You are on page 1of 7
CAUSE “ACTION ‘Advocate or Goverment Resse? ‘Aso Norpro Corporation April 15, 2015 ‘VIA CERTIFIED MAIL “The Honorable Micheel E. Horowitz Inspeetor General U.S. Department of Justice ‘950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Ste. 4706 ‘Washington, D.C. 20530-0001, Re: Request for a Review of Depai ice and Whit Concerning Department Detailees Dear Inspector General Horowitz: ‘Lam writing on behalf of Cause of Action, a 501(¢)(3) nonpartisan strategic oversight group committed to ensuring thatthe regulatory process is transparent, ai, and accountable, ‘Cause of Action respectfully requests that the Department of Justice, Office ofthe Inspector General (“DOI-OIG") review applicable policies, procedures, rules and/or guidelines, ‘whether formal or informal, written or oral, regarding the DOJ Tax Division's eurent practice of, detailing department attorneys to the Office of White House Counsel within the Executive Office of the President. In particular, Cause of Action asks that you determine whether appropriate legal and ethical safeguards are in place at both the Office of White House Counsel, as well as ‘the DOJ, to ensure that detailed attomeys are appropriately sereened to prevent confidential ‘taxpayer returns and/or return information protected under § 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code CLR.C.) from being unlawfully accessed or disclosed. Documents obtained by Cause of Action have revealed that since 2009, several DOJ Tix Division atiorneys, many of whom have been involved in litigation where § 6103-protected information was involved, have elected to serve the President as “clearance counsel” inthe Office of White House Counsel. Discussion Federal law permits employees of any “department, agency, or independent establishment ‘of the executive branch” tobe detailed to the White House to assist and advise the Presiden." "USC. § 112; see aso Rober F.Digelman Acting ASS. At'y Gen. for Admin, Memorandum tothe Heads of Department Component Concerning t= Approval of and Reimborenmant fr Why Hove and Chee Dele (A, Hon. Michael F. Horcwitz April 15,2015 Page 2 During the current Administration, the DOJ has regularly detailed Tax Division attorneys to the Office of White House Counsel. Specifically, through independent investigation, CoA has identified atleast nine Tax Division attomeys who have been detailed to the White House between April 2009 and December 2014.7 CoA’s investigation further reveals that these Aetsilees typically served as “clearance counsel,” vetting potential candidates for appointment by the President to high-ranking government posts ‘The detailing of Tax Division atiomeys to the Office of White House Counsel raises ‘ethical and legal questions because ofthese attomeys' access to confidential taxpayer returns and. return information obtained during their legl representation ofthe United States in tax-related matters. Specifically, § 6103 of the I.R.C. permits DOI attomeys to access taxpayer retums and return information when special circumstances authorize inspection.‘ Section 6103 precludes the White House from accessing confidential returns and return information unless the President ‘makes a formal request thet is disclosed tothe Joint Committee on Taxation in the United States ‘Congress.’ According to the IRS, no President has ever filed a report with the Joint Committee ‘on Taxation conceming requests for returns and return information.® Despite this fact, given recent allegations of the unlawful disclosure of taxpayer returns and return information by the IRS, as well as allegations of unauthorized access to such information by the White House,’ the ‘opportunity for the abuse of taxpayer confidentiality for political purposes is concerning if effective safeguards are notin place. To illustrate the importance of approprite screens and the risks presented through the process of detailing attomeys who access confidential and potentially politically sensitive information, consider Norah E. Bringer, a tial atomey in the DOI's Tax Division, who was detailed to the Office of White House Counsel asa clearance counsel forthe President in June 2014 and who recently returned to the department as the Counsel to the Acting Assistant ‘Attomey General for Tax ~ who oversees the entire DOJ Tax Division.* Prior to her detail at the ‘White House Counse!’s office, Ms. Bringer served as atrial attomey involved in litigation concerning the scope of § 6103 as well asthe IRS's targeting of political groups. For example, Ms. Bringer represented IRS Commissioner John Koskinen in a lawsuit against Z Stree, Inc, @ 30,2000), availabe arn: jasc goistestefeliesnaegny/201401/21pproval-eimbursement- ‘wha (O01 guideline of aspect of detaling proces). * eter fom Carmen M. Hanae, Counsel for FOIA & PA Mater, Tax Div, U.S. Det of lsc, to Cause of Action, at (Mat. 17,2015 (tached as Exhibit 1. 5 See generally Mary Anne Borel, e al, Ths WHITE HOUSE TRANSITION PROJECT: THE WiTE HOUSE COUNSEL'S “Orrice No. 2009-28, a 33 2008), avalabe a hup:/Wwhitehoustansisenprojetorgrescrcestreing/ WHP= 2008-29-Counse pat AIRC. 6103000), URC. § 61038X5);s00 alo id. §§ @XD)-2) “IRS Office of Chief Cousel, Procedure & Adminstration, Dislorre& Prinacy Law Reference Gide 212-36, nape gop pt p4639 pat (eee “IRS Disclose Cuide), "Seq eg elon lonneon, he Ming Koch Repor, NATURE. (Aus 20,2013), hp fw nationareiew com _ticl386260/mising-koe-seport-lanajhnson ee aso C)Ciaramelin, Treaty Departmen 1G Refesed FOIA ‘on Anata GoolbeoInvesigtion, Wash, FREE BEACON Gly 5, 2013), hp/resbeacocomatioal= ‘Stcuriytreasry-departmentig-refited- floats goolber investi. * See FOIA Response supra note 2 Hon, Michael E. Horowitz April 15,2015 Page 3 conservative organization dedicated to education on Middle East issues, which was subject to “extra scrutiny” when it epplied for LR-C. § 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status” Ms, Bringer also represented the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration and the IRS ina pair of related Freedom of Information Act FOIA") lawsuits brought by Cause of Action concerning, the unauthorized diseloscre of § 6103 information by the IRS and unauthorized access ofthat information by the White House. During the course of litigation, Ms. Bringer submitted, fr in ‘camera teview by the district court, confidential return information concerning unauhorized disclosures from the IRS to the White House. Ms. Bringer subsequently withdrew fiom the ‘matter. As documents produced to Cause of Action pursuant to FOIA now reveal, Ms. Bringer iew from the Cause of Action case ~and potentially athers to serve as an attorney forthe White House The nature of Ms. Bringer’s work while atthe department, which included access to § 6103-protected information, her subsequent detail to the White House (as clearance counsel, ‘hich may have involved access to taxpayer return information through “tax checks" ofthe President's appointees"), and her recent return to the Tax Division as Counsel to the head of the ision, who represents the United States in all civil and criminal tax matters, raises the heightened need for appropriate ethical and legal safeguards. Because of the potential for abuse involved inthe detailing of attorneys to the White House who formerly represented the department and/or the IRS ~ and who later retun to the ‘department ~I request thit the DOJ-OIG review whether appropriate ethical and legal safeguards _are in place, particularly relating tothe use of confidential taxpayer return information and the detailing of DOJ attorneys tothe White House and those attomeys’ subsequent etur to the DOJ. This request falls squarely within the purview of the DOJ-OIG. The Inspector General Act authorizes the DOJ-OIG to conduct investigations and audits to promote “economy, ‘efficiency, and effectiveness” within the DOJ and to “prevent and detect fraud and abuse." ‘This includes the investigation of “allegations of... administrative misconduct." The current and unprecedented practize of detailing DOJ Tax Division attomeys to the White Heuse when § 6103-protected return information is involved and various potentially conflicting altorney- privileges arise, demands your immediate attention to ensure that such information was appropriately and lawfully protected. ‘Thank you for your consideration of this request. We weleome the opportunty to discuss ‘the issues raised in this letter with you or your staff. Ifyou have any questions abou: his request, please contact Ryan Mulvey, Counsel, at (202) 499-4232 or ryan.mulvey@ ‘causeofactionore. * Eg, Ama Suro, IS Cant Dodge nras-Cenre Ore'sDicrimination Sul, A360 (May 29,2014), npn a6. comvarcls'424 ran dodge iae-cenr-org-+discrimnaon ut, IRS Disclosure Guide, supra note 6 "SUSC. App'x $202). 1d §REOXD, Hon, Michael E. Horowitz April 5, 2015 Page 4 Dante festa EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ee: Hon, Brie H. Holder, Jt. Attorney General of the United States Mr. W. Neil Eggleston White House Counsel Ms. Robin C. Ashton Counsel, Office of Professional Responsibility US. Department of Justice Ms. Eileen Shatz Senior Legislative Counsel & Ethies Official, Tax Division US. Department of Justice EXHIBIT 1 US. Department of Justice ‘Tax Division Wshingion, D.C. 20533, (CDC:CMB:CBANERJE FOIPA/TAX # 10829, March 17, 2015, Sent by E-Mail: ryan.mulvey@causeofaction.org, Me. Ryan Mulvey ‘Cause of Action 1919 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 650 ‘Washington, DC 20006 Dear Me. Mulvey: ‘This isa partial determination of category four (8) of your Freedom of Information Act request dated October 30, 2014 seeking: 4. All cords reflecting or containing alist of Tax Division attomeys who have been, or ‘re presently detailed to, the Office of White House Counsel. The time period for this requests January 20, 2001 to the present. ‘Your colleague Aram Gavoor, Senior Counsel, clarified to me on or about February 12, 2015 that Cause of Action defines “the present” in category four as December 31, 2014. The enclosed one-page record is partially responsive to categery {our because it lists Tax Division attorneys detailed from 2009 through and including December 31, 2014; tis released in full and enclosed with this letter, We continue to search to determine whether any records potentially responsive to category four of your request forthe period of January 2001 through 2008 can be located. ely yours, fear, Cero Semen WM. Division Counsel for FOIA and PA Maters Enclosures (1) ‘Tax Division Atorneys Detaled to the Whit House ‘rom Apil208 through December 31,2014 Name Seihart Dina Feestone, Darren Etinwood, Toda ‘Wattng, Nehae Mason Christine Straus, Christopher Leonard Steey| Sra, Anew Bringer, Norah ate of etl Ap03 Marcha ‘apreid Novembro Mareh-ld ——Ortobent November Mayi2 May12 —Oatober12 oeobera2 Mays May13December13 December 3 Ine-t6 ‘net

You might also like