Report text available as:

(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip?



114th Congress     }                                {    Rept. 114-635
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session        }                                {           Part 1

======================================================================



 
CONDEMNING AND CENSURING JOHN A. KOSKINEN, THE COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL 
                                REVENUE

                                _______
                                

                 June 21, 2016.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

 Mr. Chaffetz, from the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                       [To accompany H. Res. 737]

    The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to whom 
was referred the resolution (H. Res. 737) condemning and 
censuring John A. Koskinen, the Commissioner of Internal 
Revenue, having considered the same, report favorably thereon 
with an amendment and recommend that the resolution as amended 
be agreed to.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
COMMITTEE STATEMENT AND VIEWS....................................     3
PURPOSE AND SUMMARY..............................................     3
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION..............................     3
  I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................3
 II. INTRODUCTION.....................................................4
III. AUTHORITY........................................................6
 IV. BACKGROUND ON THE COMMITTEE'S INVESTIGATION......................6
          A. IRS Targeting of Tax-Exempt Applications from 
              Conservative Groups................................     7
          B. Lois Lerner's Emails are Critical to the Committee's 
              Investigation......................................    11
  V. THE IRS SIGNIFICANTLY DELAYED PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS PURSUANT TO 
     THE COMMITTEE'S FIRST SUBPOENA..................................12
 VI. COMMISSIONER KOSKINEN'S OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESSIONAL 
     INVESTIGATIONS..................................................14
          A. Koskinen Testified the Agency Would Comply with the 
              Committee's Subpoena...............................    15
          B. Commissioner Koskinen's Senior Advisors Promised to 
              Comply.............................................    16
VII. COMMISSIONER KOSKINEN'S FALSE CLAIM THAT KEY EVIDENCE WAS LOST OR 
     DESTROYED PROLONGED THE INVESTIGATION...........................17
          A. Commissioner Koskinen Promised to Produce Lois 
              Lerner's Emails Even After He Knew Some Were 
              Missing............................................    19
          B. The Committee Learned Lois Lerner's Emails Are Lost.    24
          C. Commissioner Koskinen Failed to Disclose Knowledge 
              of Additional Hard Drive Crashes...................    26
          D. The IRS Made No Effort to Recover Lois Lerner's 
              Email Archive......................................    28
          E. Commissioner Koskinen's Misleading Statements That 
              No Backup Tapes Exist..............................    29
            1. Poor IRS Leadership Led to Destruction of Backup 
                Tapes............................................    30
            2. The Current IRS Email System Backup Tapes.........    33
            3. The Decommissioned Email Server Backup Tapes......    34
VIII.COMMISSIONER KOSKINEN SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE.............36

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY..............................................    37
EXPLANATION OF AMENDMENTS........................................    37
COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION..........................................    38
ROLL CALL VOTES..................................................    38
STATEMENT OF OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE 
  COMMITTEE......................................................    41
STATEMENT OF GENERAL PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES............    41
DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS..................................    41
DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULE MAKINGS..............................    41
FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT...................................    41
COMMITTEE ESTIMATE...............................................    41
BUDGET AUTHORITY AND CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE...    41
MINORITY VIEWS...................................................    42

    The amendment is as follows:
  Amend the preamble to read as follows:

Whereas the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform issued a subpoena 
to John A. Koskinen, Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service, on February 
14, 2014, which compelled him to produce, among other things, ``all 
communications sent or received by Lois Lerner, from January 1, 2009, to 
August 2, 2013.'';

Whereas on March 4, 2014, Internal Revenue Service employees in 
Martinsburg, West Virginia, magnetically erased 422 backup tapes, 
destroying as many as 24,000 of Lois Lerner's emails responsive to the 
subpoena;

Whereas Commissioner Koskinen violated a congressional subpoena by failing 
to locate and preserve relevant records and by losing key pieces of 
evidence that were in the agency's possession, and destroyed, on his watch;

Whereas Commissioner Koskinen betrayed the trust and confidence of the 
American people as an Officer of the United States;

Whereas Commissioner Koskinen failed to live up to the promise he made to 
the Senate Committee on Finance during his confirmation hearing to: ``Be 
transparent about any problems we run into; and the public and certainly 
this committee will know about those problems as soon as we do.'';

Whereas as early as February 2014, and no later than April 2014, 
Commissioner Koskinen was aware that a substantial portion of Lois Lerner's 
emails were missing and could not be produced to Congress, but did not 
notify Congress of any problem until June 13, 2014, when he included the 
information on the fifth page of the third enclosure of a letter to the 
Senate Committee on Finance;

Whereas Commissioner Koskinen offered under oath a series of false and 
misleading statements utterly lacking in honesty and integrity;

Whereas on March 26, 2014, Commissioner Koskinen was asked during a hearing 
before the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, ``Sir, are you or 
are you not going to provide this committee all of Lois Lerner's emails?'' 
and he falsely answered, ``Yes, we will do that.'';

Whereas on June 20, 2014, Commissioner Koskinen testified falsely that 
``since the start of this investigation, every email has been preserved. 
Nothing has been lost. Nothing has been destroyed.'';

Whereas on June 20, 2014, before the House Committee on Ways and Means 
Commissioner Koskinen testified falsely that the Internal Revenue Service 
had ``confirmed that backup tapes from 2011 no longer existed because they 
have been recycled, pursuant to the Internal Revenue Service normal 
policy'' and on July 23, 2014, during a different hearing in the Committee 
on Oversight and Government Reform, Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Job 
Creation, and Regulatory Affairs, Commissioner Koskinen testified 
``confirmed means that somebody went back and looked and made sure that in 
fact any backup tapes that had existed had been recycled.'';

Whereas on June 20, 2014, Commissioner Koskinen testified that the Internal 
Revenue Service had ``gone to great lengths'' to retrieve all of Lois 
Lerner's emails, but in fact failed to search disaster backup tapes, Lois 
Lerner's Blackberry, the email server, backup tapes for the email server, 
and Lois Lerner's temporary replacement laptop, which the Treasury 
Inspector General for Tax Administration subsequently found to contain more 
than 1,000 of Lerner's emails;

Whereas Commissioner Koskinen's false statements delayed and otherwise 
interfered with congressional investigations into the Internal Revenue 
Service targeting of Americans based on their political affiliation; and

Whereas the aforementioned conduct of Commissioner Koskinen caused the 
House of Representatives to lose confidence in his ability to administer 
and supervise the execution and application of the internal revenue laws: 
Now, therefore, be it

                     Committee Statement and Views


                          Purpose and Summary

    The resolution documents that the House of Representatives 
has lost confidence in Commissioner John A. Koskinen's ability 
to administer and supervise the execution and application of 
the internal revenue code. Therefore, the House of 
Representatives censures and condemns John A. Koskinen for a 
pattern of conduct while Commissioner of the Internal Revenue 
Service that is incompatible with his duties and inconsistent 
with the trust placed in him as an officer of the United 
States. It is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
John A. Koskinen, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, should: (a) 
immediately resign from office, and if he does not so resign, 
the President should remove him from office; and (b) be 
required to forfeit any rights to any annuity for which is 
eligible under chapter 83 or chapter 84 of title 5, United 
States Code.

                  Background and Need for Legislation


                          I. Executive Summary

    On May 15, 2013--one day after the Treasury Inspector 
General for Tax Administration released a report that found the 
Internal Revenue Services (IRS) targeted taxpayers on the basis 
of their political beliefs--President Obama stated the 
targeting program was ``inexcusable and Americans have the 
right to be angry about it.'' Additionally, the President said, 
``[O]ur administration has to make sure that we are working 
hand in hand with Congress to get this thing fixed.''
    This acknowledgment came five days after Lois Lerner, 
Director of the Exempt Organizations Division, stated about the 
targeting, ``that was wrong, that was absolutely incorrect, 
insensitive and inappropriate.'' For the past two years, 
several congressional committees investigated the IRS's 
targeting of conservative groups.
    IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, however, remained 
unapologetic about the targeting program and unwilling to work 
with Congress in the manner the President directed. Rather than 
cooperate with Congress, Commissioner Koskinen obstructed the 
congressional investigations of the targeting program by: (1) 
allowing 24,000 emails relevant to the investigation, and 
covered by a congressional subpoena and internal preservation 
order, to be destroyed on his watch; and (2) failing to testify 
truthfully and providing false and misleading information to 
Congress.
    Commissioner Koskinen's posture with respect to the various 
congressional investigations of the IRS caused 52 Members of 
the House of Representatives to sign a letter on July 27, 2015 
that called on President Obama to exercise his authority under 
26 U.S.C. Section 7803(a)(1)(D) to remove Mr. Koskinen as 
Commissioner of the IRS. The President took no action, and the 
House of Representatives was therefore left to consider 
alternative means to remove or otherwise hold Commissioner 
Koskinen accountable.
    It is necessary to condemn and censure Commissioner 
Koskinen because his failure to comply with a subpoena and 
failure to testify truthfully permanently deprived the American 
people of a complete understanding of the IRS targeting 
scandal. Commissioner's Koskinen's complete disregard for 
Congress's oversight obligations and the American people's 
right to know the truth about the IRS targeting program caused 
a deficit of confidence in the nation's tax collecting agency. 
His continued leadership of the IRS is an insurmountable 
obstacle to restoring that confidence. Mr. Koskinen cannot 
continue in his role as Commissioner and the House of 
Representatives should make it clear that his actions are 
intolerable.
    This report provides additional details with respect to the 
various reasons that the House of Representatives should 
condemn and censure Mr. Koskinen. Briefly, those reasons are:
     Commissioner Koskinen failed to comply with a 
subpoena resulting in destruction of key evidence. Commissioner 
Koskinen failed to locate and preserve IRS records in 
accordance with a congressional subpoena and an internal 
preservation order. The IRS erased 422 backup tapes containing 
as many as 24,000 of Ms. Lerner's emails--key pieces of 
evidence that were in the agency's possession, and destroyed, 
on Koskinen's watch.
     Commissioner Koskinen failed to testify truthfully 
and provided false and misleading information. Commissioner 
Koskinen testified the IRS turned over all emails relevant to 
the congressional investigation, including all of Ms. Lerner's 
emails. When the agency determined Ms. Lerner's emails were 
missing, Commissioner Koskinen testified the emails were 
unrecoverable. Neither of these statements was true.
     Commissioner Koskinen failed to notify Congress 
that key evidence was missing. The IRS knew Ms. Lerner's emails 
were missing in February 2014. In fact, they were not missing; 
the IRS destroyed the emails on March 4, 2014. The IRS did not 
notify Congress the emails were missing until June 2014--four 
months later, and well after the White House and the Treasury 
Department were notified.

                            II. Introduction

    John Koskinen was confirmed as IRS Commissioner in December 
2013 during the 113th Congress. Then-Chairman Darrell Issa 
reissued a subpoena for Ms. Lerner's emails to him on February 
14, 2014.\1\ Chairman Issa served Commissioner Koskinen another 
subpoena on June 17, 2014 for any computer hardware containing 
Ms. Lerner's emails. Both subpoenas were reissued by Chairman 
Jason Chaffetz on March 4, 2015 in the 114th Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\The original subpoena was served on Treasury Secretary Jack Lew 
on August 2, 2013, because no permanent IRS Commissioner was in place.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    During his confirmation hearing, Commissioner Koskinen 
pledged to fully cooperate with the ongoing congressional 
investigations.\2\ His actions have fallen well short of 
fulfilling that pledge. As commissioner, Mr. Koskinen 
repeatedly assured the Committee that the IRS was working to 
gather Lois Lerner's emails and that the IRS would provide 
these emails to the Committee. For instance, in testimony 
before the Committee on March 26, 2014, Commissioner Koskinen 
stated the IRS would produce all of Lois Lerner's subpoenaed 
emails.\3\ It did not. In fact, under Commissioner Koskinen's 
leadership, the IRS destroyed thousands of emails covered by 
the Committee's subpoenas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\Nomination of John Koskinen: Hearing Before the S. Comm. on 
Finance, 113th Cong. (2013) (question and answer with Ranking Member 
Orrin Hatch).
    \3\Examining the IRS Response to the Targeting Scandal: Hearing 
Before the H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform, 113th Cong., at 27 
(Mar. 26, 2014) (question and answer with Rep. Chaffetz) [hereinafter 
Mar. 26, 2014 Hearing].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    After he learned that thousands of Ms. Lerner's emails were 
missing from the IRS's archiving system, the Treasury Inspector 
General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) found that Commissioner 
Koskinen and his staff failed to look in five of the six places 
where the emails could potentially be recovered. The IRS only 
examined Lerner's hard drive, which apparently crashed in 2011. 
TIGTA examined all the places where Lerner's emails might have 
been preserved, including Lerner's Blackberry devices, email 
server, backup email server, loaner laptop, the IRS's own 
backup tapes, and Lerner's hard drive.\4\ TIGTA's more thorough 
investigation recovered over 1,000 emails the IRS previously 
failed to produce to Congress.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, Report of 
Investigation: Exempt Organizations Data Loss, (June 30, 2015) 
(hereinafter ``TIGTA report'').
    \5\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The malfeasance of Commissioner Koskinen extends beyond 
investigative indifference into destruction of evidence. The 
Counselor to the Commissioner, Catherine Duval, learned of gaps 
in the Lerner email production on February 2, 2014. Yet, on 
March 4-a month later--IRS employees on the midnight shift in 
Martinsburg, West Virginia magnetically erased 422 backup 
tapes, destroying as many as 24,000 Lois Lerner emails 
responsive to the subpoenas. No one will ever know what was 
contained in those emails.
    After the backup tapes were destroyed, Commissioner 
Koskinen made a series of false and misleading statements to 
Congress while under oath. On June 20, 2014, Commissioner 
Koskinen testified: ``Since the start of this investigation, 
every email has been preserved. Nothing has been lost. Nothing 
has been destroyed.''\6\ That testimony was subsequently 
disproven by a TIGTA investigation that found 422 magnetically 
backup tapes were erased.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\Recent Developments in the Committee's Investigation into the 
Internal Revenue Service's Use of Inappropriate Criteria to Process 
Applications of Tax-Exempt Organizations: Hearing Before the H. Comm. 
on Ways & Means, 113th Cong. (2014).
    \7\TIGTA report, supra note 4, at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Commissioner Koskinen also testified at a congressional 
hearing on June 20, 2014 that the IRS made a genuine effort to 
recover the missing Lerner emails. He stated, ``We've gone to 
great lengths to spend a significant amount of money trying to 
make sure that there is no email that is required that has not 
been produced.''\8\ That statement was also proven false by 
TIGTA, and by Commissioner Koskinen's own subsequent testimony.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\IRS Commissioner John Koskinen: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on 
Ways & Means (June 20, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition, Commissioner Koskinen testified that the 
backup tapes were never sent to a lab for professional forensic 
analysis. That statement also proved false.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\Transcribed interview of Steven Manning, Internal Revenue Serv., 
in Wash., D.C. (April 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Commissioner Koskinen engaged in a systematic effort to 
obstruct, undermine, and discredit Congress's investigative 
function. His actions caused the destruction of documents 
covered by a subpoena and permanently deprived the American 
people of a complete understanding of the scope and purpose of 
the IRS targeting program. In the course of doing so, he made 
false and misleading statements to Congress. For these reasons, 
and others, Commissioner Koskinen should be condemned and 
censured.

                             III. Authority

    The authority to censure or otherwise condemn the actions 
of government officials has come to be recognized and accepted 
in congressional practice as extending to cases of 
``misconduct,'' even outside of Congress, which the House finds 
to be reprehensible, and therefore, worthy of condemnation or 
rebuke.\10\ According to the Congressional Research Service, 
``In the case of . . . federal officials, censure would be an 
exercise of the implicit power of a deliberative body to 
express its views, just as Congress may also express judgments 
of other persons or events.''\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\Jack Maskell, Expulsion, Censure, Reprimand, and Fine: 
Legislative Discipline in the House of Representatives, Cong. Research 
Serv. (May 2, 2013) (RL31382).
    \11\Richard S. Beth, Censure of Executive and Judicial Branch 
Officials, Legislation Proceedings, Cong. Research Serv. (Oct. 2, 1998) 
at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The earliest attempt to censure an official is believed to 
be a series of resolutions proposing the censure and 
disapproval of Secretary Alexander Hamilton in 1793, the texts 
of which were considered by historians to have been drafted by 
Thomas Jefferson.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\Jack Maskell and Richard S. Beth, ``No Confidence'' Votes and 
Other Forms of Congressional Censure of Public Officials, Cong. 
Research Serv. (June 11, 2007) (RL34037).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Either chamber may adopt a resolution to censure or condemn 
a federal official.\13\ There were 31 resolutions to censure, 
condemn, or express a loss of confidence, submitted from the 
93rd through 109th Congresses (1973-2006) and directed against 
federal officials.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\ Id.
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            IV. Background on the Committee's Investigation

    In February 2012, the Committee received reports the IRS 
inappropriately scrutinized certain applicants for 501(c)(4) 
tax-exempt status. Since then, the Committee has engaged in a 
comprehensive investigation of the IRS's process for reviewing 
applications for tax-exempt status. As part of this 
investigation, the Committee reviewed more than 1.3 million 
pages of documents, conducted more than 50 transcribed 
interviews of current and former IRS officials, and held over a 
dozen public hearings.
    Documents and testimony show the IRS targeted conservative-
aligned applicants for tax-exempt status by scrutinizing them 
in a manner distinct--and more intrusive--than other 
applicants. Critical questions remain regarding the extent of 
this targeting, and how and why the IRS acted--and persisted in 
acting--in this manner. Commissioner Koskinen's failure to 
comply with the Committee's subpoenas and to cooperate fully 
with the Committee's investigation has caused many key 
questions to remain unanswered.

  A. IRS TARGETING OF TAX-EXEMPT APPLICATIONS FROM CONSERVATIVE GROUPS

    In late February 2010, a screener in the IRS's Cincinnati 
office identified a 501(c)(4) application connected with the 
Tea Party. Due to ``media attention'' surrounding the Tea 
Party, the application was elevated to the Exempt Organizations 
Technical Unit in Washington, D.C.\15\ When officials in the 
Cincinnati office received several similar applications in 
March 2010, the Washington, D.C. office asked for two ``test'' 
applications, and ordered the Cincinnati employees to ``hold'' 
the remainder of the applications, which prevented the 
applications from moving forward in the review process.\16\ A 
manager in the Cincinnati office asked his screeners to develop 
criteria for identifying other Tea Party applications so the 
applications would not ``go into the general inventory.''\17\ 
By early April 2010, Cincinnati screeners began to identify and 
hold any applications that met certain criteria. Applications 
that met the criteria were removed from the general inventory 
and assigned to a special group.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\Email from Cindy Thomas, Manager, Exempt Organizations 
Determinations, IRS, to Holly Paz, Manager, Exempt Organizations 
Technical Unit, IRS (Feb. 25, 2010) [IRSR 428451].
    \16\Transcribed Interview of Elizabeth Hofacre, Revenue Agent, 
Exempt Orgs. Determinations Unit, IRS (May 31, 2013) [hereinafter 
Hofacre Tr.].
    \17\Transcribed Interview of John Shafer, Group Manager, Exempt 
Orgs. Determinations Unit, IRS (June 6, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In late spring 2010, Carter Hull, based in the Washington, 
D.C. IRS office, was assigned to work on the test 
applications.\18\ Hull, a federal employee with almost fifty 
years of experience, was a recognized expert in 501(c)(4) 
applications that showed indicia of political activity.\19\ He 
issued letters to the test applicants requesting additional 
information or clarification about certain information 
contained in their applications for tax-exempt status.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\Transcribed interview of Carter Hull Internal Revenue Serv., in 
Wash., D.C. (June 14, 2013).
    \19\Id.
    \20\IRS, Timeline for the 3 exemption applications that were 
referred to EOT from EOD, [IRSR 58346-49].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Meanwhile, through the summer and into fall 2010, 
applications from other conservative-aligned groups were also 
held. As the Cincinnati office awaited guidance from Washington 
regarding those applications, a backlog developed. By fall 
2010, the backlog of applications held in the Cincinnati office 
had grown to 60.
    On February 1, 2011, Lois Lerner, who served as Director of 
Exempt Organizations (EO) at IRS from 2006 to 2013,\21\ wrote 
an email to Michael Seto, the manager of the Technical Office 
within the EO business division. The EO Technical Office was 
staffed by approximately 40 IRS lawyers who provided advice to 
IRS agents across the country. Lerner wrote, ``Tea Party Matter 
very dangerous'' and asked the Office of Chief Counsel to get 
involved.\22\ She advised Seto that ``Cincy [Cincinnati] should 
probably NOT have these cases,'' implying they should be 
handled at IRS headquarters in Washington.\23\ Seto testified 
to the Committee that Lerner ordered a ``multi-tier'' review 
for the test applications, a process that involved her senior 
technical advisor and the Office of Chief Counsel.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\The IRS: Targeting Americans for Their Political Beliefs: 
Hearing Before the H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform, 113th Cong., 
at 22 (May 22, 2013) (H. Rpt. 113-33) (statement of Lois Lerner, 
Director, Exempt Orgs., IRS).
    \22\Email from Lois Lerner, Director, Exempt Orgs., IRS to Michael 
Seto, Manager, Exempt Orgs. Technical Unit, IRS (Feb. 1, 2011) [IRSR 
161810].
    \23\Id.
    \24\Transcribed Interview of Michael Seto, Manager, Exempt Orgs. 
Technical Unit, IRS (July 11, 2013) [hereinafter Seto Tr.].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On July 5, 2011, Lerner became aware the backlog of Tea 
Party applications pending in Cincinnati had swelled to ``over 
100.''\25\ Lerner also learned of the specific criteria used to 
screen the cases that were caught in the Tea Party backlog, 
which included the terms ``Tea Party,'' ``Patriots,'' and ``9/
12.''\26\ She believed the term ``Tea Party''--a term that 
triggered additional scrutiny under the criteria IRS personnel 
developed-was ``pejorative.''\27\ Lerner ordered her staff to 
adjust the criteria.\28\ She also directed the Technical Unit 
to conduct a ``triage'' of the backlogged applications and to 
develop a guide sheet to assist agents in Cincinnati with 
processing the cases.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\Transcribed Interview of Justin Lowe, Technical Advisor to the 
Commissioner, Tax Exempt and Gov't Entities Division, IRS (July 23, 
2013).
    \26\ Id.
    \27\ Transcribed Interview of Holly Paz, Director, Exempt Orgs., 
Rulings and Agreements, IRS (May 21, 2013).
    \28\Id.
    \29\Seto Tr. at 121-23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In November 2011, the draft guide sheet for processing the 
backlogged applications was complete.\30\ By then, there were 
160-170 pending applications in the backlog.\31\ After the 
Cincinnati office received the guide sheet from Washington, 
officials in the EO division began to process the applications 
in January 2012. IRS employees drafted questions to solicit 
information from the applicants pursuant to the guide sheet. 
The questions asked for information about the applicant 
organizations' donors, volunteers, board membership, and 
political affiliation, among other things.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \30\Email from Michael Seto, Manager, Exempt Orgs. Technical Unit, 
IRS, to Cindy Thomas, Manager, Exempt Orgs. Determinations Unit, IRS 
(Nov. 6, 2011) [IRSR 69902].
    \31\Transcribed Interview of Stephen Daejin Seok, Group Manager, 
Exempt Orgs. Determinations Unit, IRS (June 19, 2013).
    \32\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    By early 2012, questions about the IRS's treatment of these 
backlogged applications attracted public attention. Committee 
staff met with Ms. Lerner on February 24, 2012 regarding the 
IRS's process for evaluating tax-exempt applications.\33\ Ms. 
Lerner never informed the Committee about the true nature of 
the IRS's treatment of the applications from conservative 
groups. Instead, Ms. Lerner told Committee staff that the IRS's 
criteria for evaluating tax-exempt applications had not 
changed. Ms. Lerner also mentioned the guide sheet developed by 
the Washington office and used by revenue agents to process 
applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \33\Briefing by Lois Lerner, Director, Exempt Orgs., IRS, to H. 
Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform Staff (Feb. 24, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Committee staff subsequently met with TIGTA representatives 
on March 8, 2012.\34\ Shortly thereafter, TIGTA began an audit 
of the IRS's process for evaluating tax-exempt applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \34\Briefing by Treasury Inspector Gen. for Tax Admin. staff, to H. 
Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform Staff (May 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In late February 2012, after Ms. Lerner briefed Committee 
staff, then-IRS Deputy Commissioner Steven Miller requested a 
meeting with her to discuss these applications. Ms. Lerner 
informed Mr. Miller of the backlog and advised that the IRS had 
asked applicant organizations for donor information.\35\ Deputy 
Commissioner Miller relayed this information to IRS 
Commissioner Douglas Shulman.\36\ On March 23, 2012, Mr. Miller 
convened a meeting of his senior staff to discuss these 
applications. Mr. Miller launched an internal review of 
potentially inappropriate treatment of Tea Party 501(c)(4) 
applications ``to find out why the cases were there and what 
was going on.''\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \35\Transcribed Interview of Steven Miller, Deputy Commissioner, 
IRS (Nov. 13, 2013) [hereinafter Miller Tr.].
    \36\Id.
    \37\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The internal IRS review took place in April 2012. Mr. 
Miller realized there was a problem and that the application 
backlog needed to be addressed.\38\ IRS officials designed a 
new system to process the backlog, and Mr. Miller received 
weekly updates on the progress of the backlog throughout the 
summer 2012.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \38\Id.
    \39\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In May 2013, in advance of the release of TIGTA's audit 
report on the IRS's process for evaluating applications for 
tax-exempt status, the IRS planned to acknowledge publicly that 
certain tax-exempt applications were inappropriately 
targeted.\40\ On May 10, 2013, at an event sponsored by the 
American Bar Association (ABA), Ms. Lerner responded to a 
question she planted with a member of the audience prior to the 
event. A veteran tax lawyer asked:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \40\Email from Nicole Flax, Chief of Staff to the Deputy 
Commissioner, IRS, to Lois Lerner, Director, Exempt Orgs., IRS (Apr. 
23, 2013) [IRSR 189013]; Miller Tr. At 154-56; Transcribed Interview of 
Sharon Light, Senior Technical Advisor to the Director, Exempt Orgs., 
IRS (Sept. 5, 2013); Email from Nicole Flax, Chief of Staff to the 
Deputy Commissioner, IRS, to Adewale Adeyemo, Dept. of the Treasury 
(Apr. 22, 2013) [IRSR 466707].

          Lois, a few months ago there were some concerns about 
        the IRS's review of 501(c)(4) organizations, of 
        applications from tea party organizations. I was just 
        wondering if you could provide an update.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \41\Eric Lach, IRS Official's Admission Baffled Audience at Tax 
Panel, Talking Points Memo, May 14, 2013.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In response, Ms. Lerner stated:

          So our line people in Cincinnati who handled the 
        applications did what we call centralization of these 
        cases. They centralized work on these in one particular 
        group.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \42\Rick Hasen, Transcript of Lois Lerner's Remarks at Tax Meeting 
Sparking IRS Controversy, Election Law Blog (May 11, 2013, 7:37 a.m.), 
available at http://electionlawblog.org/?p=50160 (last visited Oct. 23, 
2015).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ms. Lerner also stated:

          However, in these cases, the way they did the 
        centralization was not so fine. Instead of referring to 
        the cases as advocacy cases, they actually used case 
        names on this list. They used names like Tea Party or 
        Patriots and they selected cases simply because the 
        applications had those names in the title. That was 
        wrong, that was absolutely incorrect, insensitive, and 
        inappropriate--that's not how we go about selecting 
        cases for further review. We don't select for review 
        because they have a particular name.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \43\Id.

    Ms. Lerner's statements during the ABA panel, entitled 
``News from the IRS and Treasury,'' were the first public 
acknowledgement that the IRS had inappropriately scrutinized 
the applications of conservative-aligned groups. Within days, 
the President and the Attorney General expressed serious 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
concerns about the IRS's actions. The President stated:

          It's inexcusable, and Americans are right to be angry 
        about it, and I am angry about it. I will not tolerate 
        this kind of behavior in any agency, but especially in 
        the IRS, given the power that it has and the reach that 
        it has into all of our lives.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \44\Statement by the President, May 15, 2013, available at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/05/15/statement-president 
(last visited Oct. 23, 2015).

    At the same press conference, the Attorney General 
announced a Justice Department investigation.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \45\Holder Launches Probe into IRS Targeting of Tea Party Groups, 
FoxNews.com, May 14, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As a result of Ms. Lerner's announcement at the ABA panel, 
and for other reasons, the Committee scheduled a hearing where 
Ms. Lerner would appear and answer questions about how and why 
the IRS processed conservative-aligned applicants for tax-
exempt status. On May 14, 2013, Chairman Issa invited Ms. 
Lerner to testify at a hearing on May 22, 2013.\46\ Ms. Lerner, 
through her attorney, confirmed she would appear at the 
hearing,\47\ and that she planned to invoke her Fifth Amendment 
rights and not answer questions.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \46\Letter from Hon. Darrell E. Issa, Chairman, H. Comm. on 
Oversight & Gov't Reform, to Lois Lerner, Director, Exempt Orgs., IRS 
(May 14, 2013) (letter inviting Lerner to testify at May 22, 2013 
hearing).
    \47\Email from William W. Taylor, III, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP, to H. 
Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform Majority Staff (May 17, 2013).
    \48\Letter from William W. Taylor, III, Zuckerman Spaeder LLP, to 
Hon. Darrell E. Issa, Chairman, H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform 
(May 20, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Since Ms. Lerner would not testify voluntarily at the May 
22, 2013 hearing and because her testimony was critical to the 
Committee's investigation, Chairman Issa authorized a subpoena 
to compel her to appear. The subpoena was served on May 20, 
2013.
    At the hearing, after being sworn, Ms. Lerner made a 
voluntary opening statement. She stated (in pertinent part):

          I have not done anything wrong. I have not broken any 
        laws. I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations, 
        and I have not provided false information to this or 
        any other congressional committee. And while I would 
        very much like to answer the Committee's questions 
        today, I've been advised by my counsel to assert my 
        constitutional right not to testify or answer questions 
        related to the subject matter of this hearing. After 
        very careful consideration, I have decided to follow my 
        counsel's advice and not testify or answer any of the 
        questions today.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \49\The IRS: Targeting Americans for Their Political Beliefs: 
Hearing before the H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform, 113th Cong. 22 
(May 22, 2013) (H. Rpt. 113-33) (statement of Lois Lerner, Director, 
Exempt Orgs., IRS).

    Following her statement, Chairman Issa explained he 
believed she had waived her right to assert a Fifth Amendment 
privilege and asked her to reconsider her position on 
testifying.\50\ In response, Ms. Lerner stated: ``I will not 
answer any questions or testify about the subject matter of 
this Committee's meeting.''\51\ The hearing was placed in 
recess so the Committee could consider whether Lerner had in 
fact waived her Fifth Amendment rights.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \50\Id.
    \51\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    At a business meeting on June 28, 2013, the Committee 
approved a resolution rejecting Ms. Lerner's Fifth Amendment 
privilege claim based on her waiver at the May 22, 2013, 
hearing. The hearing was reconvened on March 5, 2014. Ms. 
Lerner again refused to answer questions, and the Committee 
initiated the process to hold her in contempt of Congress.
    Meanwhile, the Committee's investigation continued. 
Documents and testimony obtained by the Committee confirmed 
that Lerner was a central figure in the IRS's inappropriate 
scrutiny of certain applicants for tax-exempt status. The 
Committee therefore focused investigative resources on 
obtaining documents--including emails--that would help 
investigators understand the full extent of her role in the 
targeting program.

 B. LOIS LERNER'S EMAILS ARE CRITICAL TO THE COMMITTEE'S INVESTIGATION

    Since Ms. Lerner refused to testify, her emails are vital 
to establish her precise role in the targeting. Without access 
to the entirety of her communications, especially those that 
occurred when the IRS's program to target conservative 
applicants for tax-exempt status was active, the full extent of 
her role cannot be known.
    Ms. Lerner was, when the targeting occurred, the Director 
of the EO business division of the IRS. The EO business 
division contains the two IRS units responsible for executing 
the targeting program: the EO Determinations Unit in 
Cincinnati; and the EO Technical Unit in Washington, D.C.
    Ms. Lerner has unique, first-hand knowledge of how, and 
why, the IRS scrutinized applications for tax-exempt status 
from conservative-aligned groups. The IRS sent letters to 
501(c)(4) application organizations, signed by Ms. Lerner, that 
included questions about the organizations' donors. These 
letters went to applicant organizations that met certain 
political criteria. Ms. Lerner later described the selection of 
these applicant organizations as ``wrong, [] absolutely 
incorrect, insensitive, and inappropriate.''\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \52\Rick Hasen, Transcript of Lois Lerner's Remarks at Tax Meeting 
Sparking IRS Controversy, Election Law Blog (May 11, 2013, 7:37 AM), 
http://electionlawblog.org/?p=50160.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In addition to being in a position to control and direct 
the targeting, the incomplete set of Ms. Lerner's emails 
obtained by the Committee makes clear she was personally 
motivated to target conservative-oriented tax-exempt 
organizations. In 2010, while IRS employees were screening 
applications, Ms. Lerner and her colleagues contemplated 
concerns about the ``hugely influential Koch brothers.''\53\ 
Ms. Lerner advised that her unit should ``do a c4 project next 
year'' focusing on existing organizations.\54\ She went on to 
acknowledge the potential scrutiny the effort could receive and 
stated that it should be engineered so as not appear to be a 
``per se political project.''\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \53\Email from Paul Streckfus to Paul Streckfus (Sep. 15, 2010) (EO 
Tax Journal 2010-130) [IRSR 191032-33].
    \54\Email from Lois Lerner, IRS, to Cheryl Chasin et al., IRS (Sep. 
15, 2010) [IRSR 191032-33].
    \55\Email from Lois Lerner, IRS, to Cheryl Chasin et al., IRS (Sep. 
16, 2010) [IRSR 191030].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As left-leaning groups pressured the IRS to investigate 
conservative nonprofits, Ms. Lerner wrote on August 31, 2010: 
``We won't be able to stay out of this--we need a plan!''\56\ 
Later, in October 2010, Ms. Lerner spoke of the intense 
pressure on the IRS to ``fix the problem'' resulting from the 
Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election 
Commission, saying, ``Everybody is screaming at us right now: 
`Fix it now before the election. Can't you see how much these 
people are spending?'''\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \56\Email from Lois Lerner, IRS, to Sarah Hall Ingram, IRS (Aug. 
31, 2010) [IRSR 632342].
    \57\Lois Lerner Discusses Political Pressure on IRS in 2010,'' 
available at https://www.youtube.com (last visited July 31, 2014) 
(transcription by Committee).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ms. Lerner played a central role in the IRS's disparate 
treatment of certain tax-exempt groups. She was extensively 
involved in handling the Tea Party cases--from directing the 
review process to receiving periodic status updates.\58\ She 
created roadblocks to delay the approval of certain 
organizations' tax-exempt applications. Ms. Lerner directed the 
manager of the IRS's EO Technical Unit to subject Tea Party 
cases to a ``multi-tier review'' system out of concern the 
applications could extend the Citizens United decision to 
nonprofit law.\59\ The system Ms. Lerner helped implement and 
manage eventually led to the significant delay of Tea Party 
501(c)(4) applications by subjecting these applications to an 
unprecedented level of scrutiny.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \58\Justin Lowe, IRS, Increase in (c)(3)/(c)(4) Advocacy Org. 
Applications (June 27, 2011). [IRSR 2735]; Email from Judith Kindell, 
IRS, to Lois Lerner, IRS (July 18, 2012). [IRSR 179406].
    \59\Seto Tr., at 34.
    \60\See e.g., Transcribed Interview of Carter Hull, Tax Law 
Specialist, Exempt Orgs. Technical Unit, IRS, at 38-44, 44-51 (June 14, 
2013) [hereinafter Hull Tr.]; Hofacre Tr. at 24-25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ms. Lerner refused to testify before Congress about her 
role in the IRS targeting scandal. Ms. Lerner's refusal to 
cooperate with the Committee's investigation rendered her 
contemporaneous emails even more important to the congressional 
effort to understand the extent of the IRS targeting program 
and her role in it.

 V. The IRS Significantly Delayed Production of Documents Pursuant to 
                     the Committee's First Subpoena

    For more than two years, the Committee has sought all of 
Ms. Lerner's emails from the IRS.\61\ On June 4, 2013, the 
Committee wrote to Mr. Koskinen's predecessor, Acting IRS 
Commissioner Daniel Werfel, to request ``[a]ll documents and 
communications sent by, received by, or copied to Lois Lerner'' 
from January 1, 2009 to the present.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \61\Letter from Hon. Darrell E. Issa, Chairman, H. Comm. on 
Oversight & Gov't Reform, to Daniel Werfel, Acting Commissioner, IRS, 
June 4, 2013.
    \62\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Because the IRS did not comply with the Committee's 
requests for information, on August 2, 2013, then-Chairman Issa 
issued a subpoena to Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew, as the 
custodian of IRS documents.\63\ Paragraph 1 on the subpoena 
schedule requested ``[a]ll communications sent or received by 
Lois Lerner, from January 1, 2009, to August 2, 2013.''\64\ The 
subpoena described eight discrete categories of documents to 
allow the IRS to identify and produce responsive documents in 
an efficient way.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \63\Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform Subpoena to Jacob Lew, Sec'y. 
Dep't of the Treasury (Aug. 2, 2013).
    \64\Id.
    \65\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On August 2, 2013, Acting Commissioner Werfel testified 
under oath regarding the IRS's effort to produce all of 
Lerner's emails to the Committee. He testified:

          Rep. JORDAN. So I just want to be clear then. Every 
        single email of Lois Lerner's that we have asked for, 
        you have sent to us?
          Mr. WERFEL. No. But we've provided hundreds of her 
        emails. But, again, this is a process.
          Rep. JORDAN. No, no, no, no, no, no. It's pretty 
        simple. You go to her computer and you get her emails.

    Eventually, Werfel committed to produce Lerner's emails. He 
testified:

          Rep. JORDAN. We have a specific request. We want 
        every bit of correspondence from Lois Lerner and you 
        won't give it to us. Here is the lady who broke the 
        story with the planted question. Here is the lady who 
        took the Fifth. Here is the lady who is at the center 
        of this storm. And we want every bit of email from her, 
        and you won't give it to us.
          Mr. WERFEL. I will tell you I'm committed to.
          Rep. JORDAN. And you have had 3 months to do it.
          Mr. WERFEL. I will tell you what we're committed to. 
        We're committed to reviewing every one of Lois Lerner's 
        emails, and providing the response.

    Acting Commissioner Werfel reiterated his commitment to 
produce Ms. Lerner's emails later during his testimony. He 
stated:

          Mr. WERFEL. Yeah, I know. A couple of other 
        responses. First, Lois Lerner's emails are on the top 
        of our list and we are working through it. But we're 
        also producing----
          Rep. JORDAN. That's not good enough. That's not. We 
        want them and we wanted them.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \66\Examining the Skyrocketing Problem of Identity Theft Related 
Tax Fraud at the IRS: Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Gov't Operations 
of the H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform, 113th Cong., at 81-83 
(2013) (testimony of Hon. Daniel Werfel, Principal Deputy Comm'r, 
Internal Revenue Serv.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Despite making the production of Ms. Lerner's emails the 
IRS's ``top'' priority, Mr. Werfel did not disclose there were 
problems with the preservation and collection of the entirety 
of Ms. Lerner's emails. In fact, contrary to Acting 
Commissioner Werfel's claim that the IRS was ``aggressively 
working to share, gather and provide information'' to the 
Committee, the agency continued to obstruct the Committee's 
investigation even after a new permanent commissioner was 
appointed.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \67\Letter from Hon. Daniel Werfel, Principal Deputy Comm'r, 
Internal Revenue Serv., to Hon. Darrell Issa, Chairman, H. Comm. on 
Oversight & Gov't Reform & Hon. Jim Jordan, Chairman, Subcomm. on 
Economic Growth, Job Creation, and Regulatory Affairs (Aug. 2, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Commissioner Koskinen's Obstruction of Congressional Investigations

    President Obama nominated John A. Koskinen to be the 
permanent IRS Commissioner on August 1, 2013.\68\ During his 
confirmation hearing, Koskinen pledged to cooperate with 
several congressional investigations examining the targeting 
scandal.\69\ He stated, ``[W]e will be transparent about any 
problems we run into; and the public and certainly this 
committee will know about those problems as soon as we 
do.''\70\ On December 23, 2013, John Koskinen was sworn in as 
the 48th IRS Commissioner.\71\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \68\The White House, Press Release, President Obama Announces His 
Intent to Nominate John Koskinen as Commissioner of the Internal 
Revenue Serv. (Aug. 1, 2013), available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/
the-press-office/2013/08/01/president-obama-announces-his-intent-
nominate-john-koskinen-commissioner (last visited July 31, 2014).
    \69\Nomination of John Koskinen: Hearing Before the S. Comm. on 
Finance, 113th Cong. (2013) (question and answer with Ranking Member 
Orrin Hatch). Mr. Koskinen's nomination makes clear his term expires on 
November 12, 2017.
    \70\Nomination of John Andrew Koskinen, to be Commissioner, 
Internal Revenue Service: Hearing Before the S. Comm. on Finance, 113th 
Cong. (2013).
    \71\Internal Revenue Serv., Commissioner John Koskinen, http://
www.irs.gov/uac/Commissioner-John-Koskinen (last visited July 31, 
2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Commissioner Koskinen was on notice from his earliest days 
in office regarding the need to preserve documents relevant to 
the IRS targeting scandal. When Commissioner Koskinen became 
the head of the agency, a Committee subpoena had been in place 
for more than four months, since August 2, 2013. The subpoena 
covered ``[a]ll communications sent or received by Lois Lerner, 
from January 1, 2009, to August 2, 2013.''\72\ The Committee 
reissued that subpoena to Commissioner Koskinen on February 14, 
2014, seven weeks after he was sworn in.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \72\H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform Subpoena to Jacob Lew, 
Sec'y, Dep't of the Treasury (Aug. 2, 2013).
    \73\H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform Subpoena to John Koskinen, 
Comm'r, Internal Revenue Serv. (Feb. 14, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The subpoena made clear the legal obligation for Mr. 
Koskinen, as the Commissioner of the IRS, to produce all eight 
categories of documents covered by the subpoena, including 
emails to and from Lois Lerner. Despite this, Mr. Koskinen 
failed to make the Committee aware that thousands of emails 
covered by the subpoena were missing.
    The chain of events that ultimately caused many of Ms. 
Lerner's emails to be unavailable to the Committee began in 
June 2011, when Ms. Lerner's computer crashed. On February 2, 
2014, Catherine Duval, Counselor to the Commissioner, noticed a 
massive gap in the batch of Ms. Lerner's emails that were being 
collected for production to the Committee.\74\ Ms. Duval 
noticed there were no custodial emails (emails extracted from 
Ms. Lerner's computers) from before 2011 because the hard drive 
that contained those messages crashed.\75\ Ms. Duval realized 
that emails from the period in question may have been 
recoverable on backup tapes and made an inquiry with the Office 
of the Chief Information Officer.\76\ Steven Manning, IRS's 
Deputy Chief Information Officer, informed Ms. Duval and Thomas 
Kane, a lawyer in the Chief Counsel's Office, that the IRS's 
``disaster recovery tapes'' (also called backup tapes) are 
reused every six months, and that the previous information is 
written over.\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \74\Transcribed interview of Thomas Kane, Deputy Assoc. Chief 
Counsel, Procedure & Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, Internal 
Revenue Serv. (July 17, 2014).
    \75\Id.; Letter from Leonard Oursler, Internal Revenue Serv., to 
Ron Wyden & Orrin Hatch, S. Comm. on Finance, encl. 3 at 6 (June 13, 
2014).
    \76\Transcribed interview of Thomas Kane, Deputy Assoc. Chief 
Counsel, Procedure & Administration, Office of Chief Counsel, Internal 
Revenue Serv. (July 17, 2014).
    \77\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    According to Commissioner Koskinen's own testimony at a 
hearing on July 23, 2014, he became aware that thousands of Ms. 
Lerner's emails were missing in February 2014, shortly after 
Ms. Duval and Mr. Kane learned backup tapes that might contain 
the missing emails are routinely overwritten.\78\ In fact, 
Commissioner Koskinen testified that Mr. Kane learning this 
information was tantamount to the entire agency being aware 
that Ms. Lerner's emails were missing. Commissioner Koskinen 
testified: ``If you told me now that Tom Kane said he knew in 
February, I would henceforth say we, as the IRS, knew in 
February.''\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \78\An Update on the IRS Response to Its Targeting Scandal: Hearing 
Before the H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform Subcomm. on Econ. 
Growth, Job Creation & Reg. Affairs, 113th Cong. (2014).
    \79\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Commissioner Koskinen--despite knowing that thousands of 
emails covered by a congressional subpoena were missing and in 
jeopardy of being permanently lost--took no meaningful action 
to retrieve them. And so, on March 4, 2014, IRS employees 
working the midnight shift at a facility in Martinsburg, West 
Virginia, magnetically erased 422 backup tapes that contained 
the missing Lerner emails.\80\ The backup tapes that were 
destroyed contained as many as 24,000 Lerner emails responsive 
to the subpoenas.\81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \80\Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, Report of 
Investigation: Exempt Organizations Data Loss 2 (June 30, 2015).
    \81\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Commissioner Koskinen did not reveal to Congress that 
thousands of Ms. Lerner's emails were missing until June 20, 
2014,\82\ despite a series of opportunities to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \82\``Recent Developments in the Committee's Investigation into the 
Internal Revenue Service's Use of Inappropriate Criteria to Process 
Applications of Tax-Exempt Organizations'': Hearing Before the H. Comm. 
on Ways & Means, 113th Cong. (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  A. COMMISSIONER KOSKINEN TESTIFIED THE AGENCY WOULD COMPLY WITH THE 
                          COMMITTEE'S SUBPOENA

    Rather than notify the Committee that thousands of emails 
covered by a subpoena were missing, Commissioner Koskinen 
devised a series of excuses for the IRS's inability to produce 
Ms. Lerner's emails. At a Committee hearing on March 26, 2014, 
Commissioner Koskinen blamed the scope of the subpoena for the 
IRS's failure to comply. He asserted the subpoena covered ``not 
thousands, but millions of documents.''\83\ Mr. Koskinen never 
mentioned that any IRS officials' emails were missing or 
destroyed. When asked specifically whether the IRS would 
respond to the subpoena, he responded that the agency would do 
so. He testified:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \83\Mar. 26, 2014 Hearing, supra note 3, at 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. You have a duly issued subpoena. Are 
        you or are you not going to provide this committee the 
        emails as indicated in this subpoena, yes or no?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. We have never said we weren't----
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. I am asking you yes or no.
          Mr. KOSKINEN. We are going to respond to the 
        subpoena----
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. No, no. Sir----
          Mr. KOSKINEN. Yes, we are going to respond to the 
        subpoena. I am just telling you to respond fully to the 
        subpoena, we are going to be at this for years, not 
        months.\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \84\Id. at 30 (testimony of John Koskinen, Comm'r, Internal Revenue 
Serv.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    During the same hearing, Commissioner Koskinen testified 
under oath that the IRS would produce all of Ms. Lerner's 
emails to the Committee.\85\ He stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \85\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. And I don't understand that. Just 
        specific to item one, Lois Lerner----
          Mr. KOSKINEN. Lois Lerner's emails----
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. Sir, are you or are you not going to 
        provide this committee all of Lois Lerner's emails?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. We are already starting----
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. Yes or----
          Mr. KOSKINEN. Yes, we will do that.\86\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \86\ Id.

    In a later exchange, Commissioner Koskinen again stated 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
that he would provide the subpoenaed documents.

          Rep. CUMMINGS. Well, reclaiming just for a second. I 
        just want us to be clear. I mean, time is precious, 
        money is precious. Just tell us. I mean, you talk about 
        relevance. You said if a lawyer were to see this 
        subpoena, they would have some concerns. I just want to 
        be clear. I mean, it sounds like, again, I am saying 
        what I said before, you seem to have an understanding 
        and we seem to have an understanding, and they don't 
        seem to be the same. So are you going to provide the 
        documents for Lois Lerner?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. Yes.
          Rep. CUMMINGS. That were subpoenaed.
          Mr. KOSKINEN. Yes.\87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \87\ Id. at 31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Like Acting Commissioner Werfel before him, Commissioner 
Koskinen promised to produce all of the emails Ms. Lerner sent 
or received during the period in question. At the hearing, Mr. 
Koskinen made no mention of the fact that the IRS did not 
possess thousands of emails responsive to the subpoenas.

     B. COMMISSIONER KOSKINEN'S SENIOR ADVISORS PROMISED TO COMPLY

    Following Commissioner Koskinen's testimony before the 
Committee, his senior advisors assured Committee staff the IRS 
would produce Ms. Lerner's emails. In a bipartisan staff 
meeting on April 4, 2014, two of Commissioner Koskinen's senior 
advisors, Catherine Duval and Leonard Oursler, discussed the 
IRS's response to the Committee's subpoena.\88\ Ms. Duval 
stated the IRS had identified and set aside all of Ms. Lerner's 
emails as part of its document production process.\89\ Neither 
Ms. Duval nor Mr. Oursler disclosed that the IRS had already 
destroyed a significant cache of Ms. Lerner's emails.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \88\Meeting between H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform Staff & 
Catherine Duval & Leonard Oursler, Internal Revenue Serv. (Apr. 4, 
2014).
    \89\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Commissioner Koskinen's False Claim that Key Evidence was Lost or 
                 Destroyed Prolonged the Investigation

    According to the IRS, Ms. Lerner's laptop computer crashed 
in June 2011. When technicians reviewed the hard drive after 
the crash, they determined the data on her hard drive was 
unrecoverable.\90\ An investigation by TIGTA concluded Ms. 
Lerner's hard drive most likely crashed on June 11, 2011, a 
Saturday. Efforts to determine who had access to Ms. Lerner's 
office at the time were unsuccessful because the security badge 
entry and exit logs from that day were also destroyed.\91\ 
Aaron Signor, an IRS IT specialist, initially examined Ms. 
Lerner's hard drive.\92\ Mr. Signor provided computer-related 
assistance to the EO Division. Mr. Signor removed the computer 
from Ms. Lerner's office and determined that a problem existed 
with the computer's hard drive.\93\ Mr. Signor attempted 
unsuccessfully to retrieve data from the hard drive before 
discarding it in a cardboard box containing roughly thirty 
other crashed drives.\94\ That was the extent of Mr. Signor's 
attempt to restore data on the hard drive and he closed the 
matter on June 21, 2011.\95\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \90\Letter from Leonard Oursler, Internal Revenue Serv., to Hon. 
Ron Wyden & Hon. Orrin Hatch, S. Comm. on Finance (June 13, 2014).
    \91\TIGTA report, supra note 4, at 9.
    \92\Transcribed interview of Aaron Signor, Internal Revenue Serv. 
(Aug. 1, 2014).
    \93\ Id.
    \94\ Id.
    \95\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In July or August 2011, Mr. Signor received a phone call 
from Lillie Wilburn, an IT manager, asking whether he still had 
Ms. Lerner's hard drive.\96\ She asked Mr. Signor to ship the 
hard drive to another technician for additional 
examination.\97\ John Minsek, a senior investigative analyst in 
the IRS's Criminal Investigations (CI) unit, eventually 
received Ms. Lerner's hard drive.\98\ Mr. Minsek understood the 
hard drive was from ``a computer of importance'' and there was 
a ``sense of urgency'' to recover data.\99\ Using the CI unit's 
digital forensic facilities, Mr. Minsek opened the hard drive 
and conducted additional tests.\100\ Once he opened the hard 
drive, Mr. Minsek noticed ``well-defined scoring creating a 
concentric circle in the proximity of the center of the 
disk.''\101\ According to Mr. Minsek, the scoring covered less 
than one percent of the surface of the disk.\102\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \96\ Id.
    \97\ Id.
    \98\Transcribed interview of John Minsek, Internal Revenue Serv. 
(July 24, 2014).
    \99\ Id.
    \100\ Id.
    \101\ Id.
    \102\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Following Mr. Minsek's examination, he determined he was 
unable to recover the data and returned the hard drive to the 
IRS's IT team.\103\ In a subsequent conversation with IRS IT 
personnel, Mr. Minsek raised the possibility the IRS could send 
Ms. Lerner's hard drive to a data recovery service, believing 
it was ``possible that they had techniques, methods, perhaps 
proprietary tools that I did not have.''\104\ Instead, Ms. 
Lerner's hard drive was sent to an IRS facility and recycled by 
an outside contractor.\105\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \103\ Id.
    \104\ Id.
    \105\Transcribed interview of Thomas Kane, Internal Revenue Serv. 
(July 17, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The destruction of Ms. Lerner's hard drive in June 2011 
occurred during a pivotal time in the IRS's targeting of 
conservatives. Just four months earlier, in February 2011, Ms. 
Lerner called the Tea Party applications ``very dangerous'' and 
ordered the cases undergo an unprecedented ``multi-tier'' 
review.\106\ In early June 2011, Ms. Lerner requested a copy of 
the tax-exempt application filed by the prominent conservative 
group Crossroads GPS for review by her senior technical 
advisor.\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \106\Email from Lois Lerner, Internal Revenue Serv., to Michael 
Seto, Internal Revenue Serv. (Feb. 1, 2011) [IRSR 161810].
    \107\Email from Holly Paz, Internal Revenue Serv., to Cindy Thomas, 
Internal Revenue Serv. (June 1, 2011) [IRSR 69914-15].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Witnesses testified Ms. Lerner stored a significant amount 
of information on her computer's hard drive. According to Mr. 
Signor, the IT technician who regularly serviced Ms. Lerner's 
computer, Ms. Lerner maintained a large volume of data on the 
hard drive of her computer.\108\ Mr. Signor recommended Ms. 
Lerner back up her data on a network server. He testified:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \108\Transcribed interview of Aaron Signor, Internal Revenue Serv. 
(Aug. 1, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Q. Do you recommend your end users to save data onto 
        the [network shared] drive?
          A. Yes.
          Q. That's something you do in the normal course of 
        your work?
          A. Yes.
    Despite that recommendation, Mr. Signor was told Ms. Lerner 
did not have the time or responsibility to save her data. Mr. 
Signor testified:
          Q. You stated at the onset of the last round that you 
        would recommend to end users that they back up their 
        work. Do you recall that?
          A. Yes.
          Q. Did you have occasion to make that recommendation 
        to Ms. Lerner prior to working on her laptop in the 
        summer of 2011?
          A. Yes.
          Q. When?
          A. There were probably several occasions between 2007 
        and 2011. I couldn't say exactly when.
          Q. Do you know in what context?
          A. It would have been in the context of another 
        ticket where I was working on her computer and maybe 
        noticed the volume of data and suggested it.
          Q. Do you have reason to know whether she followed 
        your suggestion or not?
          A. Yes.
          Q. What do you know?
          A. I was told that she didn't have backups at one 
        point.

    Mr. Signor later clarified the point further:

          Q. And when you say you told her about backups, what 
        exactly do you remember telling Ms. Lerner's assistant 
        about backups?
          A. There was one day where she and I were in Lois's 
        office. I can't remember if Lois was present or not. 
        But I had said, you know, ``Lois has plenty of data. We 
        really should get backups of her data.'' And her 
        response was, ``Well, I don't think that Lois has the 
        time to do it, and it's not her responsibility.'' 
        That's what was said, something--I'm not quoting 
        exactly, but something like that would have been 
        said.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \109\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On September 5, 2014, the IRS notified Congress it could 
not find emails from five other records custodians, in addition 
to Ms. Lerner.\110\ The IRS lost emails sent and received by 
Judy Kindell, Ms. Lerner's senior technical advisor and expert 
on non-profit political speech; Ronald Shoemaker, a Washington 
manager who oversaw work on the applications; and Julie Chen 
and Nancy Heagney, two Cincinnati-based Determinations 
Specialists.\111\ Some of the missing emails were sent and 
received during key periods of the IRS's targeting of 
conservative tax-exempt applicants. For instance, Judy 
Kindell's missing emails were from August 2010, when the IRS 
began to receive media inquiries related to the President's 
critical rhetoric of Citizens United and political speech by 
conservative non-profit groups. According to the IRS, Ms. 
Kindell was instructed to save old emails on her computer's 
hard drive and ``when her hard drive failed, she lost email 
that resided on that drive.''\112\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \110\Letter from Leonard Oursler, Internal Revenue Serv., to Hon. 
Dave Camp, Chairman, H. Comm. on Ways & Means (Sep. 5, 2014).
    \111\Id.
    \112\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In June 2011, after her emails were destroyed, Ms. Lerner 
emailed David Fish, who also experienced a hard drive failure. 
``No one will ever believe,'' she wrote, ``that both your hard 
drive and mine crashed within a week of each other!''\113\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \113\Email from Lois Lerner, Internal Revenue Serv., to David Fish 
& Nikole Flax, Internal Revenue Serv. (June 29, 2011) [IRSR 903314].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. COMMISSIONER KOSKINEN PROMISED TO PRODUCE LOIS LERNER'S EMAILS EVEN 
                    AFTER HE KNEW SOME WERE MISSING

    Commissioner Koskinen's continually evolving and misleading 
statements about Lois Lerner's emails compounded the challenges 
created by their destruction. For several months, Mr. 
Koskinen's unwillingness to provide accurate and 
straightforward information about the missing emails 
unnecessarily delayed and hindered the Committee's fact-finding 
efforts.
    On March 26, 2014, Commissioner Koskinen appeared before 
the Committee to testify about the IRS's compliance with 
congressional subpoenas and document requests.\114\ As 
described above, during the hearing, Mr. Koskinen was 
repeatedly asked whether he would commit to producing all of 
Ms. Lerner's emails. Commissioner Koskinen testified repeatedly 
that he would.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \114\Examining the IRS Response to the Targeting Scandal: Hearing 
Before the H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform, 113th Cong. (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee subsequently obtained testimony that the IRS 
knew Ms. Lerner's emails had been destroyed at the time of 
Commissioner Koskinen's appearance in March 2014. In 
particular, IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel, Thomas Kane--
who had responsibility for the IRS's document production 
process in response to congressional requests--testified that 
senior IRS leadership became aware of problems with Ms. 
Lerner's emails in early February 2014.\115\ Mr. Kane testified 
that on February 2, 2014, Catherine Duval, Counselor to the 
Commissioner, noticed a discrepancy in the number emails 
gathered from Ms. Lerner's account.\116\ The IRS had gathered 
16,000 emails from the period after April 2011 and ``less than 
100'' from the period before April 2011.\117\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \115\Transcribed interview of Thomas Kane, Internal Revenue Serv. 
(July 17, 2014).
    \116\Id.
    \117\Id.; Letter from Leonard Oursler, Internal Revenue Serv., to 
Hon. Ron Wyden, Chairman, & Hon. Orrin Hatch, Ranking Member, S. Comm. 
on Finance encl. 3 at 6 (June 13, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    After becoming aware of the discrepancy in the number of 
emails, Mr. Kane asked a subordinate, Paul Butler, to look into 
the matter.\118\ Two days later, on February 4, senior IRS 
leadership learned that Ms. Lerner's hard drive had crashed in 
2011 from her former administrative assistant, Dawn Marx.\119\ 
Mr. Kane testified:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \118\Transcribed interview of Thomas Kane, Internal Revenue Serv. 
(July 17, 2014).
    \119\Id.

          Q. And so do you remember precisely when you became 
        aware of the hard drive crash?
          A. We were--Paul Butler had talked to someone who 
        worked for Lois at about the time when the emails had a 
        great discrepancy and was told by her that there had 
        been a hard drive crash at that particular point in 
        time.
          Q. Do you know the name of the person that Mr. Butler 
        spoke with?
          A. Dawn Marx. Marx with an ``x.''

    Later, Mr. Kane testified:

          Q. Do you know, sir, when Ms. Marx informed Mr. 
        Butler about the hard drive crash?
          A. February 4th.
          Q. Of 2014?
          A. Correct.
          Q. And why does that date stand out to you in your 
        memory?
          A. The date stands out to me because we first found 
        out about it on February 2nd, and it was only 2 days 
        afterwards.

    When asked whether it took long to figure out what 
happened, Mr. Kane stated:

          A. It didn't take us long to figure out that it was 
        reported that there was a hard drive crash at or about 
        the time that the discrepancy in the emails took place.

    Once Mr. Kane discovered the crash, he communicated up the 
chain of command to Catherine Duval. Mr. Kane testified:

          Q. And upon learning on February 4th of the hard 
        drive crash, who did you communicate that to?

          A. That was relayed to Kate [Duval].
          Q. By who?
          A. I would have been the one to do it, yes.\120\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \120\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mr. Kane also told the Committee that senior IRS leadership 
became aware in mid-February 2014 that Ms. Lerner's hard drive 
had been recycled and any emails on the hard drive were 
``unrecoverable.'' Mr. Kane stated:

          Q. And do you recall when Mr. Butler gave you that 
        information, the hard drive had been recycled?
          A. I don't recall a specific date or time period, or 
        time, but it certainly would have been within the 
        period of time when he was actively interacting with 
        the IT people, in early to mid-February.\121\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \121\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mr. Kane also testified about the process that rendered the 
hard drive unrecoverable. He stated:

          Q. Do you have an understanding now as to what that 
        term, ``recycled,'' means?
          A. I do have some knowledge as to what happened to 
        the hard drive.
          Q. What happened to the hard drive?
          A. After the CI forensic analysis determined that it 
        was--that the material on it was unrecoverable, it was 
        returned to the IT people, who at some point in time 
        degaussed it to make sure that if there was anything 
        else on it, particularly from a 6103 perspective, that 
        it would not be recovered. It was then sent to New 
        Carrollton again. A lot of our IT functions are housed 
        out there, and they have a recycling function out there 
        where material is eventually recycled to an outside 
        contractor. And I have no idea what the outside 
        contractor does with these materials.\122\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \122\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    From mid-February 2014 to April 2014, the IRS attempted to 
recover some of the missing Ms. Lerner emails by other 
means.\123\ However, it is clear from Mr. Kane's testimony that 
the IRS knew no later than mid-February 2014 that a portion of 
Ms. Lerner's emails were missing. In fact, Commissioner 
Koskinen acknowledged during a July 23, 2014 hearing: ``If you 
told me now that Tom Kane said he knew in February, I would 
henceforth say we, as the IRS, knew in February.''\124\ 
Moreover, Mr. Koskinen himself stated that he personally knew 
about problems with Ms. Lerner's emails in February. 
Commissioner Koskinen testified:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \123\Id.
    \124\An Update on the IRS Response to Its Targeting Scandal: 
Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Econ. Growth, Job Creation & Reg. 
Affairs of the H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform, 113th Cong. 
(2014).

          Rep. DeSANTIS. So if the senior IRS officials knew in 
        mid-February that the emails could not be recovered off 
        the hard drive, why did you tell this committee that 
        you would produce them?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. As I have testified before, when I 
        testified at previous hearings, when I testified in 
        March, I said we would provide all Lois Lerner emails, 
        as I have also testified since then. I did not mean to 
        imply that if they didn't exist, we would somehow 
        magically provide them. We have provided you all the 
        Lois Lerner emails we have.
          With regard to when officials at the IRS knew the 
        impact of the hard drive crash, as I have testified 
        several times in the 11 hours of hearings since June 
        13th, what I was advised and knew in February was that 
        when you took the emails that had already been provided 
        to this committee and other investigators, and, instead 
        of looking at them by search terms, looked at them by 
        date, it was clear that there were fewer emails in the 
        period up through 2011 and subsequently. And there was 
        also, I was told, there had been a problem with Ms. 
        Lerner's computer. It was not described to me in any 
        greater detail than that.\125\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \125\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Despite knowing about the missing emails in February, 
Commissioner Koskinen failed to mention anything during his 
sworn testimony on March 26, 2014.\126\ Instead, he promised 
the Committee the IRS would produce all of Ms. Lerner's emails. 
In addition, Counselor to the Commissioner, Catherine Duval, 
and the IRS's National Director for Legislative Affairs, 
Leonard Oursler, failed to mention any problems with Ms. 
Lerner's emails during a meeting with bipartisan Committee 
staff on April 4, 2014.\127\ Ms. Duval requested this meeting 
specifically to discuss how the IRS would execute the 
Commissioner's promise to produce the subpoenaed Lerner emails, 
but did not use this opportunity to inform the Committee of any 
issues related to Ms. Lerner's emails.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \126\Id.
    \127\Meeting between Committee staff and Catherine Duval & Leonard 
Oursler, Internal Revenue Serv. (Apr. 4, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Even when the IRS finally acknowledged the missing emails 
on June 13, 2014, it failed to provide full and complete 
information to the Committee. First, the IRS stated it 
``confirmed'' that backup tapes from the relevant period had 
been destroyed.\128\ Commissioner Koskinen repeated this 
information during his sworn testimony to the House Committee 
on Ways and Means on June 20, 2014. He testified:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \128\Letter from Leonard Oursler, Internal Revenue Serv., to Hon. 
Ron Wyden, Chairman, & Hon. Orrin Hatch, Ranking Member, S. Comm. on 
Finance encl. 3 (June 13, 2014).

          In light of the hard-drive issue, the IRS took 
        multiple steps over the past months to assess the 
        situation and produce as much email as possible for 
        which Ms. Lerner was an author or recipient. We 
        retraced the collection process for her emails. We 
        located, processed and included email from an unrelated 
        2011 data collection for Ms. Lerner. We confirmed that 
        backup tapes from 2011 no longer existed because they 
        have been recycled, pursuant to the IRS normal policy. 
        We searched email from other custodians for material on 
        which Ms. Lerner appears as author or recipient.\129\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \129\Recent Developments in the Committee's Investigation into the 
Internal Revenue Service's Use of Inappropriate Criteria to Process 
Applications of Tax-Exempt Organizations: Hearing Before the H. Comm. 
on Ways & Means, 113th Cong. (2014) (statement of John Koskinen, IRS 
Commissioner).

    Commissioner Koskinen later defended his claim that he 
confirmed these backup tapes were destroyed. In a July 2014 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
hearing before the Committee, he testified:

          Rep. GOWDY. What does the word ``confirmed'' mean to 
        you?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. Confirmed means that somebody went back 
        and looked and made sure that in fact any backup tapes 
        that had existed had been recycled.\130\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \130\An Update on the IRS Response to Its Targeting Scandal: 
Hearing Before the Subcomm. on Econ. Growth, Job Creation & Reg. 
Affairs of the H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform, 113th Cong. 
(2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Confirmation, by Mr. Koskinen's or any definition, never 
occurred. TIGTA was able to establish that several backup tapes 
from this timeframe had not, in fact, been recycled. Moreover, 
Commissioner Koskinen did not divulge in June 2014 that the 
normal policy had not applied since May 22, 2013. In fact, Mr. 
Koskinen withheld from Congress that a notice to preserve 
backup tapes had been in place for over a year and that the IRS 
had deleted backup tapes containing as many as 24,000 emails 
during that time.\131\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \131\ Email from Terrance Milholland, Internal Revenue Serv. to 
Lauren Buschor, Karen Freeman, Daniel Chaddock, David Stender, and Anne 
Shepherd, (carbon copy to Stephen Manning, Gina Garza, Tracey Babcock, 
and Kathleen Walters, Internal Revenue Serv.) (May 22, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Commissioner Koskinen also testified the IRS went to 
``great lengths'' to recover Ms. Lerner's emails. He stated:

          Rep. McDERMOTT. Is there anything you can see in the 
        time that you've been there that they didn't--that the 
        IRS did not do to try and get all?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. There's no indication. I have said, 
        we've gone to great lengths. We've retraced the process 
        for producing her email twice just to make sure that no 
        email was missing. We understand the importance of this 
        investigation. We've gone to great lengths to spend a 
        significant amount of money trying to make sure that 
        there is no email that is required that has not been 
        produced.\132\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \132\IRS Commissioner John Koskinen: Hearing Before the H. Comm on 
Ways and Means, 113th Cong. (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee subsequently learned that, contrary to 
Commissioner Koskinen's assertions, some backup material did 
exist. TIGTA informed the Committee on July 29, 2014, that at 
least some backup tapes were not overwritten by the IRS.\133\ 
TIGTA also told the Committee it located Microsoft Exchange 
server drives from the relevant period the IRS had not searched 
because it was under the mistaken belief the drives had been 
destroyed.\134\ The IRS never bothered to determine whether the 
drives had in fact been destroyed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \133\Conference call between Treasury Inspector Gen. for Tax Admin. 
and Cong. Staff (July 29, 2014).
    \134\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Additionally, Steven Manning, the Deputy Chief Information 
Officer at the IRS from 2009 until March 2015, stated that the 
IRS made no effort to recover information from the backup 
tapes. Mr. Manning was the point person on issues related to 
the IT component of e-discovery. He testified:

          Q. Did the Commissioner ever ask for the backup tapes 
        to be forensically examined?
          A. Not to me. Not that I recall--not to me.\135\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \135\Transcribed interview of Steven Manning, Internal Revenue 
Serv., in Wash., D.C. (April 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    For four months, from February 2014 to June 2014, 
Commissioner Koskinen withheld vital information about the 
IRS's ability to comply with the Committee's subpoena for all 
of Ms. Lerner's emails. Even after claiming Ms. Lerner's emails 
were missing, Commissioner Koskinen continued to provide 
incomplete and misleading information about the IRS's efforts 
to recover them. As recently as September 12, 2014, Mr. 
Koskinen insisted Ms. Lerner's emails were permanently missing. 
In a letter to Subcommittee on Economic Growth, Job Creation, 
and Regulatory Affairs Chairman Jim Jordan regarding whether 
Ms. Lerner's emails might be recoverable from backup tapes 
maintained by the IRS, Commissioner Koskinen wrote: ``We have 
seen no indication that any email data from the June 2011 
timeline exists or is accessible on these [backup] 
tapes.''\136\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \136\Letter from John Koskinen, Internal Revenue Serv., to Rep. Jim 
Jordan, Chairman, Subcomm. on Economic Growth, Job Creation, and 
Regulatory Affairs (Sep. 12, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This statement by Commissioner Koskinen was false. On 
November 21, 2014, TIGTA notified congressional investigators 
that it located a significant portion of Ms. Lerner's 
``missing'' emails.\137\ TIGTA found the emails among hundreds 
of ``disaster recovery tapes'' that were used to back up the 
IRS email system.\138\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \137\Rachel Bade, Thousands of lost Lois Lerner IRS emails found by 
IG, POLITICO, Nov. 23, 2014.
    \138\Susan Ferrechio, 30,000 missing emails from IRS' Lerner 
recovered, WASH. EXAMINER, Nov. 22, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

         B. THE COMMITTEE LEARNED LOIS LERNER'S EMAILS ARE LOST

    Following months of noncompliance with the Committee's 
subpoenas, the IRS finally informed Congress on June 13, 2014 
that it had lost a portion of Ms. Lerner's emails. The IRS 
cited a hard drive crash in 2011 as the cause for the 
loss.\139\ The apparent hard drive crash compromised Ms. 
Lerner's emails from January 2009 to April 2011, a time period 
critical to the Committee's investigation.\140\ Four days 
later, the IRS contacted Congress again, this time to explain 
that it had also lost the emails of other IRS officials. All 
were relevant figures in the Committee's investigation.\141\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \139\Letter from Leonard Oursler, Nat'l Dir. for Legislative 
Affairs, Internal Revenue Serv., to Hon. Ron Wyden, Chairman, S. Comm. 
on Finance & Hon. Orrin Hatch, Ranking Member, S. Comm. on Finance 
(June 13, 2014), encl. 3, at 7 (carbon copy to Hon. Darrell Issa, 
Chairman, H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform) [hereinafter June 13, 
2014 Letter].
    \140\Id.
    \141\Rachael Bade, GOP: IRS Lost More Emails in Tea Party Affair, 
POLITICO, June 17, 2014 [hereinafter Bade, IRS Lost More Emails].
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The chain of events that eventually led the IRS to disclose 
the missing emails began on April 23, 2014, when the Committee 
wrote to the Justice Department about a new revelation that 
Richard Pilger, Director of the Justice Department's Election 
Crimes Branch, spoke with Ms. Lerner about coordinating with 
the IRS to prosecute tax-exempt applicants.\142\ The 
Committee's letter included a request for ``[a]ll documents and 
communications between or among Lois Lerner and employees of 
the Department of Justice for the period of January 1, 2009, 
through the present.''\143\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \142\Letter from Members, H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform, to 
Hon. Eric Holder, Attorney Gen., U.S. Dep't of Justice (Apr. 23, 2014) 
[hereinafter Apr. 23, 2014 Letter]; Email from Richard Pilger, Dir., 
Election Crimes Branch, U.S. Dep't of Justice, to Lois G. Lerner, 
Internal Revenue Serv. (May 8, 2013). [IRSR 209188].
    \143\Apr. 23, 2014 Letter, supra note 138.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On May 20, 2014, the Committee subpoenaed the Justice 
Department for the documents described in the April 23, 2014 
letter.\144\ A May 28, 2014 production from the Justice 
Department included additional emails sent between Mr. Pilger 
and Ms. Lerner.\145\ These emails were not contained in any 
prior document production from the IRS to the Committee. After 
the Committee obtained emails that demonstrated the IRS's 
production of emails in response to the subpoena was 
incomplete, the IRS came clean.\146\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \144\Subpoena from H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform to Hon. 
Eric Holder, Attorney Gen., U.S. Dep't of Justice (May 20, 2014).
    \145\Letter from Peter J. Kadzik, Principal Deputy Asst. Attorney 
Gen., U.S. Dep't of Justice, to Hon. Darrell Issa, Chairman, H. Comm. 
on Oversight & Gov't Reform (May 28, 2014).
    \146\June 13, 2014 Letter, supra note 133.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Late in the afternoon on Friday, June 13, 2014, the IRS 
notified Congress that due to a hard drive crash, Lois Lerner's 
emails to and from other IRS employees from January 2009 to 
April 2011 were missing.\147\ According to the IRS, because Ms. 
Lerner's hard drive had crashed in mid-2011, an unknown number 
of federal records were permanently destroyed.\148\ The IRS, 
therefore, was unable to recover the emails Ms. Lerner sent and 
received during that key period. This admission was the first 
time that the IRS gave any indication it did not possess all of 
Ms. Lerner's emails covered by the subpoena. The White House 
and Treasury Department learned that Ms. Lerner's emails were 
missing months earlier.\149\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \147\Id.
    \148\Id.
    \149\IRS Obstruction: Lois Lerner's Missing Emails, Part I: Hearing 
Before the H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform, 113th Cong., at 170 
(June 23, 2014) (question and answer with Rep. Jordan) [hereinafter 
June 23, 2014 Hearing]; Josh Hicks, IRS Email Controversy Continues 
this Week with Two Hearings, WASH. POST, June 23, 2014; Rachel Bade, 
IRS Chief Defiant on Lois Lerner Email Loss, POLITICO, June 20, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In written testimony submitted to the Committee in advance 
of a June 23, 2014 hearing, Commissioner Koskinen explained 
that IRS officials first discovered the possibility that Ms. 
Lerner's computer may have malfunctioned in February 2014 when 
gathering emails responsive to congressional requests.\150\ It 
was at this point that IRS officials first noticed a 
discrepancy in the distribution of the dates on her 
emails.\151\ According to testimony obtained from Thomas Kane, 
IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel for Procedure and 
Administration, senior IRS leadership first became concerned 
about the possibility that Ms. Lerner's emails were missing on 
February 2, 2014, and confirmed that her hard drive had crashed 
just two days later.\152\ IRS officials then briefed 
Commissioner Koskinen in February about this issue.\153\ 
Commissioner Koskinen testified in June 2014 that IRS 
Information Technology professionals ``learned additional facts 
regarding Lerner's computer crash in mid-2011'' during a search 
for Ms. Lerner emails in mid-March 2014.\154\ Commissioner 
Koskinen's written and oral testimony not only indicate that 
IRS employees knew about a potential problem with Ms. Lerner's 
computer at least four months before telling Congress, but also 
before Commissioner Koskinen's March 26, 2014 testimony before 
the Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \150\H. Comm. on Oversight & Gov't Reform, Written Testimony of 
John A. Koskinen, Comm'r, Internal Revenue Serv. (June 23, 2014), at 2 
[hereinafter Koskinen Written Testimony, June 23, 2014].
    \151\Id.
    \152\Kane Tr. at 45.
    \153\June 23, 2014 Hearing, supra note 143, at 38 (question and 
answer with Rep. Mica).
    \154\Bade, IRS Chief Defiant, supra note 135.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Despite receiving questions during the Committee's March 
26, 2014 hearing directly pertaining to the collection of Ms. 
Lerner's emails, Commissioner Koskinen assured Members that the 
IRS ``was already starting'' to gather Ms. Lerner's emails--
never mentioning the possibility that any of her emails were 
irretrievable.\155\ Commissioner Koskinen testified under oath 
that the IRS would respond to the subpoena, again failing to 
mention the possibility that some documents covered by the 
subpoena were lost.\156\ Months later, however, during 
testimony before the Committee, Commissioner Koskinen admitted 
that at the time of the Committee's March 26, 2014 hearing, 
``he knew there'd been a problem'' with Ms. Lerner's 
emails.\157\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \155\Mar. 26, 2014 Hearing, supra note 3, at 30.
    \156\Id.
    \157\June 23, 2014 Hearing, supra note 143, at 31 (question and 
answer with Chairman Issa).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

  C. COMMISSIONER KOSKINEN FAILED TO DISCLOSE KNOWLEDGE OF ADDITIONAL 
                           HARD DRIVE CRASHES

    On June 17, 2014--four days after the IRS admitted that an 
unknown number of Ms. Lerner's emails were lost--the agency 
informed Congress that it was not able to produce emails for 
other key officials at the center of the Committee's 
investigation.\158\ Specifically, the IRS informed Congress 
that six more employees' hard drives failed, causing the agency 
to lose emails for officials who were central to the IRS 
targeting investigation.\159\ Commissioner Koskinen later 
adjusted the number of affected employees to eight.\160\ Even 
more troubling, the IRS remained unsure if additional 
employees' hard drives crashed, raising questions as to the 
extent to which the Committee received all emails relevant to 
its investigation.\161\ Commissioner Koskinen testified before 
the Committee that the IRS is ``still looking'' into whether 
additional hard drives crashed, and that he is unaware as to 
``what the final number will be.''\162\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \158\Bade, IRS Lost More Emails, supra note 135.
    \159\Id.
    \160\Koskinen Written Testimony, June 23, 2014, supra note 144, at 
4.
    \161\Bade, IRS Chief Defiant, supra note 135.
    \162\June 23, 2014 Hearing, supra note 143, at 137 (question and 
answer with Rep. Chaffetz).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The IRS apparently lost emails for Supervisory Public 
Affairs Specialist Michelle Eldridge, Agent Kimberly Kitchens, 
Agent Julie Chen, Supervisory Agent Tyler Chumny, and Agent 
Nancy Heagney.\163\ According to the IRS, the missing data for 
seven of the eight officials came from the period under 
investigation.\164\ The IRS explained that it relied on 
employees to archive emails themselves on their personal 
computers, rather than preserving records by automatically 
backing up emails or by other means.\165\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \163\Bade, IRS Lost More Emails, supra note 135.
    \164\Id.; Koskinen Written Testimony, June 23, 2014, supra note 
144, at 4.
    \165\Bade, IRS Lost More Emails, supra note 135.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Despite the Committee's frequent, ongoing correspondence 
with the IRS regarding its document productions pursuant to the 
Committee's subpoena, the IRS never mentioned--until thirteen 
months after the Committee's initial document request--the 
possibility that it would not fully produce Lois Lerner's 
emails or those of any other IRS official.
    Even when asked directly whether there were any other 
anomalies in the data retrieval for the Committee's requests, 
Commissioner Koskinen testified that he was not aware of any. 
He testified:

          Rep. MASSIE. And what I want to ask you now is: Are 
        there any other anomalies in the data or in the 
        retrieval of emails that you can think of now so we can 
        avoid having a second hearing on this in 6 months?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. That's a fair question, a good 
        question. I'm not aware of any.
          Rep. MASSIE. Okay. So there's nothing like somebody 
        came to you----
          Mr. KOSKINEN. Other than we're pursuing the other 
        custodians.
          Rep. MASSIE. Right. The other eight hard drives that 
        have crashed.
          Mr. KOSKINEN. Right. That's what we knew last week. 
        We're still looking. I don't know what the final number 
        will be.
          Rep. MASSIE. Okay. So you understood my question?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. I understand your question.
          Rep. MASSIE. A hint of bad news that was similar to 
        the bad news we had in February, I'm asking you to just 
        share it now.
          Mr. KOSKINEN. And I've said I do not know of any 
        other bad news, as you put it.\166\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \166\June 23, 2014 Hearing, supra note 143, at 136-37 (question and 
answer with Rep. Massie).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee later learned, however, that the IRS became 
aware of additional hard drive crashes one week before the June 
23, 2014 hearing. During a transcribed interview with Committee 
staff, Thomas Kane, the IRS Deputy Associate Chief Counsel for 
Procedure and Administration, testified that the IRS learned of 
as many as twenty additional hard drive crashes on June 16, 
2014. Commissioner Koskinen, however, failed to disclose the 
extent of these additional crashes, or that there were 
complications of any kind with respect to the agency's efforts 
to comply with the Committee's subpoenas. Mr. Kane testified:

          Q. Sir, according to a news report, there were hard 
        drive failures from other IRS custodians; is that 
        right?
          A. Yes. There were--well, there are--were identified 
        potential hard drive problems, yes.\167\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \167\Kane Tr. at 165.

    Mr. Kane later testified that he became aware of the 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
additional hard drive failures on June 16, 2014. He testified:

          Q. And, sir, when did you personally become aware of 
        those other hard drive problems?
          A. On the Monday morning before that that first 
        briefing took place.
          Q. The briefing with Ways and Means?
          A. Yes.
          Q. So June 16?
          A. That's right. I believe it was on Monday 
        morning.\168\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \168\Id. at 165-66.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mr. Kane further testified:

          Q. Do you know how many custodians, in addition to 
        the seven or eight identified at Ways and Means?
          A. I don't recall the exact number. It was less than 
        20, and again, some of these people were identified 
        without any--these people were identified without any 
        real investigation as to knowing, you know, what was 
        reported or why and what the consequences of anything 
        that may have been wrong.\169\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \169\Id. at 169.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mr. Kane explained that the IRS officials whose hard drives 
crashed included Andy Megosh, a group manager in EO Guidance, 
Kimberly Kitchens, an IRS revenue agent in Cincinnati, Justin 
Lowe, the Technical Advisor to the Commissioner of Tax-Exempt 
and Government Entities, and David Fish, Manager of EO 
Guidance--all relevant figures to the Committee's inquiry.\170\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \170\Id. at 172.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    When Commissioner Koskinen appeared before the Committee on 
June 23, 2014, he had a responsibility to provide a candid 
account of the additional hard drive crashes and whether the 
crashes could interfere with the agency's ability to respond to 
the subpoenas. Commissioner Koskinen's testimony that there 
were no other anomalies in the data collection indicates that 
he failed to fully disclose to the Committee all of the details 
the IRS knew at that time about the extent of the additional 
hard drive crashes.

    D. THE IRS MADE NO EFFORT TO RECOVER LOIS LERNER'S EMAIL ARCHIVE

    Commissioner Koskinen testified that in 2011, the IRS 
maintained a disaster recovery system designed to back up 
computer contents for six months.\171\ During a June 23, 2014 
Committee hearing, Commissioner Koskinen explained that the IRS 
made no effort to recover Ms. Lerner's email archive from the 
six-month backups after she initially detected problems with 
her computer in June 2011.\172\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \171\June 23, 2014 Hearing, supra note 133, at 92-93 (question and 
answer with Rep. Chaffetz).
    \172\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    When the IRS informed Congress of Ms. Lerner's hard drive 
crash, the agency stated that IT professionals tried ``multiple 
processes to recover the information stored on her computer's 
hard drive,'' but the ``hard drive was determined at the time 
to be unrecoverable by the IT professionals.''\173\ IT 
professionals, however, never attempted to recover her emails 
from the backup tapes.\174\ According to Commissioner Koskinen, 
the IRS failed to pursue recovery because it was 
``costly.''\175\ He testified:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \173\June 13, 2014 Letter, supra note 133.
    \174\Id.
    \175\June 23, 2014 Hearing, supra note 143, at 93 (question and 
answer with Rep. Chaffetz).

          Rep. CHAFFETZ. Thank the chairman. My understanding 
        is that the backup of emails was only--only lasted for 
        6 months. Is that correct?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. Yes. It's actually a disaster recovery 
        system, and it backs up for 6 months in case the entire 
        system goes down.
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. And that was in place in 2011?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. That was the rule in 2011, policy.
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. So when Lois Lerner figured out on 
        June 13 that her computer crashed and you've--there 
        have been emails showing that she was going to great 
        lengths to try to get that recovered, why didn't they 
        just go to that 6-month tape?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. Because that 6-month tape is a disaster 
        recovery tape that has all of the emails on it and is a 
        very complicated tape to actually extract emails for. 
        But I have not seen any emails to explain why they 
        didn't do it. So I--it would be difficult, but I don't 
        know why they didn't.
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. But you said that the IRS was going to 
        extraordinary lengths to give it to the recovery team.
          Mr. KOSKINEN. That's correct. That's correct.
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. But it's back up on tape?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. For 6 months. Yes.
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. And that was within the 6-month 
        window. So why didn't you get them off the backup?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. All I know about that is that the 
        backup tapes are computer recovery tapes that put 
        everything in one lump and extracting individual emails 
        out of that is very costly and difficult and it was not 
        the policy at the time.
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. Did anybody try?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. I have no idea--indication that they 
        did.
          Rep. CHAFFETZ. So you have multiple emails showing 
        that she was trying to recover this. The testimony of 
        the IRS that they were trying desperately--in fact, you 
        got a forensic team to try to extract this. You went to 
        great lengths. You made a big point over the last week 
        about all the efforts you were going through. But they 
        were backed up on tape and you didn't do it?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. As far as I know, they did not. But 
        they did have, as I noted in the email, she had 3 
        months' worth of emails at that time going from April--
        or 2 months from April to--\176\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \176\Id. at 92-93.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Despite the IRS's policy in 2011 to retain six-month backup 
tapes of the contents of employees' computers, IT professionals 
apparently neglected to use all available resources at that 
time to retrieve Ms. Lerner's emails, including forgoing any 
attempt to recover her emails from the agency's own disaster 
recovery system.

 E. COMMISSIONER KOSKINEN'S MISLEADING STATEMENTS THAT NO BACKUP TAPES 
                                 EXIST

    Subsequently, the Committee learned that contrary to 
Commissioner Koskinen's assertions, some backup material did 
exist. TIGTA informed the Committee on July 29, 2014, that at 
least some backup tapes were not overwritten by the IRS.\177\ 
TIGTA also told the Committee it located Microsoft Exchange 
server drives from the relevant period, and that the IRS had 
not searched those drives because agency staff were under the 
mistaken belief the drives had been destroyed.\178\ The IRS 
never bothered to determine whether this was true.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \177\Conference call between Treasury Inspector Gen. for Tax Admin. 
and Cong. Staff (July 29, 2014).
    \178\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In fact, TIGTA located a number of backup tapes that 
yielded some emails within fifteen days. Timothy Camus, the 
TIGTA Deputy Inspector General for Investigations, testified:

          Rep. CHAFFETZ. Start to finish, how long did it take 
        for you to find the tapes when you started in June? I 
        believe it was June of 2014.
          Mr. CAMUS. Correct. We took possession of--740--the 
        initial set of backup tapes on July 1, roughly 15 days 
        after we started our investigation.\179\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \179\IRS: TIGTA Update Part II: Hearing Before the H. Comm on 
Oversight and Gov. Reform, 114th Cong. (2015).

    Had the IRS taken immediate steps to locate backup tapes 
concurrent with the discovery of the gap in Ms. Lerner emails 
in February 2014, tapes containing up to 24,000 emails may not 
have been destroyed on March 4, 2014.

       1. POOR IRS LEADERSHIP LED TO DESTRUCTION OF BACKUP TAPES

    The IRS information technology department records backups 
incrementally on a daily basis, with a full backup performed 
weekly.\180\ Before May 2013, the IRS reused and recycled 
backup tapes every six months as a cost saving measure.\181\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \180\TIGTA report, supra note 4, at 12.
    \181\Id. at 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On May 22, 2013, the IRS Chief Technology Officer Terence 
Milholland sent an email directive to senior staff ordering the 
preservation of electronic email media indefinitely.\182\ That 
email, titled ``Information Retention Policy Revision,'' 
changed the previous policy of keeping backup tapes only for 
six months.\183\ Mr. Milholland's order stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \182\ Email from Terrance Milholland, Internal Revenue Serv., to 
Lauren Buschor, Karen Freeman, Daniel Chaddock, David Stender, and Anne 
Shepherd, (carbon copy to Stephen Manning, Gina Garza, Tracey Babcock, 
and Kathleen Walters, Internal Revenue Serv.) (May 22, 2013).
    \183\TIGTA report, supra note 4, at 4.

          Given the current environment and ongoing 
        investigations, do not destroy/wipe-reuse and of the 
        existing backup tapes for email, or archiving of other 
        information from IRS personal computers. Further, do 
        not reuse or refresh or wipe information from any 
        personal computer that is being reclaimed/returned/
        refreshed/updated from any employee or contractor of 
        the IRS. Finally, effective immediately, the email 
        retention policy for backups is to be indefinite rather 
        than 6 months.\184\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \184\Email from Terrance Milholland, Internal Revenue Serv., to 
Lauren Buschor, Karen Freeman, Daniel Chaddock, David Stender, and Anne 
Shepherd, (carbon copy to Stephen Manning, Gina Garza, Tracey Babcock, 
and Kathleen Walters, Internal Revenue Serv.) (May 22, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mr. Milholland continued: ``In other words, retain 
everything to do with email or information that may have been 
stored locally on a personal computer.''\185\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \185\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In an interview with TIGTA, Mr. Milholland stated he was 
``blown away'' at the revelation that backup tapes were 
degaussed in March 2014, ten months after he issued this 
directive.\186\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \186\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Despite the need to preserve documents for the ongoing 
investigations by Congress, the Department of Justice, and 
TIGTA, IRS senior leadership made no effort to ensure the IRS 
IT department and lower level personnel understood the impact 
of, or complied with, the preservation order. Commissioner 
Koskinen was made aware of the existence of the preservation 
order shortly after his appointment as IRS Commissioner.\187\ 
Yet, he did nothing to ensure that his staff complied. He 
neither reissued it nor sent out an email reminding IRS 
personnel of its importance. In fact, he took no action of any 
kind with respect to the order. When asked by TIGTA if the 
email directive was sufficient, Mr. Koskinen acknowledged the 
matter ``probably could have been handled differently.''\188\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \187\Id at 1272.
    \188\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Commissioner Koskinen repeatedly missed opportunities to 
ensure compliance with the preservation order. Mr. Koskinen 
failed to raise the issue in February 2014 upon learning of the 
gap in emails; he failed to ensure that the Media Management 
Midnight Unit (the team that destroyed the backup tapes) 
properly understood the order; and failed to make certain that 
individuals who ordered the destruction of the specific media, 
in this instance the backup tapes, properly understood the 
preservation order.\189\ Mr. Camus testified:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \189\Id. at 16.

          Rep. WALBERG. So based on your investigation, what 
        efforts did the IRS, Terry Milholland or anyone else, 
        make to ensure that the CTO's email notice to cease 
        routine destruction of electronic records was actually 
        followed by low-level employees?
          Mr. CAMUS.There is very much confusion, and I'm not 
        certain there was appropriate management oversight of 
        that directive.\190\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \190\AIRS: TIGTA Update Part II: Hearing Before the H. Comm on 
Oversight and Gov. Reform, 114th Cong. (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In February 2014, upon learning that emails may be missing, 
the IRS should have investigated whether backup tapes existed, 
and whether the instruction not to destroy documents was 
properly understood and executed throughout the agency. 
Counselor to the Commissioner, Catherine Duval, testified her 
first reaction upon discovering the gap in the Ms. Lerner 
production on February 2, 2014, was to revisit the preservation 
order. During a transcribed interview, Ms. Duval testified:

          Q. Now, Mr. Kane testified before us that you first 
        noticed a discrepancy in the number of Lois Lerner 
        emails in early February 2014. Is that right?
          A. I came into the office, confess something now. I 
        came into the office on Super Bowl Sunday instead of 
        watching the Super Bowl. That's my confession. At that 
        time, I looked at a list of the Lois Lerner emails that 
        had been produced to Congress. And in looking at that, 
        I saw a disproportionate distribution of dates.
          Q. Okay. What was your reaction?
          A. My reaction was the next day I talked to the IT 
        people and other folks in the Office of Chief Counsel 
        about the need to look for backup tapes from the 
        relevant time period, to secure Ms. Lerner's laptop, to 
        do a quality control check on the document preservation 
        and collection process. And to learn what we could 
        learn about that.\191\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \191\Transcribed interview of Catherine Duval, Internal Revenue 
Serv. (July 31, 2014).

    Despite her instinct to confirm agency-wide compliance with 
the document preservation order, it does not appear that 
occurred. Had Ms. Duval taken action, the destruction of the 
backup tapes would have halted. When TIGTA investigated the 
missing emails, however, the gross mismanagement of the 
preservation notice came to light. TIGTA found a breakdown in 
communications following Mr. Milholland's email directive 
resulted in the failure to preserve backup tapes. Had IRS 
managers taken simple steps to ensure compliance with the 
order, the tapes likely would not have been destroyed.
    At any point between May 2013 and March 4, 2014, Mr. 
Koskinen could have confirmed the preservation order was 
properly distributed to those whose job it is to destroy backup 
tapes, hard drives, and other media. The Media Management 
Midnight Unit, the team that destroyed the backup tapes, failed 
to understand the scope of the preservation order. IRS 
leadership should have ensured these individuals in particular 
knew that backup tapes were not to be destroyed.
    Robert Lyewsang, an IT specialist at the IRS, told TIGTA he 
never received a copy of the preservation order, nor did anyone 
in his chain of command explain the need to preserve the backup 
tapes. Because of this, he sent the Form 3210 to the Media 
Management Midnight Team formally authorizing the destruction 
of the backup tapes.\192\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \192\Id. at 964, 967.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Mr. Lyewsang authorized the destruction of the tapes 
because Steve Warren, the manager of IT backup equipment 
nationwide, told him the tapes were not needed and the room 
where they were located needed to be cleaned out. Mr. Warren 
told Mr. Lyewsang the agency no longer needed the backup tapes 
sometime in the fall of 2013.\193\ Mr. Lyewsang told TIGTA that 
the IRS wanted to remodel the space to house a new network 
operations center, and he was being pressured to move the 
backup tapes.\194\ Mr. Lyewsang's intern testified under oath 
about the disorganized cleaning process, specifically that the 
room in question had been a year overdue for clearing out to 
reduce computer space.\195\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \193\Id. at 963.
    \194\Id.
    \195\Id. at 1202.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As Commissioner Koskinen acknowledged, verifying that IRS 
employees understood the directive to preserve all backup tapes 
could, and should, have been done differently. Upon becoming 
commissioner, Mr. Koskinen should have taken steps to ensure 
that IRS employees knew of and were properly following the 
preservation order. At a minimum, after learning about the 
missing emails, Commissioner Koskinen should have directed his 
subordinates to make sure the people on the ground--the people 
who most needed to know about the preservation directive--were 
aware of the need to preserve backup tapes. Instead, IRS 
employees did not understand the preservation order and failed 
to preserve relevant backup tapes.
    In June 2014, after the IRS acknowledged the missing Lerner 
emails, the agency stated that it ``confirmed that backup tapes 
from 2011 no longer exist because they have been recycled'' but 
failed to disclose when this occurred.\196\ Commissioner 
Koskinen repeated this information during his sworn testimony 
to the House Committee on Ways and Means on June 20, 2014, 
where he testified that the IRS went to ``great lengths'' to 
recover Ms. Lerner's emails.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \196\Letter from Leonard Oursler, Internal Revenue Serv., to Hon. 
Ron Wyden, Chairman, & Hon. Orrin Hatch, Ranking Member, S. Comm. on 
Finance, encl. 3 (June 13, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee learned these statements were false. Not only 
did the IRS fail to ``confirm'' the tapes had been destroyed, 
the backup tapes were swiftly recovered by TIGTA when it became 
aware of the issue in June 2014. Further, had the IRS either 
abided by its preservation notice of May 22, 2013 or looked for 
backup tapes upon learning of the problems in the email 
production in February 2014, up to 24,000 additional Lerner 
emails may have been recovered. The IRS, however, failed on 
both accounts.

              2. THE CURRENT IRS EMAIL SYSTEM BACKUP TAPES

    In May 2011, the IRS migrated its email backup system from 
New Carrollton, Maryland, to Martinsburg, West Virginia.\197\ 
At that time, and until May 22, 2013, IRS policy was to recycle 
the backup tapes every six months.\198\ On May 22, 2013, IRS 
Chief Technology Officer Terence Milholland issued a policy 
directive via email titled ``Information Retention Policy 
Revision,'' changing the backup tape recycle policy to an 
indefinite retention period.\199\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \197\IRS: TIGTA Update Part II, Hearing Before the H. Comm. on 
Oversight & Gov't Reform, 114th Cong. 4 (2015) (written testimony of 
Hon. J. Russell George and Timothy P. Camus, TIGTA) (hereinafter ``June 
25 TIGTA testimony'').
    \198\TIGTA report, supra note 4, at 4.
    \199\Email from Terrance Milholland, Internal Revenue Serv. to 
Lauren Buschor, Karen Freeman, Daniel Chaddock, David Stender, and Anne 
Shepherd, (carbon copy to Stephen Manning, Gina Garza, Tracey Babcock, 
and Kathleen Walters, Internal Revenue Serv.) (May 22, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    TIGTA learned about Lois Lerner's hard drive crash and 
resulting gaps in the IRS's production on June 13, 2014, the 
same day Congress and the American public learned of the 
problem, but months after the IRS discovered the missing 
emails.\200\ TIGTA promptly opened an investigation to 
determine whether the emails the IRS reported as lost could be 
recovered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \200\TIGTA report, supra note 4, at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Two weeks later, on June 30, 2014, TIGTA requested the IRS 
provide any backup tapes that could contain Lerner's emails 
from January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2011.\201\ In 
response to this request, the IRS provided 744 tapes that may 
have been used to back up Lerner's email account.\202\ From 
these tapes, TIGTA found five sets of weekly backups of 
Lerner's email beginning on November 20, 2012, approximately 
six months before Milholland's backup tape retention policy 
directive took effect.\203\ According to TIGTA, these tapes are 
the oldest known Lerner email account backups available.\204\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \201\Id. at 13.
    \202\Id.
    \203\Id. at 14.
    \204\Id. at 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    TIGTA compared the Lerner emails it recovered from these 
backup tapes to the IRS's production to Congress and found over 
1,000 new emails the IRS never produced.\205\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \205\Id. at 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Timothy Camus, the TIGTA Deputy Inspector General for 
Investigations, explained to the Committee how TIGTA found the 
backup tapes for the current IRS email system: ``To the best we 
can determine through the investigation, they just--they simply 
didn't look for those emails. So for the 1,000--over 1,000 
emails that we found on the backup tapes--we found them because 
we looked for them.''\206\ In fact, TIGTA determined the agency 
failed to look in five of the six possible sources of 
``electronic media, all of which the IRS had in their 
possession.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \206\IRS: TIGTA Update Part II, Hearing Before the H. Comm. on 
Oversight & Gov't Reform, 114th Cong. (2015) (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

            3. THE DECOMMISSIONED EMAIL SERVER BACKUP TAPES

    When the IRS moved the email server from New Carrollton, 
Maryland to Martinsburg, West Virginia, it turned off the old 
email server but left it in place.\207\ In December 2011, IRS 
IT employees disassembled the server and treated the server 
hard drives and backup tapes as junk.\208\ In April 2012, most, 
but not all, of these parts were destroyed by an IRS 
contractor. In December 2013, months after the preservation 
order was issued, the remaining servers and backup tapes were 
shipped to Martinsburg for destruction.\209\ These servers and 
tapes remained in Martinsburg until March 2014 until Mr. 
Lyewsang sent the proper paperwork to destroy the hard drives 
and backup tapes.\210\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \207\June 25 TIGTA testimony, supra note 191, at 4.
    \208\TIGTA report, supra note 4, at 3.
    \209\Id.
    \210\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On or about March 4, 2014, one month after the IRS realized 
it did not have all of Ms. Lerner's emails, IRS employees on 
the Media Management Midnight Unit in Martinsburg, West 
Virginia, magnetically erased, or degaussed, 422 backup tapes 
that likely contained full, weekly backups of Lerner's email 
account dating back to late November or December 2010.\211\ 
During its investigation, TIGTA found and examined these tapes, 
but they contained no recoverable data.\212\ As discussed 
above, the employees did not destroy the server hard drives 
shipped with the backup tapes because they incorrectly believed 
the preservation order only applied to hard drives.\213\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \211\Id. at 17.
    \212\June 25 TIGTA testimony, supra note 191, at 7.
    \213\TIGTA report, supra note 4, at 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Notwithstanding Mr. Milholland's May 2013 directive not to 
destroy any of the backup tapes for email, the IRS continued to 
degauss backup tapes until approximately June 2014.\214\ TIGTA 
estimates the IRS's failure to comply with the May 2013 
preservation order and congressional subpoenas resulted in the 
loss of up to 24,000 Lerner emails.\215\ Mr. Camus testified 
before the Committee about the destruction of these tapes. He 
stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \214\Id. at 17.
    \215\June 25 TIGTA testimony, supra note 191, at 8.

          Rep. JORDAN. How in the world, with the preservation 
        order and the subpoena did they destroy 422 tapes, 
        containing, according to your investigation, 
        potentially 24,000 emails? How does that happen, Mr. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Camus?

          Mr. CAMUS. It's an unbelievable set of circumstances 
        that would allow that to happen.\216\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \216\IRS: TIGTA Update Part II: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on 
Oversight & Gov't Reform, 114th Cong. (2015) (emphasis added).

    Despite the known gaps in Ms. Lerner's emails identified in 
February 2014, the IRS never asked any of the employees in 
question to look for backup tapes or the server hard drives 
associated with the decommissioned server.\217\ TIGTA made the 
first request for these tapes in June 2014. TIGTA found, if the 
IRS had actually conducted a search for backup tapes for Ms. 
Lerner's email account, the agency would have probably 
identified the tapes before they were degaussed in March 
2014.\218\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \217\TIGTA report, supra note 4, at 18.
    \218\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Though Commissioner Koskinen testified the IRS made 
``extraordinary efforts'' to recover Ms. Lerner's emails, 
TIGTA's investigation shows this is not the case. Mr. Camus 
testified:

          Rep. WALBERG. Given the IRS's failure to attempt the 
        methods TIGTA used to recover the missing emails, would 
        you characterize the IRS efforts as extraordinary?
          Mr. CAMUS. I would not.\219\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \219\IRS: TIGTA Update Part II: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on 
Oversight & Gov't Reform, 114th Cong. (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In fact, TIGTA found IRS's lack of due diligence extended 
beyond the backup tapes. Mr. Camus testified the IRS failed to 
search five of six potential sources for Lerner emails. He 
stated:
          Rep. WALBERG. How many potential sources for 
        recovering Lerner's emails existed for the IRS?
          Mr. CAMUS. We believe there were six.
          Rep. WALBERG. Namely?
          Mr. CAMUS. The hard drive would have been a source, 
        Blackberry source, backup tapes a source, server drives 
        a source, the backup tapes for the server drives, and 
        then finally the loaner lap tops.
          Rep. WALBERG. How many of these six did the IRS 
        search?
          Mr. CAMUS. We're not aware that they searched any one 
        in particular. They did--it appears they did look into 
        initially whether or not the hard drive had been 
        destroyed, but they didn't go much further than 
        that.\220\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \220\IRS: TIGTA Update Part II: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on 
Oversight and Gov't Reform, 114th Cong. (2015).

    The lack of due diligence with respect to retrieving Ms. 
Lerner's missing emails was compounded by a stunning ignorance 
of where those missing emails might reside. On June 20, 2014, 
after the email problems became public, Commissioner Koskinen 
testified he was not even aware as to whether or not Ms. Lerner 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
had a Blackberry. He testified:

          Rep. PRICE. Do you [know]--if Lois Lerner had a 
        Blackberry or an iPhone?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. I do not know.
          Rep. PRICE. Can you find out if Lois Lerner had an--
        had an iPhone or a Blackberry for us?
          Mr. KOSKINEN. I can find that out and be happy to let 
        you know.\221\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \221\IRS Commissioner John Koskinen: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on 
Ways and Means, 113th Cong. (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Commissioner Koskinen's posture with respect to the 
Committee's efforts to obtain Ms. Lerner's emails delayed the 
Committee's investigation. Commissioner Koskinen's credibility 
was further damaged when TIGTA found approximately 1,000 
missing Lerner emails that Commissioner Koskinen previously 
claimed were permanently lost. In fact, TIGTA located a number 
of backup tapes that yielded some emails within fifteen days. 
Timothy Camus, the TIGTA Deputy Inspector General for 
Investigations, testified:

          Rep. CHAFFETZ. Start to finish, how long did it take 
        for you to find the tapes when you started in June? I 
        believe it was June of 2014.
          Mr. CAMUS. Correct. We took possession of--740--the 
        initial set of backup tapes on July 1, roughly 15 days 
        after we started our investigation.\222\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \222\IRS: TIGTA Update Part II: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on 
Oversight and Gov't Reform, 114th Cong. (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Had the IRS taken immediate steps to locate backup tapes 
upon the discovery of the gap in Lerner emails in February 
2014, tapes containing up to an additional 24,000 emails may 
not have been destroyed on March 4, 2014. Mr. Camus further 
testified:

          Rep. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Camus, the IRS had these emails. 
        And you said they didn't purposely destroy them, but 
        what did they do with these emails?
          Mr. CAMUS. To the best we can determine through the 
        investigation, they just simply didn't look for those 
        emails. So for the 1,000--over 1,000 emails that we 
        found on the backup tapes--we found them because we 
        looked for them.\223\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \223\IRS: TIGTA Update Part II: Hearing Before the H. Comm. on 
Oversight and Gov't Reform, 114th Cong. (2015) (emphasis added).

      VIII. Commissioner Koskinen Should be Censured and Condemned

    More than two years have passed since Congress began 
investigating the IRS's mistreatment of conservative tax-exempt 
groups. After reviewing more than one million pages of 
documents, conducting more than 50 transcribed interviews, and 
holding over a dozen public hearings, the American people still 
do not have a complete accounting of the IRS's deprivation of 
American citizens' first Amendment rights.
    The IRS's destruction of up to 24,000 relevant emails in 
the face of a congressional subpoena and preservation order is 
inexcusable. Had the IRS taken the necessary steps to educate 
employees on the preservation notice, or undertaken any sort of 
investigation once the agency learned of the missing emails, it 
could have stopped the destruction of these important 
documents. In the absence of Lois Lerner's testimony, these 
documents are critical to the Committee's attempt to determine 
fully what went wrong at the IRS. Commissioner John Koskinen's 
false and misleading statements to Congress about the 
destruction of these emails has compounded the problem. His 
unwillingness to present accurate information about the missing 
emails has delayed and hindered the Committee's efforts, 
perhaps permanently so.
    The IRS is one of the most powerful federal agencies and 
must be trustworthy. It is not possible to move past the 
agency's willful targeting of conservative tax-exempt 
applications as long as the agency refuses to take 
responsibility for its actions. As leader of the IRS, 
Commissioner Koskinen has repeatedly failed to take 
responsibility for the destruction of evidence by the agency 
and the numerous misstatements he made to Congress about this 
matter. Because of his actions, and the actions of others at 
the agency he leads, the American people may never know the 
complete truth about the IRS' targeting of conservative tax-
exempt applications.
    For these reasons, the Committee recommends that 
Commissioner Koskinen be censured and condemned; resign or be 
removed from office; and forfeit all rights to any annuity for 
which he is eligible under chapter 83 or chapter 84 of title 5, 
United States Code.

                          Legislative History

    The Committee's full investigation and oversight of the 
need to censure and condemn John A. Koskinen is documented 
above. H. Res. 737, condemning and censuring John A. Koskinen, 
the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, was introduced on May 18, 
2016 by Congressman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) and referred to the 
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. The bill was also 
referred to the Committee on the Judiciary and the Committee on 
Ways and Means. On June 15, 2016, the Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform ordered H. Res. 737 favorably reported, 
as amended, by a roll call vote of 23 to 15.

                       Explanation of Amendments

    During Full Committee consideration of the resolution, 
Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings (D-MD) offered an amendment 
to the resolution to strike specific portions of the resolution 
he believed to be inaccurate. Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) 
offered an amendment to the Cummings amendment to clarify the 
date of a statement made by John A. Koskinen. The Chaffetz 
second degree amendment was adopted by voice vote, and the 
Cummings amendment, as amended, was adopted by voice vote.
    Congressman Matt Cartwright (D-PA) offered an amendment to 
the resolution to strike and replace the entire preamble and 
replace the text with new clauses related to the current 
Inspector General for Tax Administration, the Honorable J. 
Russell George. The amendment also would strike and replace all 
text following the resolved clause and insert language 
suggesting ``Commissioner Koskinen is an honorable public 
servant who has been extraordinarily cooperative with 
Congress.'' The Cartwright amendment was not adopted by a roll 
call vote of 15 to 21.

                        Committee Consideration

    On June 15, 2016 the Committee met in open session and 
ordered reported favorably the resolution, H. Res. 737, by roll 
call vote, a quorum being present.

                            Roll Call Votes

    There were two roll call votes during consideration of H. 
Res. 737:

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

  Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations of the Committee

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause 
(2)(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, the Committee's oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the descriptive portions of 
this report.

         Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

    In accordance with clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee's performance 
goal or objective of this resolution is to condemn and censure 
John A. Koskinen, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    No provision of this resolution establishes or reauthorizes 
a program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of 
another Federal program, a program that was included in any 
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress 
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program 
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of 
Federal Domestic Assistance.

                  Disclosure of Directed Rule Makings

    The Committee estimates that enacting this resolution does 
not direct the completion of any specific rule makings within 
the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 551.

                     Federal Advisory Committee Act

    The Committee finds that the resolution does not establish 
or authorize the establishment of an advisory committee within 
the definition of 5 U.S.C. App., Section 5(b).

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    With respect to requirements of clause (3)(c)(3) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section 
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee has 
not received a cost estimate for this measure from the Director 
of Congressional Budget Office. The Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform estimates that the resolution would have no 
cost.

                             MINORITY VIEWS

    On October 27, 2015, Chairman Chaffetz and 18 other 
Republican Committee Members introduced House Resolution 494 to 
impeach John Koskinen, the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue 
Service (IRS), for ``high crimes and misdemeanors.''\1\
    They introduced their resolution only days after the 
Department of Justice (DOJ) reported to Congress that it 
``found no evidence that any IRS official acted based on 
political, discriminatory, corrupt, or other inappropriate 
motives that would support criminal prosecution.'' The 
Department of Justice also ``found no evidence that any 
official involved in the handling of tax-exempt applications or 
IRS leadership attempted to obstruct justice.''\2\
    Republicans also introduced their impeachment resolution 
after the Republican Treasury Inspector General for Tax 
Administration (TIGTA) reported that he identified no evidence 
of politically motivated targeting, no evidence that anyone at 
the IRS obstructed Congress, and no evidence of any order to 
destroy or conceal documents. In testimony before the House 
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, the Inspector 
General agreed that he found ``no evidence that IRS employees 
were politically motivated in their creation or use of the 
inappropriate screening criteria'' or that ``any IRS employees 
had been directed to destroy or hide information from Congress, 
the DOJ, or TIGTA.''\3\
    Despite these findings, Oversight Committee Members Jim 
Jordan and Mark Meadows reportedly approached House Speaker 
Paul Ryan in a private meeting last month and threatened to 
force a vote on their impeachment resolution on the House 
floor.\4\ Speaker Ryan reportedly discouraged their campaign 
for impeachment. He argued that the IRS ``has not been led 
well'' and ``needs to be cleaned up,'' but ``[a]s far as these 
other issues,'' his preference would be to focus on efforts to 
``reform the tax code.''\5\
    Shortly after the meeting with Speaker Ryan, Chairman Jason 
Chaffetz introduced a new resolution to censure Commissioner 
Koskinen.\6\ The resolution was referred to the Committee on 
the Judiciary and the Committee on Ways and Means, and, because 
it also proposed stripping Commissioner Koskinen of his 
pension, it was referred to the Oversight Committee as well.
    Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte announced that 
he would hold several hearings on these issues.\7\ The first 
hearing, entitled ``Examining the Allegations of Misconduct 
Against IRS Commissioner John Koskinen, Part I,'' took place on 
May 24, 2016. Chairman Goodlatte invited Chairman Chaffetz and 
Representative Ron DeSantis to testify at that hearing. 
Chairman Goodlatte scheduled ``Part II'' of the hearing for 
June 22, 2016.
    Instead of waiting for the Judiciary Committee to conclude 
its hearings, Chairman Chaffetz rushed to hold a business 
meeting with the Oversight Committee on June 15, 2016, to 
leapfrog over the Judiciary Committee and proceed with a vote 
on his censure resolution. The Oversight Committee approved the 
resolution along party lines. Democrats strongly oppose the 
Chairman's censure resolution for the reasons set forth below.
Republicans conceded during the markup that their censure resolution 
        was inaccurate
    At the Oversight Committee business meeting on June 15, 
2016, Committee Republicans were forced to admit that their 
resolution was inaccurate after Ranking Member Elijah E. 
Cummings offered an amendment to correct its factual 
inaccuracies.
    For example, the resolution misleadingly spliced together 
two statements made by the Commissioner, making it appear as 
though he made them together. In fact, he made these statements 
on different dates before different Committees.\8\
    Ranking Member Cummings made the following statement in 
support of his amendment:

          Mr. Chairman, I want to make clear that I am not 
        suggesting that you deceived the House when you 
        included these inaccuracies in this resolution. I am 
        not alleging that you were dishonest. I recognize that 
        you were likely relying on what others told you. The 
        same is true of Commissioner Koskinen.\9\
    Chairman Chaffetz acknowledged the inaccuracy, and Ranking 
Member Cummings' amendment on this provision was adopted.
The resolution Republicans voted out of Committee continues to include 
        obvious factual inaccuracies
    Despite correcting one inaccuracy, Republicans refused to 
correct several others during the markup.
    For example, paragraph ten of the resolution asserts that 
Commissioner Koskinen should be fired in part because he did 
not check Lois Lerner's BlackBerry to retrieve additional 
emails after her hard drive crashed. Ranking Member Cummings 
offered an amendment to strike that language because TIGTA took 
possession of her BlackBerry six months before Commissioner 
Koskinen joined the IRS.
    On June 30, 2013, the Inspector General's office issued a 
report stating that it ``took possession of LERNER's BlackBerry 
on June 10, 2013, after she left the IRS.''\10\ Mr. Koskinen 
was not sworn into his position as Commissioner until December 
23, 2013.\11\
    Republicans refused to acknowledge these facts and voted 
against correcting this inaccuracy in their resolution. 
Chairman Chaffetz stated during the markup: ``The record is 
clear that in terms of the BlackBerry, it was not 
checked.''\12\ However, the Inspector General's report 
indicates that in fact it was checked:
          Forensic examination of the BlackBerry provided 2,972 
        readable e-mails. A manual comparison to de-duplicate 
        these items against the IRS production to Congress 
        resulted in the discovery of 190 new e-mails that had 
        not been previously provided to Congress, the DOJ or to 
        TIGTA; 169 of the e-mails are from after 8:30 AM on May 
        16, 2013; six of the e-mails mentioned EO matters, but 
        nothing responsive to Congress' request.\13\
    It remains unclear what Chairman Chaffetz expected 
Commissioner Koskinen to do with Ms. Lerner's BlackBerry when 
he joined the IRS six months later in December 2013, 
particularly since the Inspector General had already taken 
possession of the BlackBerry and later conducted a forensic 
investigation.
The resolution is inaccurate in stating that Commissioner Koskinen knew 
        as early as February 2014 that a substantial portion of Lois 
        Lerner's emails were missing
    Paragraph six of the resolution states that Commissioner 
Koskinen knew ``as early as February 2014'' that Ms. Lerner's 
emails were missing and could not be produced to Congress. This 
assertion is also wrong.
    Commissioner Koskinen did not learn of the hard drive 
failure until April 2014, when he was advised about it by staff 
and informed that a hard drive failure did not necessarily mean 
a loss of data.\14\ Commissioner Koskinen testified to this 
effect before the Oversight Committee.\15\ Republicans refused 
to acknowledge these facts and voted against correcting this 
inaccuracy in the resolution.
    The majority has presented no evidence that Commissioner 
Koskinen was aware of the hard drive failure prior to April 
2014. They argue that he must have learned about the hard drive 
failure earlier because it furthers their baseless conspiracy 
theory that he intentionally withheld information and was 
complicit in, or even ordered, the destruction of back-up tapes 
that occurred in March 2014.
    The Justice Department reported that as soon as IRS 
officials discovered the hard drive failure, ``IRS attorneys 
and officials spent that time exercising due diligence to 
determine what had occurred, mitigating heavily against 
criminal intent.''\16\
The resolution mischaracterizes Commissioner Koskinen's previous 
        testimony
    The censure resolution mischaracterizes Commissioner 
Koskinen's testimony at a June 20, 2014, hearing before the 
House Committee on Ways and Means. The resolution refers to his 
testimony at this hearing as ``false'' because Commissioner 
Koskinen stated: ``Since the start of this investigation, every 
e-mail has been preserved. Nothing has been lost. Nothing has 
been destroyed.''\17\
    In fact, during that same hearing, Commissioner Koskinen 
made clear: ``At this time, it is too early to know if any e-
mails have been lost on those hard drives.''\18\ In addition, 
he made these statements a year before he learned that backup 
tapes had been degaussed by low-level employees in West 
Virginia.
The resolution completely disregards the conclusions of the Republican 
        Inspector General of the IRS
    When Republicans launched their investigation, they relied 
heavily on Inspector General J. Russell George. Inspector 
General George is a holdover appointee who was chosen by 
President George W. Bush and who previously served as the 
Republican staff director of a subcommittee of the Oversight 
Committee.
    Inspector General George conducted an extensive 
investigation to determine whether IRS employees intentionally 
targeted conservative applicants for tax-exempt status for 
political reasons. His staff interviewed more than 100 
witnesses and searched tens of thousands of documents, and his 
office spent more than $2 million on this investigation.\19\ At 
the conclusion of this investigation, Inspector General George 
identified no politically motivated targeting, no obstruction 
of justice, and no effort to conceal information from Congress.
    Rep. Matthew Cartwright offered an amendment during the 
Oversight Committee markup to include Inspector General 
George's findings in the censure resolution. As he stated when 
he introduced his amendment, ``The bottom line is that in order 
to vote for this censure resolution, you would have to believe 
Inspector General George is lying.''\20\
    Republicans opposed the amendment and voted it down.
The Republican Inspector General found no politically motivated 
        targeting
    After Inspector General George's exhaustive multi-year 
investigation, he identified no evidence that anyone at the IRS 
targeted any group for political reasons.
    Testifying before two different committees in May 2013, 
Inspector General George agreed that he found ``no evidence 
that IRS employees were politically motivated in their creation 
or use of the inappropriate screening criteria.''\21\
    Inspector General George's findings were confirmed by the 
Oversight Committee's own investigation. In June 2013, an IRS 
Screening Manager who worked at the IRS for 21 years and 
described himself as a ``conservative Republican'' objected to 
any suggestion that he or his team unfairly targeted 
conservative groups.\22\
    During the Oversight Committee's markup, Republicans 
defeated Rep. Cartwright's amendment to include this finding in 
the resolution.
The Republican Inspector General found no order to destroy any 
        documents
    The Inspector General's office interviewed 118 witnesses 
and reviewed employee emails in Martinsburg, West Virginia, 
where two low-level employees recycled, or ``degaussed,'' 
backup tapes that included emails from Ms. Lerner.
    The Inspector General concluded: ``No evidence was 
uncovered that any IRS employees had been directed to destroy 
or hide information from Congress, the DOJ, or TIGTA.''\23\ One 
witness interviewed by the Inspector General stated:

          Nobody in particular would have made the decision to 
        destroy the tapes/hard drives, degaussing/destruction 
        is just part of the process. Nobody specifically 
        instructed [NAME REDACTED] to destroy the tapes/hard 
        drives and nobody told him to do it because of the 
        content on the tapes/hard drives. [NAME REDACTED] said 
        he never knows the content of the tapes or hard drives 
        the group destroys, to include this particular 
        shipment.\24\

    During the Oversight Committee's markup, Republicans 
defeated Rep. Cartwright's amendment to include this finding in 
the resolution.
The Republican Inspector General found no evidence that any IRS 
        employees erased backup tapes to conceal responsive emails
    The Inspector General's office conducted its own analysis 
of whether any data could be salvaged from the backup tapes and 
produced to Congress, finding that 422 server backup tapes that 
were believed to have contained Lois Lerner's e-mails had been 
degaussed on March 4, 2014.
    The Inspector General concluded that ``the investigation 
did not uncover any evidence that the IRS and its employees 
purposely erased the tapes in order to conceal responsive 
documents from Congress, the DOJ, and TIGTA.''\25\
    The Inspector General reported that two low-level employees 
working in Martinsburg, West Virginia degaussed the backup 
tapes so they could be reused. The Chief Technology Officer of 
the IRS issued a policy directive to preserve all electronic 
backup media in May 2013, but the Inspector General found that 
the ``employees who destroyed the backup tapes misinterpreted 
the directive.''\26\
    During the Oversight Committee's markup, Republicans 
defeated Rep. Cartwright's amendment to include this finding in 
the resolution.
The Republican Inspector General testified that Commissioner Koskinen 
        has been ``extraordinarily cooperative''
    The censure resolution accuses Commissioner Koskinen of 
failing to locate and preserve emails from Ms. Lerner that were 
lost due to her hard drive failure, and of making false and 
misleading statements to Congress. These allegations have been 
directly contradicted by the Inspector General and others.
    On June 25, 2015, Inspector General George appeared before 
the Oversight Committee and testified that Commissioner 
Koskinen was ``extraordinarily cooperative'' with the 
investigation.\27\
    Senator Orrin Hatch, the Chairman of the Senate Committee 
on Finance, agreed with Inspector General George, stating that 
``for the most part'' Commissioner Koskinen has ``been very 
cooperative with us.''\28\
    During the Oversight Committee's markup, Republicans 
defeated Rep. Cartwright's amendment to include this finding in 
the resolution.
The Department of Justice found no politically motivated targeting or 
        obstruction of justice
    As part of a lengthy investigation of their own, career 
officials at the Justice Department reported to Congress that 
they ``found no evidence that any IRS official acted based on 
political, discriminatory, corrupt, or other inappropriate 
motives that would support criminal prosecution.''\29\
    The Justice Department also ``found no evidence that any 
official involved in the handling of tax-exempt applications or 
IRS leadership attempted to obstruct justice.''\30\
    In collaboration with the Inspector General and the Federal 
Bureau of Investigation, the Justice Department conducted more 
than 100 witness interviews, collected more than one million 
pages of IRS documents, and examined potential criminal 
liability for IRS employees under civil rights, tax 
administration, and obstruction statutes.
    The Justice Department specifically examined ``whether any 
IRS official attempted to obstruct justice with respect to 
their reporting function to Congress, the collection and 
production of documents demanded by the Department and 
Congress, and the delayed disclosure of the consequences of Ms. 
Lerner's hard drive crash, or the March 2014 erasure of 
electronic backup tapes.''\31\
    The Justice Department found ``no evidence of such an 
intent by any official involved in the handling of tax-exempt 
applications or the IRS's response to investigations of its 
conduct.''\32\
There is no evidence that the degaussed backup tapes contained ``key'' 
        evidence
    Paragraph 3 of the resolution suggests that the backup 
tapes that were degaussed contained ``key pieces of evidence,'' 
but Ms. Lerner's hard drive crashed before she learned that any 
inappropriate criteria were being used. The IRS Technology 
Asset Management System indicates that Ms. Lerner filed a 
helpdesk ticket with regard to her hard drive failure on June 
13, 2011.\33\ This is approximately two weeks before a June 29, 
2011, briefing when she learned about language contained in the 
``Be on the Lookout'' listing inappropriate criteria. She 
instructed that the criteria be revised immediately.\34\
    On June 25, 2015, Inspector General George testified to the 
Oversight Committee that, after extensive efforts, his office 
was able to recover more than 1,000 emails from Ms. Lerner's 
hard drive. However, after examining those emails, he 
concluded: ``A review of these new e-mails did not provide 
additional information for the purposes of our 
investigation.''\35\
    Instead, these so-called ``new'' emails were completely 
irrelevant. For instance, one of the recovered emails that the 
Inspector General produced to Congress was a December 25, 2012, 
email from eBay advertising holiday shopping deals. Another 
newly discovered email was from FlowerShopping.com a few days 
before.
    On October 23, 2015, the Justice Department sent a letter 
to the Committee concluding that ``we are confident that we 
were able to compile a substantially complete set of the 
pertinent documents.''\36\ The Department stated:

          The IRS collected documents from more than 80 
        employees--many more employees than were regularly and 
        directly involved in the matters under investigation--
        making exceedingly remote the chance that a hard drive 
        crash or other technical failure experienced by any 
        particular employee could cause the permanent loss of 
        any relevant email or other document.\37\

The resolution has no legal effect whatsoever

    The resolution to censure Commissioner Koskinen is a simple 
House resolution that merely expresses ``the sense of the House 
of Representatives.''\38\ This resolution has no practical 
effect and lacks the force of law. House resolutions are 
``considered only by the body in which they were introduced,'' 
and are ``not presented to the President for action.''\39\
    Legal scholars agree that even if the House passes H. Res. 
737, it would have no legal effect. For example, according to 
the Congressional Research Service: ``Simple resolutions 
require no action by the other house of Congress, and since 
they contain no legislative matters are not presented to the 
President and `have no legal effect.'''\40\

Chairman Chaffetz is inaccurate when he says his resolution would 
        ``require'' Commissioner Koskinen to forfeit his pension

    When Chairman Chaffetz introduced his resolution censuring 
Commissioner Koskinen, he stated that it ``requires the 
forfeiture of his pension.''\41\ At the June 15, 2016, business 
meeting to consider the censure resolution, Chairman Chaffetz 
again asserted that H. Res. 737 ``requires forfeiture of his 
government pension and any other federal benefits for which he 
is eligible.''\42\
    Legal scholars agree that Chairman Chaffetz's public 
statements are inaccurate. Because H. Res. 737 is a House 
resolution with no legal effect, it does not require 
Commissioner Koskinen to forfeit his pension.
    On June 20, 2016, Richard Briffault, the Joseph P. 
Chamberlain Professor of Legislation at Columbia Law School, 
sent a letter to the Oversight Committee stating, ``The 
provision of H. Res. 737 concerning Commissioner Koskinen's 
pension is just such a `sense of the House' statement. It 
cannot bind persons or property outside the House.''\43\

It would be fundamentally unfair and potentially unconstitutional to 
        take away Commissioner Koskinen's vested pension for his 
        previous government service

    Commissioner Koskinen has devoted many years of his career 
to public service in the federal government. Even though the 
resolution to censure Commissioner Koskinen has no legal 
effect, it would be fundamentally unfair to strip Commissioner 
Koskinen of the vested pension he previously earned for more 
than a decade of government service based on unfounded 
allegations that are unrelated to that service.
    In addition, the Supreme Court has held that any 
legislative act that ``determines guilt and inflicts punishment 
upon an identifiable individual without provision of the 
protections of a judicial trial'' is an unconstitutional Bill 
of Attainder.\44\ As the Judiciary Committee concluded when 
considering the proposed impeachment of President Clinton, ``a 
law formally and publicly expressing condemnation by the 
legislature directed at a specific individual--confronts 
squarely the prohibition on Bills of Attainder.''\45\
    Members of Congress and other officers and employees of the 
federal government can be required to forfeit the federal 
retirement annuities for which they had qualified only if they 
are convicted of specific federal offenses.\46\ Commissioner 
Koskinen has not been charged or convicted of any crime, and 
there is no other legal mechanism under which the House, acting 
alone, would have the authority to remove his pension.
    On June 17, 2016, Richard W. Painter, the S. Walter Richey 
Professor of Corporate Law at the University of Minnesota Law 
School, sent a letter to the Oversight Committee stating: ``A 
legislative enactment that sought to take away the pension or 
other property of a particular individual would be a bill of 
attainder specifically prohibited by the Constitution.''\47\
    Professor Painter's letter cites the Heritage Foundation 
Guide to the Constitution, which states: ``As James Madison 
said in The Federalist No. 44, `Bills of attainder, ex post 
facto laws, and laws impairing the obligation of contracts, are 
contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to 
every principle of sound legislation.'''\48\
    Professor Painter's letter concludes:

          I should furthermore note that over the past several 
        years your Committee has spent millions of taxpayer 
        dollars on this investigation. This is essentially a 
        dispute between the IRS and Members of Congress about 
        the 501c4 organizations that further the objectives of 
        political campaigns, including campaigns of Members of 
        Congress. The IRS is charged with determining whether 
        the activities of these organizations comply with the 
        Internal Revenue Code and it is not proper for Congress 
        to seek to intimidate the IRS in the discharge of its 
        duties.\49\

Commissioner Koskinen is an honorable man who has served the public on 
        behalf of Democrats and Republicans

    Commissioner Koskinen is a dedicated and well-respected 
public servant who has worked for both Democrats and 
Republicans throughout his long and distinguished career. He 
agreed to come out of retirement in 2013 to lead the IRS during 
a period of significant turmoil.\50\
    Commissioner Koskinen has a long and respected history of 
taking on difficult jobs. He began his career in public service 
working for Republican Mayor John V. Lindsay of New York. In 
1994, he was asked by the Clinton Administration to become the 
``Y2K Czar,'' tasked with preparing the government in the lead-
up to the year 2000.
    Commissioner Koskinen was called on by President George W. 
Bush's administration to become Freddie Mac's new chairman in 
the midst of the financial crisis. According to President 
Bush's chief housing-finance administrator, James B. Lockhart 
III, Commissioner Koskinen was selected because ``Freddie 
needed some stronger management.'' Mr. Lockhart has stated that 
the Bush Administration was ``thankful'' that Commissioner 
Koskinen accepted the position.\51\
    This resolution has no binding authority and will have no 
legal effect. This Committee has done a great deal of 
bipartisan work on investigations and legislation. The Chairman 
and Ranking Member have sent more than 600 bipartisan letters 
in this Congress. But this partisan investigation is founded on 
conspiracy theories that undermine the credibility and 
integrity of the Oversight Committee.
                                        Elijah E. Cummings,
                                                    Ranking Member.
                              ----------                              


                                ENDNOTES

    \1\H. Res. 494.
    \2\Letter from Peter J. Kadzik, Assistant Attorney General, 
Department of Justice, to Chairman Jason Chaffetz and Ranking 
Member Elijah E. Cummings, House Committee on Oversight and 
Government Reform (Oct. 23, 2015) (online at http://
democrats.oversight.house.gov/sites/
democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/documents/2015-10-
23%20DOJ%20to%20HOGR%20%28IRS%29%20- 
%20Chmn%20Chaffetz%20RM%20Cummings.pdf).
    \3\House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, The 
IRS: Targeting Americans for Their Political Beliefs, 113th 
Cong. (May 22, 2013) (online at https://oversight.house.gov/
hearing/the-irs-targeting-americans-for-their-political-
beliefs/); Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, 
Report of Investigation: Exempt Organizations Data Loss (June 
30, 2015) (#54-1406-008-I) (online at http://
democrats.oversight.house.gov/sites/
democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/documents/
TIGTA%20Report.pdf).
    \4\Conservatives Force Leadership's Hand in IRS 
Impeachment, The Hill (May 18, 2016) (online at http://
thehill.com/policy/finance/280334-conservatives-force-house-
gop-leaderships-hand-in-irs-impeachment).
    \5\Ryan Stops Short of Backing Effort to Impeach IRS Chief, 
Roll Call (Apr. 14, 2016) (online at www.rollcall.com/news/
politics/ryan-wont-back-effort-impeach-irs-commissioner).
    \6\H. Res. 737.
    \7\Conservatives Force Leaderships Hand in IRS Impeachment, 
The Hill (May 18, 2016) (online at http://thehill.com/policy/
finance/280334-conservatives-force-house-gop-leaderships-hand-
in-irs-impeachment).
    \8\House Committee on Ways and Means, Hearing on IRS 
Investigation, 113th Cong. (June 20, 2014); House Committee on 
Oversight and Government Reform, Subcommittee on Economic 
Growth, Job Creation, and Regulatory Affairs, Hearing on An 
Update on the IRS Response to its Targeting Scandal, 113th 
Cong. (July 23, 2014).
    \9\House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
Statement of Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, Full Committee 
Business Meeting to Consider H. Res. 737, Condemning and 
Censuring John A. Koskinen, the Commissioner of Internal 
Revenue (June 15, 2016) (online at http://
democrats.oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/republicans-
concede-inaccuracies-in-resolution-to-censure-irs-commissioner-
but).
    \10\Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, 
Report of Investigation: Exempt Organizations Data Loss (June 
30, 2015) (#54-1406-008-I) (online at http://
democrats.oversight.house.gov/sites/
democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/documents/
TIGTA%20Report.pdf).
    \11\Koskinen Sworn in as IRS Commissioner, The Hill (Dec. 
23, 2013) (online at http://thehill.com/policy/finance/193917-
john-koskinen-sworn-in-as-irs-commissioner).
    \12\House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
Statement of Chairman Jason Chaffetz, Full Committee Business 
Meeting to Consider H. Res. 737, Condemning and Censuring John 
A. Koskinen, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (June 15, 
2016) (online at https://oversight.house.gov/markup/full-
committee-business-meeting-37/).
    \13\Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, 
Report of Investigation: Exempt Organizations Data Loss (June 
30, 2015) (#54-1406-008-I) (online at http://
democrats.oversight.house.gov/sites/
democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/documents/
TIGTA%20Report.pdf).
    \14\Id.
    \15\House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
Hearing on IRS Obstruction Part I, 113th Cong. (June 23, 2014).
    \16\Letter from Peter J. Kadzik, Assistant Attorney 
General, Department of Justice, to Chairman Jason Chaffetz and 
Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, House Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform (Oct. 23, 2015) (online at http://
democrats.oversight.house.gov/sites/
democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/documents/2015-10-
23%20DOJ%20to%20HOGR%20%28IRS%29%20-
%20Chmn%20Chaffetz%20RM%20Cummings.pdf).
    \17\House Committee on Ways and Means, Hearing on IRS 
Investigation, 113th Cong. (June 20, 2014).
    \18\Id.
    \19\Email from Treasury Inspector General for Tax 
Administration Staff to House Committee on Ways and Means Staff 
(Apr. 15, 2015).
    \20\House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
Statement of Rep. Matthew Cartwright, Full Committee Business 
Meeting to Consider H. Res. 737, Condemning and Censuring John 
A. Koskinen, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (June 15, 
2016) (online at https://oversight.house.gov/markup/full-
committee-business-meeting-37/).
    \21\House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
Hearing on The IRS: Targeting Americans for Their Political 
Beliefs, 113th Cong. (May 22, 2013).
    \22\House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
Interview of Screening Group Manager (June 6, 2013) (online at 
http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/first-
hand-account-cummings-releases-full-transcript-of-conservative-
republican).
    \23\Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, 
Report of Investigation: Exempt Organizations Data Loss (June 
30, 2015) (#54-1406-008-I) (online at http://
democrats.oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/new-irs-
inspector-general-report-finds-no-evidence-that-lerner-
intentionally).
    \24\Id.
    \25\Id.
    \26\Id.
    \27\House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
Hearing on IRS: TIGTA Update, Part Two (June 25, 2015).
    \28\Hatch: Senate Wont Remove IRS Head, The Hill (May 19, 
2016) (online at http://thehill.com/policy/finance/280594-
hatch-senate-wont-remove-irs-commissioner).
    \29\Letter from Peter J. Kadzik, Assistant Attorney 
General, Department of Justice, to Chairman Jason Chaffetz and 
Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, House Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform (Oct. 23, 2015) (online at http://
democrats.oversight.house.gov/sites/
democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/documents/2015-10-
23%20DOJ%20to%20HOGR%20%28IRS%29%20-
%20Chmn%20Chaffetz%20RM%20Cummings.pdf).
    \30\Id.
    \31\Id.
    \32\Id.
    \33\Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, 
Report of Investigation: Exempt Organizations Data Loss (June 
30, 2015) (#54-1406-008-I) (online at http://
democrats.oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/new-irs-
inspector-general-report-finds-no-evidence-that-lerner-
intentionally).
    \34\Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, 
Inappropriate Criteria Were Used to Identify Tax-Exempt 
Applications for Review (May 14, 3013) (#2013-10-053) (online 
at www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2013reports/
201310053fr.pdf).
    \35\House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
Testimony of J. Russell George, Treasury Inspector General for 
Tax Administration, and Timothy P. Camus, Deputy Inspector 
General for Investigations, Treasury Inspector General for Tax 
Administration, Hearing on IRS: TIGTA Update, Part Two (June 
25, 2015).
    \36\Letter from Peter J. Kadzik, Assistant Attorney 
General, Department of Justice, to Chairman Jason Chaffetz and 
Ranking Member Elijah E. Cummings, House Committee on Oversight 
and Government Reform (Oct. 23, 2015) (online at http://
democrats.oversight.house.gov/sites/
democrats.oversight.house.gov/files/documents/2015-10-
23%20DOJ%20to%20HOGR%20%28IRS%29%20-
%20Chmn%20Chaffetz%20RM%20Cummings.pdf).
    \37\Id.
    \38\H. Res. 737.
    \39\Congress.gov, How Our Laws Are Made--Learn About the 
Legislative Process (online at www.congress.gov/resources/
display/content/How+Our+Laws+Are+Made+-
+Learn+About+the+Legislative+Process#HowOurLawsAreMade-
LearnAbouttheLegislativeProcess-SimpleResolutions) (accessed 
June 16, 2016); United States House of Representatives, The 
Legislative Process (online at www.house.gov/content/learn/
legislative_process/) (accessed June 16, 2016).
    \40\Memorandum from Congressional Research Service to House 
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform Staff, Effect of 
House Censure Resolution on a Federal Official's Pension (June 
20, 2016).
    \41\House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
Chaffetz Introduces Censure Resolution for IRS Commissioner 
(May 18, 2016) (online at https://oversight.house.gov/release/
chaffetz-introduces-censure-resolution-for-irs-commissioner/).
    \42\House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 
Statement of Chairman Jason Chaffetz, Full Committee Business 
Meeting to Consider H. Res. 737, Condemning and Censuring John 
A. Koskinen, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (June 15, 
2016) (online at https://oversight.house.gov/markup/full-
committee-business-meeting-37/).
    \43\Letter from Richard Briffault, Joseph P. Chamberlain 
Professor of Legislation, Columbia Law School, to House 
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (June 20, 2016).
    \44\Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S. 
425, 433 (1977) (citing United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303, 
315-216).
    \45\House Committee on the Judiciary, Impeachment of 
William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States, 
105th Cong. (1998) (H. Rept. 105-830) (online at 
www.congress.gov/105/crpt/hrpt830/CRPT-105hrpt830.pdf).
    \46\Congressional Research Service, Loss of Federal 
Pensions for Members of Congress Convicted of Certain Offenses 
(Sept. 12, 2013) (96-530) (online at www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/
96-530.pdf).
    \47\Letter from Richard W. Painter, S. Walter Richey 
Professor of Corporate Law, University of Minnesota Law School, 
to House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (June 17, 
2016).
    \48\Heritage Foundation, The Heritage Guide to the 
Constitution, Bill of Attainder (online at http://
www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/1/essays/62/bill-of-
attainder)
    \49\Id.
    \50\Head of I.R.S., Facing Censure, Relishes a Job Few 
Could Love, New York Times (June 14, 2016) (online at 
www.nytimes.com/2016/06/15/us/politics/irs-impeachment-john-
koskinen.html?_r=1).
    \51\Id.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]