Judge’s Ruling on IRS and ICE Data Sharing
A federal judge has ruled that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) likely violated the law by agreeing to share confidential taxpayer information with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The judge has ordered a suspension of this practice.
Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, appointed by President Clinton, described the data sharing as “unlawful conduct” that contravened both procedural and tax laws.
In her ruling, she stated, “Plaintiffs have shown that the IRS’s implementation of the Address-Sharing Policy was arbitrary and capricious because it failed to recognize its previous policy of strict confidentiality and did not adequately consider the reliance interests created by that policy.”
ICE had requested access to IRS data to assist in locating undocumented immigrants. Initially, they sought information on over 7 million taxpayers but later narrowed their request to 1.28 million individuals classified as “immigrant taxpayers,” according to the judge.
The court noted that at least 47,000 records were shared with ICE. Although the IRS initially rejected ICE’s request, it agreed to cooperate after ICE limited its inquiry to those 1.28 million individuals who were under investigation for remaining in the U.S. beyond their deportation orders.
The judge expressed skepticism about ICE’s justification for needing this information, particularly since they claimed one individual was directly involved in all 1.28 million cases.
Kollar-Kotelly criticized the IRS for failing to provide a valid rationale for entering into an agreement with ICE, which she deemed a breach of the Administrative Procedure Act.
The judge pointed out that ICE’s reasons for requesting migrants’ addresses did not meet legal standards necessary for disclosing taxpayer information. She noted that their June 27 request lacked specific explanations regarding how this data was pertinent to ongoing criminal investigations.
This lawsuit was initiated by the Center for Taxpayer Rights, which expressed concerns about potential misuse of its members’ data by ICE. The judge acknowledged these fears as valid and indicated that there has been a decline in individuals seeking pro bono tax services from the center, thus granting them legal standing in this case.
