Search:

Custom Search

Mandatory Removal for Failing to Pay Taxes Upheld on Appeal

By Susan Smith

Monday, June 9, 2008

You can have daily headlines from FedSmith.com delivered right to your desktop each business morning. The service is free and you don't get junk e-mail as the price of your subscription. Just visit our newsletter page to sign up!

If you work for the Internal Revenue Service, it's a good idea to be scrupulous in filing for and paying your federal taxes, as a former information technology specialist in its Memphis office found out. (Wesley v. Department of the Treasury, C.A.F.C. No. 2008-3138 (nonprecedential), 6/5/08)

When the agency found out that Wesley had not properly filed federal tax returns for four consecutive calendar years and had not timely paid taxes for three of those years, he was removed. The charge was violation of the Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998 (RRA) and other standards of conduct. (Opinion pp. 1-2)

Wesley unsuccessfully appealed to the Merit Systems Protection Board. The Board found that the agency had proved its case and under the RRA removal was the mandatory penalty. (p. 2)

Pointing to its limited scope of review, the court sustained the Board's decision. The Board's findings and conclusion that Wesley's violation of the IRS code was willful turned largely on the auditor's testimony, the fact that Wesley had consented to the accuracy of those tax audits, and the fact that he had agreed to liability for increased taxes plus penalties and interest. (p. 2)

Wesley's removal stands.
 

© 2008 FedSmith Inc. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced without express written consent of FedSmith Inc.

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.

Readers' Comments

  • Son: Are you on leave as you browse the web and share your findings with coworkers? You may not care that union activity is largely subsidized by taxes, but the public would. The title does not sound like a manager or NBU, but I may be mistaken. Regardless you fail to understand. If I ...
    Posted: June 12, 2008 9:01 AM
  • My comments were in direct response to your statement of union resourses expended. Additionally, all at NHQ got a big laugh out of the 'unlikely it was a NBU or manager' comment. Please repond further as your comments are lifting the morale over here....
    Posted: June 11, 2008 2:26 PM
  • What about alll the men and women in Congress? Don't pay "Your fired". The Judges, "Your fired". The Political Appointees, "Your fired". The President, "Your fired". Only when there is lawlessness in the leadership, will there be lawlessness in the nation....
    Posted: June 11, 2008 9:08 AM

View All Comments »

 HTML  Text

MORE BY SUSAN SMITH

More »