[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 4831-4838]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1315
                  NO HIRES FOR THE DELINQUENT IRS ACT

  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 687, I call up 
the bill (H.R. 1206) to prohibit the hiring of additional Internal 
Revenue Service employees until the Secretary of the Treasury certifies 
that no employee of the Internal Revenue Service has a seriously 
delinquent tax debt, and ask for its immediate consideration.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 687, in lieu of 
the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the 
Committee on Ways and Means printed in the bill, an amendment in the 
nature of a substitute consisting of the text of Rules Committee Print 
114-47 is adopted and the bill, as amended, is considered read.
  The text of the bill, as amended, is as follows:

                               H.R. 1206

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``No Hires for the Delinquent 
     IRS Act''.

[[Page 4832]]



     SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON IRS HIRING OF NEW EMPLOYEES UNTIL 
                   CERTIFICATION THAT NO IRS EMPLOYEE HAS A 
                   SERIOUSLY DELINQUENT TAX DEBT.

       (a) In General.--No officer or employee of the United 
     States may extend an offer of employment in the Internal 
     Revenue Service to any individual until after the Secretary 
     of the Treasury has submitted to Congress either the 
     certification described in subsection (b) or the report 
     described in subsection (c).
       (b) Certification.--
       (1) In general.--The certification referred to in 
     subsection (a) is a written certification by the Secretary 
     that the Internal Revenue Service does not employ any 
     individual who has a seriously delinquent tax debt.
       (2) Seriously delinquent tax debt.--For purposes of this 
     section, the term ``seriously delinquent tax debt'' means an 
     outstanding debt under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 for 
     which a notice of lien has been filed in public records 
     pursuant to section 6323 of such Code, except that such term 
     does not include--
       (A) a debt that is being paid in a timely manner pursuant 
     to an agreement under section 6159 or section 7122 of such 
     Code;
       (B) a debt with respect to which a collection due process 
     hearing under section 6330 of such Code, or relief under 
     subsection (a), (b), or (f) of section 6015 of such Code, is 
     requested or pending;
       (C) a debt with respect to which a levy has been made under 
     section 6331 of such Code (or a debt with respect to which 
     the individual agrees to be subject to a levy made under such 
     section); and
       (D) a debt with respect to which relief under section 
     6343(a)(1)(D) of such Code is granted.
       (c) Report.--The report referred to in subsection (a) is a 
     report that--
       (1) states that the certification described in subsection 
     (b) cannot be made;
       (2) provides an explanation of why such certification is 
     not possible;
       (3) outlines the remedial actions that would be required 
     for the Secretary to be in a position to so certify; and
       (4) provides an indication of the time that would be 
     required for those actions to be completed.
       (d) Effective Date.--This section shall apply to offers of 
     employment extended after December 31, 2016.

     SEC. 3. NO ADDITIONAL FUNDS AUTHORIZED.

       No additional funds are authorized to carry out the 
     requirements of this Act. Such requirements shall be carried 
     out using amounts otherwise authorized.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The bill shall be debatable for 1 hour 
equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Ways and Means.
  After 1 hour of debate, it shall be in order to consider the further 
amendment printed in House Report 114-502, if offered by the Member 
designated in the report, which shall be considered read and shall be 
separately debatable for the time specified in the report equally 
divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent.
  The gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Holding) and the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Levin) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from North Carolina.


                             General Leave

  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks and include extraneous materials on H.R. 1206, currently under 
consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from North Carolina?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  H.R. 1206, the No Hires for the Delinquent IRS Act, prohibits the IRS 
from expanding its workforce unless the agency either certifies to 
Congress that IRS employees do not have seriously delinquent tax debts 
or explains why the agency is unable to provide this required 
certification.
  I want to commend my friend and colleague from North Carolina (Mr. 
Rouzer) for helping bring attention to the fact that some of the IRS' 
own employees, Mr. Speaker, have serious delinquencies on their 
personal tax obligations.
  The American public expects IRS employees--the same people, the same 
employees that audit American taxpayers--to abide by the Federal tax 
laws they enforce. However, Mr. Speaker, just last year, the Treasury 
Inspector General for Tax Administration reviewed the IRS' handling of 
employees that were found to have willfully violated the tax laws. So, 
that is how the IRS is handling the matter of their own employees who 
have willfully violated the tax law.
  Shockingly, Mr. Speaker, in 61 percent of those cases of IRS 
employees who have willfully violated the tax law, the IRS decided to 
retain the employees and failed to document why these employees were 
not fired.
  Mr. Speaker, this is unacceptable and the American people deserve 
better. Allowing IRS employees to continue administering our tax laws 
when they, themselves, are in violation of that law undermines the 
trust of the American taxpayer.
  My friend Mr. Rouzer's legislation is an important step forward 
towards creating accountability and restoring the public's trust in the 
IRS.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  This is really a couple of sad days for this institution. Here we are 
filling in time with bills that are going nowhere and are deeply 
mistaken. No action on the budget, no action on the tragedy in Flint, 
no action on the needs of Puerto Rico, no action on Zika--essentially, 
the Republicans are about no action. So instead, they bring up this 
series of bills, and now, H.R. 1206.
  Let's look at it carefully. What this bill says is that the IRS 
cannot hire a single person until the Secretary of the Treasury issues 
a written certification that not a single employee in the entire agency 
has a serious tax debt. So when an employee quits or is terminated, 
that position could not be filled until an examination was completed of 
the tax status of every one of the 80,000 IRS employees.
  Realistically, to certify that no single employee has a significant 
tax debt, the IRS would need to immediately and continuously terminate 
any employee with a Federal tax lien. The IRS already has the authority 
to terminate an employee for delinquent taxes. This was established in 
1998 in section 1203 of the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act.
  The White House's Statement of Administration Policy says that the 
bill is ``unworkable in operation, as `seriously delinquent' debts 
could be as low as $1 and tax liens are recorded on a case-by-case 
basis.''
  This bill is yet another politically motivated attack on the IRS and 
its 80,000 employees, who have one of the lowest rates of tax 
delinquency in the Federal Government at around 1 percent.
  I wish you would just look at the chart and see where the IRS is 
compared to the Congress. If you are really worried, ladies and 
gentlemen, about tax delinquency, we would need to look no further than 
here in the House, where tax delinquency among employees is more than 5 
percent.
  The administration opposes this bill, stating further: ``These bills 
would impose unnecessary constraints on the Internal Revenue Service's 
operations without improving the agency's ability to administer the Tax 
Code and serve taxpayers.''
  As I said at the beginning, there is a lot of work that should be 
undertaken in this House. Instead, this is essentially an empty Chamber 
with empty legislation. These bills are nothing more than a distraction 
to cover up the basic failure of the Republican majority to bring on 
legislation that would truly meet the needs of the American people. I 
urge that we oppose this bill.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Georgia 
(Mr. Lewis), a most distinguished member of our committee, control the 
remainder of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Michigan?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Rouzer), the sponsor of this 
legislation.
  Mr. ROUZER. I thank my colleague and friend from North Carolina (Mr. 
Holding) for yielding time to discuss this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I filed this bill, H.R. 1206, the No Hires for the 
Delinquent IRS Act, in response to reading news

[[Page 4833]]

reports of more than 1,500 employees at the IRS who willfully failed to 
follow their own tax guidelines and, in a number of cases, were found 
to be seriously delinquent on their taxes.
  For starters, it is the height of hypocrisy for the very agency that 
is charged with collecting taxes to have employees who refuse to adhere 
to the standards and guidelines which the rest of us must follow and 
abide by. Of course, this is in addition to the egregious behavior and 
abuse of power some in the agency displayed when they targeted 
organizations for their political affiliations and beliefs. We all 
remember how the IRS misled taxpayers and the Congress in an effort to 
deny that such activity ever even occurred. Thankfully, the truth 
always has a way of being revealed, at least eventually.
  I think we can all agree that the American people deserve a 
government that works for them, not against them. Certainly, the IRS is 
one of the most cumbersome, customer-unfriendly agencies in the Federal 
Government, regardless of how much they are funded. Anyone who denies 
this hasn't been listening to the American people.
  Now, let me be clear. There are plenty of fine civil servants working 
hard at the IRS and in all other agencies of the Federal Government. It 
is the culture of arrogance and unchecked bureaucratic power that has 
developed within these agencies that is the problem and is the catalyst 
for the type of disregard and double standard this bill aims to help 
address. This culture starts with the leadership at the top.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is very simple. It prohibits the IRS from 
hiring any new additional employees until the agency can certify that 
every one of their employees who are out of step with the tax 
requirements imposed on the American people have a plan to achieve 
compliance. Now, who can argue against this?
  For all the moaning and groaning I have heard from the other side of 
the aisle the past couple of days, this is not a bill that merits even 
one vote of opposition. This is a commonsense bill that will help 
encourage the IRS to clean up its act, and I encourage my colleagues to 
vote for it.
  Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to the bill, H.R. 1206, 
preventing the IRS from hiring anyone--not one person, not one 
individual--until the IRS proves that there is not a single employee in 
the entire agency with a serious tax debt.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask: How can a hiring freeze possibly help taxpayers? 
Every person in this body knows that the IRS already has the authority 
to fire anyone--any employee--for serious Federal tax issues. Congress 
gave the IRS this power in section 1203 of the IRS Restructuring and 
Reform Act. It was signed into law in 1998, and it is working.
  Last year, Mr. Speaker, the Department of the Treasury had a lower 
tax delinquency rate than any Federal agency and lower than the 
American public. It was lower than the Congress.
  This is a mean piece of legislation and it is not right. It is not 
fair. It is mean-spirited. So, I ask you: Why do we want to punish 
these Federal employees? Why do we want to go after the majority of IRS 
workers who are just hardworking, dedicated public servants? More 
importantly, Mr. Speaker, what good does this bill do?
  Every year--not one year, but every year--the IRS is expected to do 
more with less. We cannot get blood from a turnip. This legislation 
does nothing to help taxpayers get the service they need and deserve. 
It does nothing--not one thing--to fight identity theft. This does 
nothing to stop stolen returns. It does nothing to help the taxpayers 
speak to a live IRS staff person in a timely manner.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is all about a message. It is a talking point. 
It is so sad that we have come to this point. As a Congress, we can do 
better.
  Mr. Speaker, some of us here are ready to do the people's work. This 
is purely a waste of time. As Mr. Levin stated, this piece of 
legislation is not going anywhere.
  Last week, I introduced the Taxpayer Protection Act. My bill responds 
to the real needs of American taxpayers.

                              {time}  1330

  There are many other good ideas to help taxpayers, but these bills 
are not being considered by this body this week.
  Instead, Mr. Speaker, we are considering a bill, as I said before, 
that is mean, downright mean, a bill that is unnecessary, a bill that 
would do more harm than good.
  We owe it to ourselves and we owe it to the American people, to the 
American taxpayer, to do better. We can do better.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge each and every one of my colleagues to vote 
``no'' on this pointless and harmful piece of legislation. It is the 
right thing to do, to vote ``no.'' This is not good for the Congress. 
It is not good for the Ways and Means Committee.
  Why do we want to point? It is pointless to punish one IRS worker. 
More than 80,000 employees, and for one person, just one person, one 
individual, for tax debt, then they cannot hire an employee.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve and expect all 
IRS employees to abide by the Federal tax laws that the IRS is charged 
with administrating, period, end of story.
  I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Mimi 
Walters).
  Mrs. MIMI WALTERS of California. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support 
of the No Hires for the Delinquent IRS Act.
  Between 2004 and 2013, nearly 1,600 IRS employees intentionally 
violated tax laws, according to the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 
Administration.
  Just last year, the same Inspector General reported that the IRS 
rehired 141 former employees who had bungled their own tax returns. 
Five of those rehires had intentionally failed to file their returns at 
all.
  Think about that for a moment. The Federal bureaucrats who are 
responsible for ensuring the American people pay their taxes are not 
paying their own taxes, and they face no repercussion for botching 
their own returns.
  This is one more example of how Washington is out of touch with the 
people it is meant to serve. It is no wonder the American people do not 
have faith in this Federal agency.
  This bill will require the IRS to exclusively hire employees who pay 
their own taxes. It is essential to protecting American taxpayers and 
ensuring the IRS is held accountable. It is just common sense.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 1206.
  Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Doggett).
  Mr. DOGGETT. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman.
  This bill is just the next segment of Republican Tax Distraction Day.
  Certainly, we should focus on misconduct, on delinquencies, from 
whatever the source. But here, on Republicans Tax Distraction Day, they 
are about distracting attention from their failure to address the real 
problem with reference to delinquencies and misconduct, and that is a 
problem that they have just shown total indifference about.
  For anyone who was listening even a little bit last week, world news 
around the globe focused on something called the Panama Papers, 11.5 
million files explored over the course of an entire year by the 
International Consortium of Investigative Journalists detailing how 
some people, especially the very wealthy, have used the secrecy of an 
offshore tax haven in Panama to avoid paying their taxes and, in some 
cases, illegal money laundering by organized crime and other forms of 
official corruption. This isn't just an American problem, but there is 
no American exceptionalism to it either. It is an international 
problem.
  Our European allies have responded to the Panama Papers by initiating 
new efforts to try to get at this problem of tax abuse. And the truth 
of the

[[Page 4834]]

matter is, this is just the tip of the iceberg with this 11.5 million 
papers because it is only about abuse in one of a number of secret tax 
havens.
  But, of course, it did not attract universal attention. If you were 
in Beijing today and you were to search for the Panama Papers on the 
Web, what you would find is: Sorry, no relevant material.
  There is another place that you will find nothing about the Panama 
Papers, and that is in the House Ways and Means Committee and the 
Republican Caucus because they haven't been interested. They have shown 
constant indifference to problems that are generated from these tax 
havens, from the dodging, from the avoidance, from the evasion that has 
been going on, when that ought to be the focus of our attention. 
Instead of real abuse, they focus on imagined abuse.
  And keep in mind, by the way, this particular piece of legislation is 
designed to cover IRS employees for their delinquencies. They bother to 
exempt the Congress of the United States from that provision.
  But I think the focus ought to be on these abuses and delinquencies 
that are occurring in other places that are costing us real dollars. 
The Panama Papers show the importance of our working together with our 
allies to address lawlessness and money laundering and tax evasion. 
They show why we need to be participating in the Base Erosion and 
Profit Shifting initiative.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS. I yield the gentleman another 30 seconds.
  Mr. DOGGETT. They show why the Stop Tax Haven Abuse legislation that 
I have introduced and the Corporate EXIT Fairness Act, to deal with 
those who renounce their citizenship, why they deserve a hearing and 
attention, the attention that they are not getting today or any day 
from this Republican Congress.
  If this Congress will do nothing to address this tax evasion and 
avoidance, the least we can do is to do no harm. But today's action 
does do harm. Rather than getting at the real problems, they seek to 
limit an already underfunded agency.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has again expired.
  Mr. LEWIS. I yield the gentleman another 30 seconds.
  Mr. DOGGETT. They seek to limit, impair, and hinder an already 
underfunded agency in doing its job of tax avoidance so that everyone 
contributes to the costs of our national security and vital services.
  We need to be strengthening the law, ensuring fair enforcement, and 
ensuring that we have the resources necessary to keep America the 
strongest country in the world.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, it is pretty straightforward. The IRS needs 
to earn and keep the trust of the American taxpayer. And I say ``earn'' 
with emphasis because the IRS has lost the trust of the American 
taxpayer.
  Allowing IRS employees to continue administering our tax laws when 
they are in violation of the law undermines the people's trust. It does 
not earn the people's trust.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Walberg).
  Mr. WALBERG. Mr. Speaker, I say thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank 
you to my colleagues for their hard work on this package of bills to 
rein in the IRS and make it more accountable to taxpayers.
  Earlier this week, the taxpayers in my home State of Michigan and 
across the country reflected on another year of a tax burden that is 
too high and take-home pay that is too low. But not only is our current 
tax system broken, the agency in charge of enforcing it is, too. Time 
after time, the IRS has proven that it can't be trusted to clean up its 
act and fails to practice what it preaches.
  In a report last year, the IRS inspector general found that hundreds 
of employees are violating IRS guidelines and failing to pay their 
personal tax obligations. Those are obligations, and I tend to think 
that the good employees of the IRS would be encouraged as well if their 
colleagues paid their taxes.
  The No Hires for the Delinquent IRS Act would simply--and this is 
what we are talking about--prevent the IRS from any additional hiring 
until it verifies that its current employees have paid their own taxes.
  Now, a good friend and colleague of mine has described this as a 
waste of time. The single mom in Monroe, Michigan, doesn't think that 
this is a waste of time. The family farmer in Jackson doesn't think 
that this is a waste of time. The small-business owner in Charlotte 
doesn't think that this is a waste of time. Why? Because they all have 
to pay their taxes on time.
  People who work at the IRS should have to play by the same rules as 
everyone else does. And, in fact, that might assist them in making sure 
that congressional employees pay their taxes too, and any other 
department of the Federal Government pays their taxes too, because why? 
They pay their taxes, and now they can do what their job asks them to 
do.
  The good colleague and gentleman from Georgia understands, I am 
certain, the principle that we both know well, where it says: To whom 
much is given, much is required. Much responsibility has been given to 
the IRS, and much is required. Pay your taxes.
  I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense bill.
  Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I enjoyed listening to my friend from 
Michigan, and I would just say why shouldn't we lead by example here in 
Congress, to whom much has been given? Shouldn't we have the 
credibility?
  I would have supported this bill in Ways and Means, with one simple 
amendment. I offered an amendment to apply the same provisions to 
Congress.
  The House of Representatives has a worse record of compliance with 
our employees than the IRS. The IRS has the best record in the Federal 
Government. Every single department in the executive branch has a 
better record in Congress.
  Why should we have over 500 people on that chart not paying their 
taxes?
  If it is such a great idea that you can implement this smoothly and 
simply for the IRS, why shouldn't it be easier to implement with 
Congress, which has about 10 percent of the employees but has four 
times more delinquency?
  Well, people on the committee were all aflutter. They did not, on a 
technical basis, allow me to offer this amendment, so I went to the 
Rules Committee.
  I think this is a good principle. People ought to pay their taxes. 
But if you are going to use a sledgehammer like this and it is possible 
to administer, why doesn't it apply to Congress?
  Congress sets the rules. Congress funds the IRS. Congress passes that 
crazy Internal Revenue Code that people hate and then blame the IRS for 
administering what Congress passed.
  Now, I am mystified. If this is not just a stunt to try and divert 
attention from the fact that Congress and the Republican leadership has 
been attacking the IRS, defunding it, making its job a difficult job 
under the best of circumstances, why not apply it to Congress?
  Why shouldn't we set the example, particularly when we have more 
people under our employment who are on that big list? Don't we lead by 
example? Shouldn't people look to us?
  The hypocrisy in not allowing my amendment to apply to Congress may 
be one of the reasons why Congress is the only entity in the Federal 
Government that has probably lower ratings than the IRS. It is because 
we are not willing to be accountable, because we play games, because we 
do things that we know will never be enacted into law but would be a 
good sound bite on somebody's Web site or a quick interview.

                              {time}  1345

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 
seconds.

[[Page 4835]]


  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I am going to give all of my colleagues an 
opportunity to step up and to cosponsor legislation that would extend 
to Congress the same degree of scrutiny as they want to have for the 
IRS.
  Even though the IRS problem is much smaller than ours--it is less 
than one-quarter--what is good for the goose is good for the gander. I 
don't know if this is sauce, but I would invite my colleagues to step 
up and not play games. Have Congress be accountable.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, the American people deserve and expect IRS 
employees to follow the same tax laws that they administer. It is very 
simple.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina 
(Mr. Rouzer), the sponsor of the legislation.
  Mr. ROUZER. Mr. Speaker, there are several things that come to mind 
here. Number one, each Member of Congress is held accountable every 2 
years by the voters of their respective district.
  The last time I checked, this is referred to as the people's House. 
We are either here to represent our constituencies and our people back 
home or we are representing the bureaucracy of the Federal Government.
  Now, I don't know what side my other colleagues, particularly on the 
other side of the aisle, care to be on as it relates to this, but I 
personally think it is important to represent our people back home, not 
the bureaucracies here in Washington, D.C.
  The other thing I have heard as it relates to this bill is it is 
mean. My goodness. What is mean about this? All it says is, when the 
IRS can certify that their employees who are delinquent have a plan to 
get back into compliance, they are able to hire again. Until then, 
there is a freeze on hiring.
  There is nothing mean about that. It is just good common sense. It is 
an encouragement, and it is an incentive for the IRS to clean up its 
act.
  Then we hear about the funding issue. I have never ever, ever once 
heard the other side say that there was plenty of funding for any 
Federal agency, the IRS or any agency.
  I will tell you what is mean and what is destructive is an 
obstructive, intrusive Federal Government that does not allow the 
individual American people and our families to do what they do best, 
and that is grow a business, make a profit, and create jobs.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman an additional 30 
seconds.
  Mr. ROUZER. I read somewhere not long ago that rules and regulations 
of the IRS and elsewhere have cost this economy $2 trillion in the last 
fiscal year--$2 trillion.
  If we got rid of the rules and regulations that are harming the 
economy and that are keeping our economy from growing at a robust pace, 
then the IRS would end up having a whole lot more money.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Will the gentleman yield for a question?
  Mr. ROUZER. I yield to the gentleman from Oregon.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Why shouldn't we have the same rule apply to the 
10,000 employees of the House of Representatives?
  Mr. ROUZER. This bill is about accountability. Every Member of this 
Congress is held accountable every 2 years.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has again expired.
  Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Danny K. Davis).
  Mr. DANNY K. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my 
colleague for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.R. 1206, which would 
restrict the IRS' ability to hire qualified personnel until it has 
documented that each one of its 80,000 employees has not violated an 
unusual, uncertain tax standard. This legislation is totally 
unnecessary and promises to further undermine taxpayer service and tax 
enforcement.
  First of all, it is totally unnecessary, suggesting that IRS 
employees are tax delinquent when, in reality, IRS employees 
demonstrate a tax compliance rate much higher than that of Members of 
Congress or other Federal agencies.
  Indeed, 99 percent of IRS employees are tax compliant in contrast to 
only 95 percent of the House of Representatives.
  Further, IRS employees already are subject to the Federal Payment 
Levy Program that can levy Federal salaries to recover tax debts. 
Certainly, this is a bill in search of a problem.
  Secondly, this bill would further impede the ability of the IRS to 
serve taxpayers and enforce tax laws. Due to Republican insistence on 
dramatically reducing the IRS funding by over $1 billion in the last 5 
years, the IRS has already experienced extraordinary reductions in 
personnel and service.
  Seven former IRS Commissioners from both parties have spoken about 
this unprecedented reduction and its negative impact on our tax system.
  My constituents, your constituents, and constituents all over the 
country have suffered enough. Our national debt has suffered. Every 
time we collect $1, that yields another $4 in revenue.
  So I would urge my colleagues to vote against this bill. I certainly 
will do so.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman notes the Federal Payment Levy Program. I 
would like to clarify that this bill would only treat an employee as 
seriously delinquent in the most egregious case where no payments were 
being made because wages can be levied under the Federal Payment Levy 
Program. Most employees would fall within one of the exceptions and 
would be within the definition of seriously delinquent.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon 
(Mr. Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy.
  Mr. Speaker, I like the notion of accountability. It is true that we 
are up for election every other year, and I am sure that my friend from 
North Carolina has a system in his office to make sure that the 18 
people who work for him are not on this list of over 500 people. But 
that is not a suitable accountability. We are talking about an entire 
agency.
  I think there is no good reason that we shouldn't have the same sort 
of accountability for almost 10,000 people who work for the House of 
Representatives.
  Shouldn't we collectively set an example? After all, there are four 
times as many people who have tax delinquency who work for the House of 
Representatives.
  Why shouldn't we set an example? If it can be easily administered and 
we want to send a message, why don't we send a message that we care 
about it?
  We can learn from the gentleman about his system to make sure there 
are no tax delinquencies in his office. I would like to know that, and 
I am sure the leadership of the House of Representatives would like to 
implement it here.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this bill. 
It would hamstring the IRS and would make no real impact on tax 
avoidance in the United States. This bill is shameful.
  If we are serious about cracking down on tax dodging, we would focus 
on ending corporate inversions. Our government must stand up and say to 
these corporations: Stop cheating the American people.
  We cannot continue to allow corporations to pretend that they are 
American companies reaping the benefits that this country has to offer 
and all the while claiming to be a foreign corporation when the tax 
bill comes. They don't pay their fair share of taxes in the United 
States.
  Corporations are cheating the American people out of revenue that 
could

[[Page 4836]]

make such a real difference in the lives of children and families so 
that they can dodge taxes and gouge prices.
  A quote from an article in The New York Times last week by Nicholas 
Kristof says: ``The Real Welfare Cheats. One academic study found that 
tax dodging by major corporations costs the U.S. Treasury up to $111 
billion a year. By my math, less than one-fifth of that annually would 
mean more than enough to pay the additional costs of full-day 
prekindergarten for all 4-year-olds''--that is about $15 billion--
``prevent lead poisoning in tens of thousands of children ($2 billion), 
provide books and parent coaching for at-risk kids across the country 
($1 billion) and end family homelessness ($2 billion).''
  The administration has issued new rules to curb inversions, but the 
Congress--the Congress--needs to work to end this abhorrent practice.
  It is absurd that the U.S. Treasury does not have the authority to 
share a list of inverted corporations with other government agencies. 
Congress can give them that authority.
  It is up to us to make sure that Treasury can provide such a list. 
Congress also needs to strengthen the definition of an inverted 
corporation in the Tax Code. We should also consider inversions a deal 
breaker when we dole out Federal contracts.
  Inverted corporations should not receive Federal contracts. They are 
bad actors, and we should not be rewarding them with lucrative 
contracts for moving their mailboxes to avoid paying their taxes in the 
United States.
  That is why Congressman Doggett and I introduced the No Federal 
Contracts for Corporate Deserters Act, so that inverted companies will 
no longer be able to benefit from Federal contracts at the expense of 
companies who do pay their fair share.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentlewoman an additional 1 
minute.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Instead of pursuing this unnecessary and misguided bill 
that would punish the IRS, but honestly makes very little impact on tax 
avoidance, what we should do is we need to go after those corporations. 
They game our system at the expense of the American taxpayer of up to 
almost $11 billion.
  Wouldn't every American like to have an opportunity to be able to say 
that they can send their kid to school, that they don't have to risk 
homelessness, and that they can provide their kid with an education 
instead of these corporations taking and ripping off the United States?
  Let's get real on the floor of this House of Representatives. Do you 
want to do the right thing? Do you want to do what is morally 
responsible? Then, let us end these inverted corporations. Let them pay 
their fair share of taxes or tell them that it is illegal and that we 
can prosecute them.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, let me make a point that is being lost in the debate 
here. Current law actually requires that the IRS fire willfully 
noncompliant employees unless they have reasonable cause for not paying 
their taxes. That is current law.
  Yet, in most cases--61 percent of cases, Mr. Speaker--the IRS fails 
to even document why delinquent employees were not penalized.
  In addition, Mr. Speaker--and I think the American people would be 
stunned to hear this--there are instances of IRS employees who are 
delinquent in their taxes who have not only not been fired, but have 
received bonuses.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina 
(Mr. Rouzer).
  Mr. ROUZER. Mr. Speaker, I have listened to this debate today and the 
discussion about inversions. There is a broader point that is missed 
here.
  Inversions aren't even an issue if America is the most attractive 
place to do business. Capital investment goes where it is welcome, not 
where it is unwelcome.
  Why do you hear about inversions today? It is because we have an 
outdated Tax Code that significantly needs reform. It is because we 
have more rules and regulations than we have ever had before that are 
stifling the economy to the tune of $2 trillion annually. It is because 
we have a healthcare law in place that is killing the economy and job 
growth.
  I can't tell you how many businesses I meet and go and visit all 
across the district that are sitting right at 49 employees. I wonder 
why. It is because of the healthcare law that is unworkable and 
destroying the American economy.
  Again, capital and investment goes where it is welcome. How do we 
make that possible again? We reform our Tax Code so that this is the 
most attractive place to do business in the world. We get rid of the 
rules and regulations that make it so difficult to do business, all the 
rules and regulations coming out of labor, EPA, and everywhere else.

                              {time}  1400

  It is not just one, it is all of them. It is death by a thousand 
cuts. I can't tell you how many people I have talked to all across my 
district who say: David, do you know what? Business is just no fun 
anymore.
  And so they are plotting their exit strategy. They are not plotting 
the strategy of growth. They are plotting a strategy to exit and retire 
with what they have been able to achieve so far.
  Here is the fundamental question of this bill. Are we going to be on 
the side of the American people? Or are we going to be on the side of 
the bureaucracy? Are we going to defend the EPA? Are we going to defend 
the IRS? Are we going to defend the Department of Labor? Are we going 
to defend all these rules and regulations that are killing the American 
economy? Or are we going to stand with the American people? That is the 
question before us today.
  Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Pocan)
  Mr. POCAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, this week represents another missed opportunity for 
Congress to take action on the challenges facing the American people.
  I understand that we are at this point because the majority can't 
pass a budget, they can't take action to combat the Zika virus, they 
can't help the people of Flint, Michigan, and they can't address the 
opiate crisis.
  Unfortunately, your right wing and your extreme right wing can't seem 
to agree with each other. Instead of taking real action, we are going 
to vote today to prohibit the IRS from hiring any new employees until 
the Treasury certifies that none of the agency's existing employees 
have unpaid taxes.
  This legislation is both unworkable and unnecessary. IRS employees 
have a tax compliance rate of over 99 percent, but a hiring freeze will 
hinder our ability to go after the real tax cheats in this country, and 
that is something we should all be able to agree on.
  Instead of arbitrary changes to the IRS, Congress needs to take 
action to make our Tax Code work for the American people instead of 
corporate interests, something that is conspicuously absent from your 
debate today.
  Let's talk about how we can close loopholes that allow multinational 
corporations to pay nothing in Federal income taxes while working class 
Americans and small businesses pay their fair share.
  Let's have a debate about the corporate tax dodgers who are able to 
shift their headquarters out of the country with a stroke of the pen, 
all while continuing to use our American infrastructure resources and 
customer base.
  Let's talk about the thousands and thousands of tax-dodging 
corporations, including the 18,000 corporations that are registered to 
a single building in the Cayman Islands, a building full of post office 
boxes.
  Today corporate profits are at an all-time high, but the share of 
Federal revenue from corporate taxes continues to shrink, dropping from 
33 percent of the revenue in 1952 to less than 10 percent today.
  While many corporations complain about the 35 percent statutory tax 
rate, the reality is the effective tax rate is much lower. In fact, a 
2013 GAO report

[[Page 4837]]

found that U.S. corporations pay an effective tax rate of just 12.6 
percent. A recent study from Oxfam found that U.S. corporations are 
currently hiding $1.4 trillion in profits from domestic taxation in tax 
havens like in Panama and the Cayman Islands.
  While corporations dodge paying their fair share in taxes, the burden 
falls to the middle class and the small businesses in all of our 
districts, and that is just wrong. That is the reality of why we are 
here with these useless bills in consideration this week. Once again, 
the majority can't pass a budget well past the required deadline. Let's 
have a serious conversation about how we can adjust our Tax Code away 
from the corporate interests and in favor of working families.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS. Mr. Speaker, we owe it to ourselves and we owe it to the 
American taxpayers to do better. As a body, we can do better, much 
better.
  Mr. Speaker, I encourage each and every one of my colleagues to vote 
``no,'' to vote ``no'' on this pointless and harmful piece of 
legislation. This bill is not worthy of the paper that it is written 
on. Vote ``no'' on this mean-spirited bill. It is not the way to go.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The Internal Revenue Service, the people who work there, most of 
them, like most Americans, pay their taxes. The Internal Revenue 
Service is charged, obviously, with administering the Tax Code, they 
are charged with collecting taxes.
  I served a long time in the U.S. Attorney's Office, and I can tell 
you that the Internal Revenue Service is probably the most intimidating 
Federal agency of the whole panoply of Federal agencies. The American 
people have a right to expect IRS employees, these IRS employees who 
are auditing taxpayers, collecting taxes, to abide by Federal tax laws.
  Mr. Speaker, that is why there is a law on the books that says the 
IRS can fire an employee who is delinquent on their taxes. That is why 
I found it so amazing that when the Treasury Inspector General for Tax 
Administration went and did an investigation, they found that the IRS, 
the bureaucrats that run the IRS, in 61 percent of the cases where you 
had an IRS employee that was delinquent on their taxes, that they were 
not fired.
  Further, it was shocking to find that there were cases when these 
employees who were delinquent on their taxes were not only not fired, 
but they received a bonus.
  This is unacceptable and the American people deserve better. Allowing 
IRS employees to continue administering our tax laws when they 
themselves are in violation of that law undermines the trust of the 
American taxpayer.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``yea,'' on my colleague, Mr. Rouzer's 
legislation, H.R. 1206. It is an important step forward in creating 
accountability and restoring the public's trust in the IRS.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Jody B. Hice of Georgia). All time for 
debate on the bill has expired.
  The Chair understands that the amendment printed in House Report 114-
502 will not be offered.
  Pursuant to the rule, the previous question is ordered on the bill, 
as amended.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.


                           Motion to Recommit

  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman opposed to the bill?
  Mr. KILDEE. I am opposed.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion to 
recommit.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Kildee moves to recommit the bill H.R. 1206 to the 
     Committee on Ways and Means with instructions to report the 
     same back to the House forthwith with the following 
     amendments:
       Page 3, after line 11, insert the following:
       (d) Special Rule of Applicability.--This section shall not 
     apply for any year if the Federal tax delinquency rate for 
     either chamber of Congress is greater than the Federal 
     delinquency tax rate for the Department of Treasury, as 
     published by the Internal Revenue Service in its Federal 
     Employee/Retiree Delinquency Initiative (FERDI) for the prior 
     year.
       Page 3, line 12, strike ``(d)'' and Insert ``(e)''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, this is the final amendment to the bill, 
which will not kill the bill or send it back to committee. If adopted, 
the bill will immediately proceed to final passage, as amended.
  This Republican bill is unnecessary because the IRS already, as has 
been said, has rules in place to terminate employees that are 
delinquent on their taxes. But it is important to note that out of the 
entire Federal Government, the employees of the Treasury Department 
have the lowest tax delinquency rate, a rate of 1.19 percent, one-
fourth the delinquency rate for the U.S. House of Representatives, 
which is over 5 percent, and substantially lower than the delinquency 
rate for the general public, which is about 9 percent.
  My motion would stop this bill from going into effect in any year 
that the Federal tax delinquency rate of either the House or the Senate 
is more than that of the Treasury Department. It is that simple.
  You know what we are doing here. We are taking precious time on the 
floor of this House of Representatives to deal with a bill that will go 
nowhere, that has no impact, and is simply a talking point to continue 
to beat up the IRS.
  Meanwhile, we have public health crises taking place. The Zika 
crisis, which endangers pregnant women, what have we done on the floor 
of the House to deal with that real crisis? What have you brought to 
the floor for us to vote on? Nothing.
  And in my own hometown of Flint, Michigan, a city of 100,000 people 
who now for 2 years have not been able to drink water that comes from 
the tap because it has been poisoned by the terrible decisions of its 
State government, a community in crisis that has every right to expect 
that its government, its Federal Government, would come to the aid of 
these people, 100,000 people poisoned by their own State government in 
crisis, 9,000 children under the age of 6 who for 2 years have had lead 
going into their bodies. Lead is a neurotoxin.
  Three people today in Michigan have been criminally charged for 
inflicting this terrible tragedy on my hometown, a city in America in 
crisis, facing a disaster. And what is the response of the United 
States Congress? What is the response of the Republican leadership?
  Not 1 minute devoted to coming up with a solution for the people in 
Flint. Nothing. More messaging bills, more talk, no help for people in 
crisis, no effort to deal with the Zika crisis, and nothing, nothing 
for this great American city facing an existential threat and facing 
generations of impacts, unless the State, that so far has failed to 
step up, and the Federal Government act.
  I sat through the hearings that have been held here in the United 
States Congress and listened to Members, Democrats and Republicans, 
offer concern and offer sympathy. But when I introduced the Families of 
Flint Act, an effort that would share equally the responsibility for 
solving this terrible crisis between the State and Federal Government, 
rather than arguing about who was at fault--we all have a sense that 
the State of Michigan is at greatest fault--but rather than litigating 
that question, we seek to solve the problem.
  Not only do I not yet have one Republican cosponsor who has been 
willing to step up, nearly 100 Democrats have, and I am sure there will 
be more. And I asked for help from my friends on the other side, but no 
time on this floor has been devoted to what is clearly one of the 
biggest crises facing this Nation--a great American city facing a 
threat, a literal threat to its existence,

[[Page 4838]]

a threat to the health of those people, a threat to the future of those 
children.
  One of the first votes I cast when I came here to the House of 
Representatives was to cast a vote to provide relief to the victims of 
Hurricane Sandy, not my district, not my community, not my region, but 
fellow Americans.

                              {time}  1415

  I was proud of that vote. I was proud that, at that moment, on that 
day, as a Member of the House of Representatives, I was first an 
American, and when other Americans were suffering, we were willing to 
help. Why not Flint? Why spend time on these meaningless political 
messaging bills when there are real problems in this country that need 
to be addressed?
  Mr. Speaker, I ask that we put aside this nonsense and get to the 
work that the American people sent us here to do.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to 
recommit.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from North Carolina is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HOLDING. Mr. Speaker, the motion to recommit is an attempt by the 
minority to gloss over the IRS' failure to enforce its rules for IRS 
employee conduct and over its failure to protect taxpayer dollars.
  Quite simply, this bill would require the IRS to report to Congress 
as to whether it has employees with seriously delinquent tax debt or to 
report why it cannot provide that information to Congress.
  As I have said multiple times, the American people deserve and expect 
IRS employees to follow the same tax laws that they administer. That is 
an expectation of the IRS; so it is not surprising that the IRS would 
have a low rate of delinquency amongst its employees. IRS employees 
should know that it is current law. Current law actually requires that 
the IRS fire willfully tax-noncompliant employees unless they have 
reasonable cause for not paying their taxes. What is shocking is that, 
in most cases, Mr. Speaker, the IRS leadership fails to even document 
why delinquent employees are not penalized, and 61 percent were not 
penalized for having delinquent taxes.
  This legislation, Mr. Speaker, is a critical step forward in 
restoring accountability and trust in the IRS. It is a trust that has 
been broken--a trust, I would argue, that doesn't exist between the 
people and the IRS.
  I urge my colleagues to make the IRS accountable to the American 
people--to vote against the motion to recommit and to vote ``yes'' on 
H.R. 1206.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the previous question is 
ordered on the motion to recommit.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to recommit.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
order of the House of today, further proceedings on this question will 
be postponed.

                          ____________________