About three years ago, under the Trump Administration, the IRS implemented a new policy. When tax representatives contact the IRS seeking tax information related to their clients, the Agency now requires all representatives to divulge sensitive personal information – such as, the representative’s SSN and date of birth. The IRS claims that it implemented this new requirement to verify the representative’s identity and to prevent identity theft against the taxpayer. Both explanations appear reasonable, except the need to solicit such sensitive information must be questioned in light of one critical fact. The IRS creates and maintains a unique identification number for each representative known as the Centralized Authorization File (CAF) number, a primary purpose of which is to verify the representative’s identity.
Why has the IRS decided the CAF number is not sufficient to confirm the tax representative’s identity? What was the impetus for the policy shift, a shift which the Biden administration has shown no signs of rolling back? The IRS refuses to explain why the Agency now requires representatives to divulge sensitive personal information for identification purposes; or how it uses, stores and protects this sensitive information. In fact, the IRS redacted from public view most of the discussion of its practices, leaving tax representatives to guess how the Agency handles their personal data.
The primary concern for tax representatives is whether their sensitive personal information – including their SSNs – becomes part of the taxpayer’s file and thus available to the taxpayer. Does the IRS provide the representative’s personal information to the taxpayer in any respect? Why the IRS has been secretive of its practices presents a broader concern. To this end Tuan Samahon and Shawn Rodgers have filed a FOIA lawsuit in the District of Minnesota, seeking disclosure of the redacted portions of the IRM
Tuan Samahon is a Professor of Law at Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law. He teaches and writes in the areas of federal courts and constitutional law. His articles have been published in the Stanford Law Review, Ohio State Law Journal, Hastings Law Journal, William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal, University of Chicago Legal Forum, Denver Law Review, and Villanova Law Review, among others.
Mr. Rodgers is a partner at Goldstein Law Partners, LLC. He concentrates his practice in the areas of constitutional law and civil rights, appellate advocacy, commercial litigation, and employment law. He represents a diverse client base, which includes corporate entities, non-profit organizations, entrepreneurs, and private individuals. As an experienced litigator, Mr. Rodgers appears regularly before federal and state courts at both the trial and appellate levels.