The US Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) plan to rescind Harvard University’s tax-exempt status is a highly controversial move, sparking intense debate and raising serious questions about the potential abuse of power. This action has ignited a firestorm, with many questioning the fairness and legality of targeting a specific institution in this manner. The move feels particularly arbitrary, prompting comparisons to authoritarian regimes that selectively enforce laws against their political opponents.
This potential action is not just about Harvard; it’s about the implications for all non-profit organizations. The concern is that this sets a dangerous precedent, allowing the government to target any entity it deems undesirable, creating a chilling effect on free speech and academic freedom.… Continue reading
The IRS is nearing a deal with DHS to aid in locating undocumented migrants, involving ICE providing names and addresses to the IRS for verification. This agreement, a narrower version of an earlier proposal, would represent a significant change in IRS policy, requiring high-level DHS approval for each request. The IRS would confirm addresses, not proactively provide data to ICE, though this still raises privacy concerns given the strict confidentiality rules surrounding taxpayer information. This development follows a lawsuit from immigrant rights groups challenging the legality of such information sharing.
Read More
In response to her termination, Traci DiMartini, former IRS head of human resources, claims her dismissal stemmed from revealing the Office of Personnel Management’s role in federal employee firings under the DOGE administration. The stated reasons for her dismissal included “ineffective management” of employee purges and “insubordination.” DiMartini further alleges her refusal to mandate weekend work for IRS staff to accommodate a DOGE employee contributed to her firing. She intends to contest her termination.
Read More
The current administration, characterized by an “anti-state state” approach, prioritizes dismantling government functions outside of policing, funneling resources to private enterprise. This strategy, coupled with mass firings at agencies like the IRS, aims to cripple public services and justify further budget cuts, ultimately benefiting the ultra-wealthy. Tax resistance, drawing historical parallels to past civil disobedience movements, is presented as a method to expose this governmental corruption and the resulting harm to the public. Withholding taxes becomes a form of political protest, aiming to highlight the misuse of public funds and the deliberate undermining of essential services.
Read More
Thousands of federal employees, including IRS workers, accepted a voluntary separation package with deferred resignation, expecting administrative leave starting March 1st. However, many IRS employees have been instructed to continue working until May 15th due to their positions being deemed “essential.” This contradicts the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) initial FAQ page, raising concerns about the reliability of the offer. The union representing these employees highlights the critical role of IRS workers during tax season and argues that the government’s actions demonstrate the essential nature of these jobs.
Read More
During a Las Vegas rally, President Trump threatened to fire or reassign thousands of IRS agents, echoing false claims of 88,000 new hires targeting taxpayers. This action, if implemented, could severely curtail the IRS’s tax collection capabilities, potentially leading to increased tax evasion and reduced government revenue. The move follows a 90-day federal hiring freeze, with exceptions for national security and public safety. Trump’s proposed reassignment of IRS agents to the border reflects his ongoing focus on immigration enforcement.
Read More
The omission of funding for the World Trade Center Health Program in a recent stopgap spending bill has angered 9/11 first responders and their unions. The bill, intended to avoid a government shutdown, failed to extend funding beyond 2027, despite prior expectations of full funding through 2040. Union representatives expressed outrage at the lack of long-term commitment to care for the thousands suffering from 9/11-related illnesses, emphasizing the ongoing need for treatment and financial security. While some lawmakers have pledged to reinstate the funding, the exclusion underscores a failure to fulfill promises made to these individuals.
Read More
Matt Underwood 
John Q. Hosedrinker