do not collect that information, no.
    Mr. Sessions. Then why would you have responded that you 
look at that and made decisions from that?
    Mr. Werfel. That is not my testimony.
    Mr. Sessions. What is your testimony?
    Mr. Werfel. My testimony is that the research group from 
Stanford University, using what is called imputed identifiers 
of race because we have no race data in terms of the taxpayers, 
identified not a disparate treatment, but a disparate impact, 
basically saying that, on average, our audit algorithms are 
having the unintended consequence of having Black families at a 
higher audit rate than non-Black families. And this is an 
analysis where you are not using actual race data. You are 
using what is called imputed race data, so we do not collect 
race data and we do not plan to.
    Mr. Sessions. So, you have made changes as a result of this 
information----
    Mr. Werfel. Yes. The role is to adjust the approach, and 
then working either internally or with external stakeholders, 
again using an imputed race methodology, ensure that any 
efforts that the IRS is undertaking in audit are fair across 
all demographics, not just race.
    Mr. Sessions. So, fair, if you are applying the law as it 
were, and you did not know whether someone, their ethnicity, 
their race, you changed how you look at the law based upon some 
consideration.
    Mr. Werfel. I think we have a responsibility to do all of 
our operations in a non-biased way. There should be no 
disparate impact or treatment based on political affiliation, 
race, age.
    Mr. Sessions. But you were following the law.
    Mr. Werfel. Right. And so, in following the law, I think 
our responsibility under the law is to make sure that IRS 
operations are carried out without a disparate impact on any 
particular minority population or political group, and so the 
type of study that Stanford did is helpful. It basically gives 
us an outside-in perspective and says we have studied it. We do 
not have the race information, but we are able to impute race, 
and I think the Congresswoman entered the report into evidence, 
and so the methodology of how they imputed race is in the 
report.
    We looked at it and we said, yes, based on this analysis, 
we agree that the way we are selecting cases for audit is 
having a disparate impact. That would not be consistent with 
what we believe our responsibilities under the law are, which 
is to implement the tax code as fairly as possible across all 
demographics. And so, we are making changes in the hopes that 
the next time this is tested, that the disparate impact no 
longer exists.
    Mr. Sessions. I find it very interesting. Now, we will look 
at that because it seems like it is a threshold by which you 
would look at people. Is that more generally specifically 
correct?
    Mr. Werfel. I do not think so. I mean, the first big step 
that we took was to just reduce the volume of audits for 
refundable credits, not related to any demographic, just a 
specific cut in volume because the researchers, and in that 
Stanford report that is now in evidence, indicate----
    Mr. Sessions. What would that figure be then? You went from 
this to what?
    Mr. Werfel. I can get you that data.
    Mr. Sessions. I am interested in that----
    Mr. Werfel. Yes.
    Mr. Sessions [continuing]. Because I want to be realistic 
that I think you are entitled to set thresholds, and I want to 
be realistic about what the numbers are. I do not want us to 
find a way to where we might be discriminating or 
discriminatory, but I would be interested in what those 
threshold numbers were and what you have changed them to.
    Mr. Sessions. On behalf of this Subcommittee, as the 
Chairman and the Ranking Member, Mfume, we want to thank both 
of you for taking time to be with us today. I want to thank you 
for taking time to speak with me the other day. I told you that 
we would try and be fair. I told you we would probably be 
prompt. I did not know that we were going to get off like this, 
but I just want you to know that I appreciate what you have 
done in taking the time here, and also from the GAO.
    Does the distinguished Ranking Member have any comments 
that he would like to make? The distinguished gentleman is 
recognized.
    Mr. Mfume. Thank you very, very much. Mr. Chairman, I want 
to thank you for your guidance on this issue as we have spent a 
lot of time talking and trying to figure out a bipartisan 
method to get us to these hearings so that we could receive 
this testimony and have an opportunity to go over it as we both 
want to, I think without a doubt, make sure that going forward, 
the IRS is more effective, not less effective. And while all 
Members here have an opinion, it is really up to this Committee 
to set the example. And, Mr. Commissioner, I said before you 
have got a tough job. You really, really do. There are no 
silver linings, no magical bullets, and nothing else that is 
going to set this where we all want it to be on the right 
track, except hard work and dogged oversight. We do our 
oversight here, and we expect that you will do dogged oversight 
in your role.
    I can tell you that the last 7 months that you have been 
there have been very, very encouraging, and we hope that the 
information provided by GAO, which are not touchpoints but 
guideposts, will be taken seriously, but not only that, but 
reviewed periodically with GAO to find out if in fact things 
are indeed working. It is a tough road to hoe, but somebody has 
got to do it, and it looks like you are it, sir, because we 
recognize we cannot do without the IRS in this country. And 
yet, we all know that we want it to be better each and every 
year, and one of the ways to do that is to make sure that it is 
properly funded to be able to do those sort of things.
    It has been on the record for some time now that IRS has 
improved customer service to our constituents. We all know it 
is not perfect. We still get those phone calls in our offices. 
Our staff still have worked for months and months and work at 
trying to mildly satisfy and bring about resolution in cases, 
but I am glad to report that it is getting better. IRS is 
opening both permanent and pop-up taxpayer assistance centers 
to help communities, and trust me, sir, those are very, very 
needed. A lot of people do not know where to turn. They want to 
do the right thing by compliance and complying with the law, 
but they just need, in this instance, a helping hand.
    So, I, you know, look forward to talking more with the 
Chair about this. We really believe that as the oversight body 
here, it is our function but, more importantly, our duty to try 
to find a way to get answers and to provide the larger American 
public with one sense and some sense, that there is continuity 
here, but that there is also cooperation here as we try to move 
forward.
    Mr. Chairman, I have a couple of unanimous consent requests 
that I would like to read into the record. I would ask 
unanimous consent to enter into the record this letter that is 
dated July 19, 2023, from a coalition of more than 200 
national, state, and local organizations, and research 
organizations, including Texas Area United Way, RAISE Texas, 
Unitarian Universalist Fellowship of Hidalgo County, Texas, and 
the Michigan League for Public Policy to the IRS commissioner 
in support of the IRS Free File Program.
    Mr. Sessions. Without objection.
    Mr. Mfume. I would also ask unanimous consent to enter into 
the record a Treasury Department press release entitled, 
``Filing Season 2023, A Report Card: IRS Delivered 
Significantly Improved Customer Service,'' and the IRS' 
Strategic Operating Plan for 2023 to 2031, which outlines the 
organization's plans for implementing the $80 billion coming 
from the Inflation Reduction Act.
    Mr. Sessions. Without objection.
    Mr. Mfume. And finally, Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous 
consent to enter into the record a statement from former 
taxpayer advocate, Nina Olson, and accompanying letter dated 
June 21 of this year from the executive director of the Center 
for Taxpayer Rights, Nina Olson to the Treasury Department and 
IRS Commissioner Werfel regarding the implementation of IRS' 
2023 to 2031, Strategic Operating Plan.
    Mr. Sessions. Without objection.
    Mr. Mfume. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Sessions. Thank you very much. Before I end this, I 
want to say that Mr. Mfume and I attempt to run this with an 
understanding about working with each other in a fair manner, 
not only to our Members, but also to the witnesses that we 
asked to come and appear. We do expect them to appear. We do 
expect them to follow our guidance of working with each other. 
But we, when we end this hearing, we want to come down and 
shake your hand and thank you for being here.
    With that, and without objection, all Members have 5 
legislative days within which to submit material and additional 
written questions for the witnesses which will be forwarded to 
the witnesses.
    If there is no further business, without objection, the 
Subcommittee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 4:39 p.m., the Subcommittees were 
adjourned.]

                              [all]