Why is the IRS Withholding on Whistleblower Award Payments?

We informed the Whistleblower Office three years ago that we did not believe that the IRS was either required to or had the legal authority to withhold on award payments to whistleblowers under section 7623.  With the payment earlier this month of the first whistleblower award under the enhanced provisions of section 7623(b), we knew a decision on this issue must have been reached by the IRS, so we were preparing a FOIA request to obtain these decision documents.  The IRS just released a September 2010 document, PMTA 2010-63 [PDF], in which Chief Counsel admits "There is no specific statutory authority to withhold on Whistleblower awards" and as a footnote to that statement, despite their conclusion to the contrary, that "Historically, all identified existing withholding regimes have a statutory basis."  Technically, their conclusion relies solely on a line from a Notice 92-6 [PDF] - which appears to have been written by the IRS Public Affairs Division - that was taken completely out of context.  However, the IRS tips their hand as to the real reason that they have decided to withhold, which is: "because they can" ... and they believe it will be at least a year before anyone can challenge them on it.  (See "Future Challenges" on page 5)  That's like saying: why try to efficiently solve a legal issue now with rational guidance and a cooperative process when you can resolve it next year in protracted litigation.

The only conceivable legal authority for withholding on an award to a U.S. whistleblower under section 7623 is the backup withholding provisions of section 3406.  However, section 3406 would only permit the IRS to backup withhold if the informant did not provide the IRS with a social security number.  A tax whistleblower not having or disclosing a social security number is the exception rather than the rule.

Why does any of this matter?  It is common for tax whistleblowers to be represented by counsel, and those individuals typically do not have the resources to pay legal fees on a time and materials basis during the several years that a case may take before an award is paid, if any.  Therefore, many whistleblowers utilize contingent fee contracts with their counsel.  Congress anticipated this structure and allowed for an above the line deduction for legal fees in section 7623 cases.  The withholding that the IRS has begun imposing on whistleblower awards ignores any deductions a whistleblower has for those contingent fees, leading to significant overwithholding.  The whistleblower, who in many cases has waited several years for the IRS to utilize his information and collect the underpayment from the taxpayer, waited as much as an additional two years after the payment is made by the taxpayer for the IRS to decide if the award is eligible to be paid, now gets about half of the award he is expecting because of overwithholding.  He then must file a claim for refund when his next tax return is due and wait to receive a big refund, all the while receiving no interest from the government for the use of his money for the last 1-3+ years.

Imagine if IRS did the same thing in another context: what if IRS decided to withhold at the 35% corporate rate on all payments made this year to one of their contractors, such as IBM.  The halls of the IRS would immediately fill with IBM lobbyists.  They would not only be arguing that the IRS had no legal authority to withhold, but that by withholding on a gross payment for services, the IRS has ignored their deductible costs, resulting in overwithholding of tax which would only be applied to their net taxable income.

Comments (1)

Read through and enter the discussion by using the form at the end
Steven Schmidt - June 23, 2011 9:39 AM

Re. Overseas IRS Whistleblowers (Non–Resident Aliens)

The Conundrum and Inherent Contradictions of :-

(1) New Treasury Whistleblower Regulation 1603 (N), and
(2) New IRS Requirement of 30% Mandatory Withholding Tax on all Whistleblower Awards

(1) IRS Regulation 1603(N)- Traveling to the US and assisting the IRS in explaining the unlawful tax evasion and corroborative documentary evidence that underpins your case.

Verses

(2) IRS Regulation 1441 which stipulates that the IRS will now apply a mandatory minimum of 30% withholding tax to the awards of overseas whistleblowers “to the extent such item constitutes gross income from sources within the United States i.e. “The payment of the award will be US source income to the extent of the portion attributable to the activities of the non-resident alien whistleblower undertaken in the US, if any, in order to provide information in accordance with the statute” (7623(B). This would of course include any meetings a whistleblower may have with his\her attorney in the US.

Conclusion. Overseas non-resident alien whistleblowers, should insist on meeting the IRS outside the US. As indeed whistleblowers should do when meeting with their US attorney, in order to avoid liability for US Withholding tax on any potential future award.

Confirmation of New US Treasury Regulations section 6103(n). 14 March 2011. “Disclosure of Return Information in Connection with Written Contracts Among the IRS, Whistleblowers, and Legal Representatives of Whistleblowers.” Essentially, temporary regulations to this effect, had been in place since March of 2008. However, as a practical matter confirmation that 1603(n) is now a permanent regulation is largely irrelevant because to date, since 2008, there is not one recorded incidence of the IRS electing to entering into this type of contract. Contracts which would potentially speed up the process by leveraging the inside knowledge and expertise of the respective whistleblower in order to expedite a case to the benefit of the US Treasury Department.

Office of Chief Counsel Internal Revenue Service. Memorandum 22 March 2011. “Subject: Determination of Character, Source, and Withholding Requirements with respect to Whistleblower Awards paid to Nonresident Alien Individuals.”

Post a comment

Fill out this form to add a comment to the discussion
I'd like to leave a comment. is
,
is
,
is
is