IRS audited 69% of filers claiming adoption tax credit

posted at 8:01 am on May 23, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Mary Katharine linked this yesterday in her post on Rep. Stephen Lynch’s unmistakable anger over the corruption at the IRS, but it’s worth a long look on its own, too.  National Review’s David French, an adoptive father himself (as am I), researched a few other IRS priorities over the past few years other than targeting conservatives for extra scrutiny and harassment.  The agency took very clear aim at people claiming the adoption tax credit, auditing a jaw-dropping 69% of all such filers:

As we get word that the IRS has harassed a number of pro-life groups, including at least one alleged demand that a pro-life group not picket Planned Parenthood, check out this statistic: In 2012, the IRS requested additional information from 90 percent of returns claiming the adoption tax credit and went on to actually audit 69 percent. More details from the Taxpayer Advocate Service:

During the 2012 filing season, 90 percent of returns claiming the refundable adoption credit were subject to additional review to determine if an examination was necessary. The most common reasons were income and a lack of documentation.

■ Sixty-nine percent of all adoption credit claims during the 2012 filing season were selected for audit.

■ Of the completed adoption tax credit audits, over 55 percent ended with no change in the tax owed or refund due in fiscal year 2012. The median refund amount involved in these audits is over $15,000 and the median adjusted gross income (AGI) of the taxpayers involved is about 64,000. The average adoption credit correspondence audit currently takes 126 days, causing a lengthy delay for taxpayers waiting for refunds.

Did a special risk exist in the claiming of this tax credit?  Are adoptive families that much more dishonest than the average filers, in the experience of the IRS?  As it turns out …. no.  Even with the massive amount of scrutiny applied to these filings — delaying final acceptance of the returns for more than four months, on average — only 1.5% of the claims were disallowed.

That allowed the IRS to drag back about $11 million in credits, out of $668.1 million claimed in the year, for a success rate of 1.5% after an audit rate of 69%.  Bear in mind, please, that the federal government brought in $1.375 trillion in income-tax revenue in 2012, which means that the agency audited 69% of filers on credits amount to what turned out to be 0.0486% of total IRS revenue that year.  I’m not even sure we can calculate what percentage of overall revenue was restored in this effort (~0.0008%).  We can, however, calculate that it cost taxpayers over $2 million in interest when legitimate claims were finally paid after long delays.  How much did all of the auditing activity cost the IRS? I’m sure the final figure is in the millions.

Now, what could possibly be the rationale for a 69% audit rate on credits amounting to 0.0486% of tax revenue? It’s not that adoptive families are predominately wealthy; TAS notes that 45% of these families were at 200% of the poverty level or below, and had already endured an expensive, lengthy process to complete their adoptions.  Either the IRS is terribly incompetent at prioritization, or the organization has a bias against adoption.

Either way, French is correct in his conclusion:

As an adoptive family, it’s sometimes difficult to describe the immense challenges in gathering paperwork, opening your lives to social workers for home studies, then expensive travel to sometimes-corrupt foreign locales to then launch a new life with a child you love immensely but who is also experiencing his or her own culture shock and adjustment. All of this places a great strain on family finances and emotions. To then face an audit on the other side? All so the IRS can collect a whopping 1 percent additional revenue? It’s beyond the pale. If the IRS is concerned about fraud, it can audit random samples, not the vast majority of adoptive families claiming the credit.

The IRS is a broken institution. Yet despite its moral and legal corruption, it still wields immense power. As Congress investigates wrongdoing, it’s past time to consider fundamental tax reform. In other words, starve the beast. It has proven it can’t be trusted with power.

As it has proven in its targeting of conservative political speech and its arrogance in Congressional hearings, too.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Baby Facepalm! Now that there is funny!

KS Rex on May 23, 2013 at 8:04 AM

Either the IRS is terribly incompetent at prioritization, or the organization has a bias against adoption.

I say yes on both..

Electrongod on May 23, 2013 at 8:05 AM

Well, those adoptive parents were asking for it! Those babies should have been aborted !! // IRS, Obama, various HA trolls

bitsy on May 23, 2013 at 8:09 AM

Either the IRS is terribly incompetent at prioritization, or the organization has a bias against adoption.

Or maybe they are just plain evil.

bitsy on May 23, 2013 at 8:10 AM

Obama hates babies?

faraway on May 23, 2013 at 8:11 AM

Based on previous revelations about the IRS’ Planned Parenthood-favoring harassment of pro-life groups, I don’t think it’s a stretch to assume this is just another angle for them to discourage anything that would cut into PP’s profit margin/human sacrifice.

Shepherd Lover on May 23, 2013 at 8:12 AM

Okay that screen cap needs to be used again. Too funny.

gophergirl on May 23, 2013 at 8:13 AM

Either the IRS is terribly incompetent at prioritization, or the organization has a bias against adoption.

Well, if you adopt you are pro-family which means that you probably do not support stuff like Planned Parenthood. Which puts you in the same catagory as those other radicals like Tea Party Patriots. /

Seriously, the adoptive parents I know spent thousands to make it all happen. I wonder if that is what triggers the audits- higher than anticipated expenditures based on income.

Happy Nomad on May 23, 2013 at 8:13 AM

Somebody should tell Putin to open up his orphanages again, if he really wants to see Americans getting punished by corrupt government intrusion.

Gingotts on May 23, 2013 at 8:13 AM

Obama hates babies?

faraway on May 23, 2013 at 8:11 AM

Babies are a form of punishment…

Electrongod on May 23, 2013 at 8:15 AM

Well, let’s ask Adolf Axelrod what he thinks. Did the policy of auditing adoptive parents achieve the desired goal of intimidating people from adoption? No? Well, then, it’s all fine and good.

Syzygy on May 23, 2013 at 8:19 AM

Obama hates babies?

faraway on May 23, 2013 at 8:11 AM

Only the ones that survive a botched abortion.

Doughboy on May 23, 2013 at 8:20 AM

So glad to see this being corroborated and reported. Adoptive parents started hearing from each other that this was going on when we were being audited and/or asked for ridiculous and impossible means of proof. In the int’l adoption world, our network is pretty large and very connected to one another, but we never drew the connection to the IG report until now.

Wonder who is the next target to be revealed, as the IG onion is peeled.

hoosiermama on May 23, 2013 at 8:22 AM

But, were teh ghey parents who wanted to adopt also audited????

I doubts it.

ted c on May 23, 2013 at 8:25 AM

And what does the IRS expect to learn? That the families didn’t really adopt? I don’t know how much the federal government is involved with domestic adoptions, but with foreign adoptions, you have submitted so much paperwork to the feds that it’s ridiculous. Plus, the cost of the adoption usually exceeds the tax credit, so it’s unlikely families are padding the costs to increase the credit.

Really, I’m not certain about the point of the targeting. I can’t imagine is was political; adoptions seem to be one of the fairly common activities no matter your political leanings, at least in my experience. And as was pointed out, it had to have cost the IRS substantially more to do the audit than they could have even hoped to take in. Sounds like it’s just more government run amuck to me.

kenro85 on May 23, 2013 at 8:27 AM

People shouldn’t be “punished” with a baby!, BHO

trs on May 23, 2013 at 8:28 AM

War on children.

Philly on May 23, 2013 at 8:29 AM

This is power run amok on steroids! It is time to shut this dog and pony show down like a whore house on main street.

Tilly on May 23, 2013 at 8:30 AM

The IRS is there for power, nothing more.

The power to tax is the power to control…the money is just a “weapon” to obtain what they actually want, control and power.

This is nothing new, it’s written every history book. Taxes are there to suppress, the reason is always “benevolent”, but the ultimate goal and purpose is to control the people.

And this is a perfect example…in the freest society in history, the IRS, the tax man is no different than under any of the Kings.

You want solar to “succeed” and coal to fail? The tax man cometh…

right2bright on May 23, 2013 at 8:31 AM

#WarOnAdoption

BigGator5 on May 23, 2013 at 8:31 AM

That these folks would be in charge of implementing the Monster Obamacare makes it hard to sleep at night.

workingclass artist on May 23, 2013 at 8:32 AM

The baby facepalm pic is a hoot!

workingclass artist on May 23, 2013 at 8:35 AM

The IRS, and the entire federal government, is dominated by left-wing apparatchiks.

farsighted on May 23, 2013 at 8:35 AM

Liberals prefer abortion…

PatriotRider on May 23, 2013 at 8:36 AM

Agenda 21…

PatriotRider on May 23, 2013 at 8:36 AM

Babies obviously contribute to global warming…

PatriotRider on May 23, 2013 at 8:37 AM

Time for a simple, no allowance, no deduction, no loophole FLAT TAX and put every damn one of these corrupt SOBs out on the street.

deadrody on May 23, 2013 at 8:38 AM

What degree of tax revolt would you think is necessary to achieve our aim?

RiverCocytus on May 23, 2013 at 8:38 AM

Obama’s proposed solution: Simply replace the cumbersom ADOPTION tax credit with a more streamlined ABORTION tax credit. Problem solved!

The Dems will sell it as deficit reduction on the basis of all the years worth of exemptions and child tax credits the taxpayer gives up.

The left is corrupt to the very core. Utter moral bankruptcy.

SoRight on May 23, 2013 at 8:38 AM

When government has the right to ask how much you earned last year, all of this is foreseeable. The answer really is easy: repeal the 16th amendment and with it goes the income tax.

Nemesis of Jihad on May 23, 2013 at 8:39 AM

Babies are a form of punishment…

Electrongod on May 23, 2013 at 8:15 AM

Some days more than others.

Happy Nomad on May 23, 2013 at 8:40 AM

Seriously though, people need to talk about tax revolt. If you really want a flat tax, you have to force the issue. If we cannot force the issue, then haven’t we already lost?

RiverCocytus on May 23, 2013 at 8:41 AM

OT…But KMOV fired the news anchor who was targeted and spoke out about it…

” My producer, Kevin, was just contacted by someone with Conners’s legal team. KMOV just terminated his employed on the basis of, according to them, his Facebook post, which I first covered here…

‘We regret to announce that Larry Conners is no longer a KMOV news reporter. Larry was a valued member of KMOV for a long time, and we will miss him…

For KMOV, there is no higher cause than unbiased, objective news reporting. It is what our viewers expect and it is what we work very hard to deliver. We can accept no less. Larry is certainly entitled to his opinion, but taking a personal political position on one of the Station’s Facebook pages creates an appearance of bias that is inconsistent with important journalistic standards…”

http://danaloeschradio.com/breaking-kmov-fires-larry-conners/

workingclass artist on May 23, 2013 at 8:47 AM

We are in the midst of an international adoption. (Case is *finally* moving forward again after sitting in red tape for years, and we might finalize in a few months – A cautiously optimistic hooray!) The amount we have spent over the amount they offer for a credit (which we haven’t filed since we don’t have the child yet) is unbelievable.

I can’t come up with any practical reasons for this, only nefarious ones.

CJ on May 23, 2013 at 8:49 AM

UGH!

“Last week news broke that the IRS was facing a class action lawsuit over allegations that it improperly accessed and stole the health records of some 10 million Americans, including medical records of all California state judges. In a case involving solely a tax matter involving a former employee of the company, these agents stole more than 60,000,000 medical records of more than 10,000,000 Americans, including at least 1,000,000 Californians. The lawsuit by John Doe Company against 15 John Doe IRS agents is seeking punitive damages for constitutional violations, as well as $25,000 “per violation per individual” in compensatory damages.

But the story does not end there.
The IRS to this day is refusing to return the records including intimate medical records to the company…”

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/05/scandal-irs-will-not-return-60000000-medical-records-it-stole-from-california-company/

workingclass artist on May 23, 2013 at 8:49 AM

The IRS, EPA, and several others need to be cut back by 50% so that they only have resources to do the job that they are supposed to do. They have too many employees and too much money to behave themselves.

scgas on May 23, 2013 at 8:52 AM

tax revolt. These people cannot be trusted with public money. Let them wait for it for as long as they made the public wait.

RiverCocytus on May 23, 2013 at 8:52 AM

What did I hear about Penny Pritzker under reporting her income ?

This alone was more than ALL of the Adoption claw back.

Jabberwock on May 23, 2013 at 8:55 AM

69% ?!?! That’s absolutely outrageous. I wonder how that compares to the percentage of audits that are conducted on those who claim the EITC?
Isn’t that the credit that is known by the IRS to be widely abused?

lynncgb on May 23, 2013 at 8:58 AM

Babies are a form of punishment…

Electrongod on May 23, 2013 at 8:15 AM

Some days more than others.

Happy Nomad on May 23, 2013 at 8:40 AM

Heh. “A noise at one end and a mess at the other”, as one father said.

MelonCollie on May 23, 2013 at 8:58 AM

CJ on May 23, 2013 at 8:49 AM

Very exciting news. It’s a painful process, but well worth it in the end.

kenro85 on May 23, 2013 at 8:58 AM

#AbolishTheIRS

ITguy on May 23, 2013 at 9:00 AM

Well, surely something is wrong when people who adopt get a tax credit for the new child, while a woman who aborts gets no such benefit from the tax code. Something is fishy about that. It sounds like a tax dodge by people who don’t want to pay their fair share. /

Liam on May 23, 2013 at 9:01 AM

#AbolishTheIRS

ITguy on May 23, 2013 at 9:03 AM

CJ on May 23, 2013 at 8:49 AM

It is so, so, worth it. A thousand times over.

the_moll on May 23, 2013 at 9:07 AM

Liberals prefer abortion…

PatriotRider on May 23, 2013 at 8:36 AM

This. The IRS is ticked off about losing tax dollars that they’d have received if these babies simply weren’t available for adoption.

Abortion, in this instance, is a money maker for the feds.

Corrupt IRS employees should be given the alternatives of being fired or reassigned to disaster relief. Ship them out to OK to help them–assuming they’re not too incompetent to help.

BuckeyeSam on May 23, 2013 at 9:11 AM

These people cannot be trusted with public money.

RiverCocytus on May 23, 2013 at 8:52 AM

I suspect a LOT of people are starting to reach that conclusion right about now.

Aitch748 on May 23, 2013 at 9:12 AM

BTW: go where the real money is–EITC fraud. Oh, wait, those are Dem voters.

BuckeyeSam on May 23, 2013 at 9:12 AM

Everyone of these liberal abuses should be highlighted right now. Although these have undoubtedly been building up for years, it’s kind of helpful that Pandora’s Box is opening up in time to cripple Obama’s second term.

Unleash the hounds.

BuckeyeSam on May 23, 2013 at 9:14 AM

Did a special risk exist in the claiming of this tax credit?

From the “progressive” perspective, YES!

If adoption is viewed as an option, more women with unplanned pregnancies might choose to put their baby up for adoption, rather than ending its life with abortion.

That is a risk/threat to Planned Parenthood’s business model.

Seriously.

Planned Parenthood’s business model counts on women having 2 to 3 abortions in their teens and early 20′s.

Anything that threatens Planned Parenthood is considered a threat by the Democratic party and their operatives in Big Government.

ITguy on May 23, 2013 at 9:15 AM

Just when I think I can’t be surprised by anything coming out of this administration. This is third-world dictator stuff. Whats worst is nobody will be punished. Many will be promoted and it will continue.

Alabama Infidel on May 23, 2013 at 9:27 AM

It is so, so, worth it. A thousand times over.

the_moll on May 23, 2013 at 9:07 AM

It absolutely is! Congratulations on being almost THERE! Oh, and keep your receipts. :)

hoosiermama on May 23, 2013 at 9:27 AM

Grist for the abortion mill….

Axeman on May 23, 2013 at 9:29 AM

***

Anything that threatens Planned Parenthood Big Abortion is considered a threat by the Democratic party and their operatives in Big Government.

ITguy on May 23, 2013 at 9:15 AM

FIFY.

BuckeyeSam on May 23, 2013 at 9:34 AM

■ Sixty-nine percent of all adoption credit claims during the 2012 filing season were selected for audit.

■ Of the completed adoption tax credit audits, over 55 percent ended with no change in the tax owed or refund due in fiscal year 2012. The median refund amount involved in these audits is over $15,000 and the median adjusted gross income (AGI) of the taxpayers involved is about 64,000. The average adoption credit correspondence audit currently takes 126 days, causing a lengthy delay for taxpayers waiting for refunds.

so 69% of adoptees were audited, and 55% had no change.

So 45% were assessed a change.

45% violated their tax duties in some way, shape or form. So the IRS correctly targeted a high-risk group.

What’s the problem?

nonpartisan on May 23, 2013 at 9:35 AM

But…but…but…those adoptive families belonged to the Tea Party, so no good deed goes unpunished!

Obama: You have to punish them with a bay-buh!

Steve Z on May 23, 2013 at 9:36 AM

Let me try that again.

***

Anything that threatens Planned Parenthood Big Abortion is considered a threat by the Democratic party and their operatives in Big Government.

ITguy on May 23, 2013 at 9:15 AM

FIFY.

BuckeyeSam on May 23, 2013 at 9:38 AM

Another class-action lawsuit I hope.

In all aspects of the IRS corruption scandal, we have been looking at how conservative groups were discriminated against to help steal the election of 2012.

What we are not looking for yet is evidence of the IRS favoring liberal groups. Can you imagine what the audit rate is among employees of Planned Parenthood? I’d be surprised if a single person was audited. Planned Parenthood itself audited? Never going to happen.

A study group needs to get cranking on statistics. The corruption at the IRS has been developing and growing at the IRS like a cancer, probably for twenty years or more. Barky only drove the latest incarnation.

slickwillie2001 on May 23, 2013 at 9:42 AM

Obama hates babies?

faraway on May 23, 2013 at 8:11 AM

Babies are a form of punishment…

Electrongod on May 23, 2013 at 8:15 AM

Liberals prefer abortion…

PatriotRider on May 23, 2013 at 8:36 AM

You’re just seeing this? Someone should do a reality show on kids coming of age. Begin with the parents they never see. Then the TV they watch, the teachers they have and the pop culture they inhabit while facing an economy more worried about global warm, er climate change than whether we will be leaving anyone from the old black and white American gene pool around to drown in the rising water and storms.

A couple of years ago, some friends and I determined that the effective result of various cultural and social engineering influences in the nation were to destroy the traditional family. I could do a dissertation on how our government is quietly performing a cultural destruction and genocide and they know it.

Because of the terse nature of communication here, I made mention of it and it came our as attacks on white Christians who are certainly the bull’s eye but not the only group people affected.

I have had libs over drinks in DC promise me that they were going to make this country brown, black, female and secular.

The startling aspect here is that these audit criteria and the audits themselves are so much an active program. They really don’t need to be so aggressive as they already have the program working so well in the rest of the farm they are running.

The IRS is just another lever they control.

No back to the war on women and the right to free birth control pills! They are victime! LOL

IlikedAUH2O on May 23, 2013 at 9:44 AM

so 69% of adoptees were audited, and 55% had no change.

The adopted children were audited? Are you sure about that?

So 45% were assessed a change.

In which direction is that change? How many got a larger refund than they first claimed?

45% violated their tax duties in some way, shape or form. So the IRS correctly targeted a high-risk group.

Violation or accounting error? Were adoptive parents trying to game the system? I bet to you, they were; they tried to get out of paying taxes by adopting a child. It’s not cheap. Adoption lawyers’ fees are quite high. A self-declared Harvard Law grad should know that.

Duh!

What’s the problem?

nonpartisan on May 23, 2013 at 9:35 AM

Liberalism in general, and you in particular.

You do realize you’re not welcome here among us, right? We only have to put up with you because Management forces you on us. You’re not one of us Conservatives. Why don’t you just stay away from us and hang out at HuffPo instead, where you’d feel welcome and fit right in.

And go play Switch while you’re at it.

Liam on May 23, 2013 at 9:50 AM

Obviously. If these awful adopters are that opposed to having just aborted the babies, they need an eye kept on them. Crazy ultra-right-wing bastards.

MadisonConservative on May 23, 2013 at 9:50 AM

only 1.5% of the claims were disallowed.

45% violated their tax duties in some way, shape or form. So the IRS correctly targeted a high-risk group.

What’s the problem?

nonpartisan on May 23, 2013 at 9:35 AM

So I guess reading comprehension isn’t one of your talents either! Dipsh^t!

texgal on May 23, 2013 at 9:53 AM

Planned Parenthood is about to get a bonanza of money from insurance companies after the contraception mandate goes into effect. They will now be paid for pills they have given out free. We are going to see massive advertising and cultural nudging to get every girl and woman taking birth control. And of course, if the contraceptives sold to you by Planned Parenthood fail, they will be happy to sell you an abortion. And all the profits get recycled back into Democratic campaigns.

Adoption messes up this whole business/political model. And yes, it really is that sinister.

rockmom on May 23, 2013 at 9:55 AM

The IRS needs an ombudsman to whom taxpayers can complain and seek reimbursement for needless expense incurred to respond to IRS badgering.

BuckeyeSam on May 23, 2013 at 9:57 AM

Adoption messes up this whole business/political model. And yes, it really is that sinister.

rockmom on May 23, 2013 at 9:55 AM

Also, with Plan B ordered by a judge to be given to any female of any age on request, PP can make money off that drug, too.

Liam on May 23, 2013 at 10:02 AM

A friend of mine was audited last year for claiming the adoption tax credit. They had to show proof that they adopted, even though they had sent that in a previous filing, and it took forever for them to get their return as well.

As I told her, you would think in this day and age we would be encouraging adoption for unwanted children. Everyone should count.

pt on May 23, 2013 at 10:05 AM

Of course, a majority of adoptive parents are Christian too, and the secular leftists hate hate hate Christianity.

kirkill on May 23, 2013 at 10:06 AM

What’s the problem?

nonpartisan on May 23, 2013 at 9:35 AM

Got into that Harvard Alumni database yet sweetie?

slickwillie2001 on May 23, 2013 at 10:09 AM

45% violated their tax duties in some way, shape or form. So the IRS correctly targeted a high-risk group.

What’s the problem?

nonpartisan on May 23, 2013 at 9:35 AM

Have you ever been audited?

They used to have a taxpayer compliance audit where you needed original birth certificate(s) to kick off the review — those of yourself and dependents. (I wonder if that has changed.)

My return is (giggle) several page long and has been for years. The auditor HAS to justify their time by getting $$$$ from the schmucks they drag in.

I know they will deny it but even the government has to worry about efficiency ratings or similar criteria for programs.

A good question is whether this makes any collection sense.

I already know the answer to that and so do you.

IlikedAUH2O on May 23, 2013 at 10:31 AM

Well, it’s a safe bet the troll would never have made it as a tax attorney.

Apparently this fat, ugly, unpopular teenager thinks that, just because the IRS corrects a tax return, that automatically means fraud on the part of the filer. What a moron.

Twice in the last several years, I’ve gotten correspondence from the IRS about corrections to my return. In both cases, the correction was in my favor.

Dope.

CurtZHP on May 23, 2013 at 10:39 AM

Saving the past and the future.

Reince was good on Hannity last night and pretty forceful.

I have a hook for you traditional Americans.

School loans.

Give huge $$$$$ credit and mommy money for married folks with college degrees to have kids.

And pass a tax on university endowments.

Now the real nuts here can come out and make smart remarks about eugenics.

Secondly, I realize how much more important Tesla’s stock price is but really…

IlikedAUH2O on May 23, 2013 at 10:41 AM

I almost assumed this would be a troll-free thread. I mean, who in their right mind would go to bat for the IRS? Then along comes nonpartyinmypants.

CurtZHP on May 23, 2013 at 10:47 AM

Really, I’m not certain about the point of the targeting. I can’t imagine is was political; adoptions seem to be one of the fairly common activities no matter your political leanings, at least in my experience. And as was pointed out, it had to have cost the IRS substantially more to do the audit than they could have even hoped to take in. Sounds like it’s just more government run amuck to me.

kenro85 on May 23, 2013 at 8:27 AM

I think there’s two reasons that people have pointed out.

1. Conservatives are known to favor adoption so liberals may have assumed this was an easy way to detect and harass conservatives.

2. Liberals favor abortion and think we have an overpopulation problem, so seek in whatever way they can to increase the number of aborted children and decrease the number of adopted children. As others have pointed out, there is also a Planned Parenthood angle as well.

Doomberg on May 23, 2013 at 10:48 AM

I adopted last year, and I was hesitant to claim the credit for this year.

The staffers warned us that the adoption credit is risky in some ways. If you claim it, you cannot file electronically–it’s all by mail. It’s the largest credit on the tax form, up to 12,000 dollars if you have a special needs child. And until this tax year (for 2012) it was refundable. So it would be very easy to claim you adopted two or three kids and claim a massive refund. I can see a fair amount of attention paid to it. It is, I believe, the only thing that is guaranteed to have a human look at your return, and not just a computer.

For tax year 2012, it’s different. It is no longer refundable, and you no longer have to send in proof of adoption. So even though I claimed it for last year, I actually didn’t get anything, as I don’t have enough income after deductions, etc. to reduce any tax. I only claimed it to preserve the credit for later.

Vanceone on May 23, 2013 at 11:01 AM

Doomberg on May 23, 2013 at 10:48 AM

Yeah, the more I read this thread, the more I realized I may have been incorrect about the percentages of conservatives vs liberals adopt. At least, it looks like a lot of Hot Airians have or are.

kenro85 on May 23, 2013 at 11:09 AM

so 69% of adoptees were audited, and 55% had no change.
So 45% were assessed a change.
45% violated their tax duties in some way, shape or form. So the IRS correctly targeted a high-risk group.
What’s the problem?
nonpartisan on May 23, 2013 at 9:35 AM

Your question implies that you’re not even remotely contemplating the reasoning of why this sub group had a 7 out of 10 audit rate. Don’t know if you have ever been involved in an IRS audit (personal or business) but surely you can imagine how invasive, time consuming, and stressful they are. Your question also implies that your unaware or uninterested in some ‘questionable’ (to say at minimum) ethics issues with bureaucrats abusing their power with and at the IRS.

anuts on May 23, 2013 at 11:12 AM

This is proof of pure evil.

In fact in this hyperbolic world it is impossible to express how evil this is. Evil doesn’t even begin to express it.

petunia on May 23, 2013 at 11:17 AM

Well….the obvious question is what percentage of adopters are conservative? Given what we know, it would be logical to deduce that the IRS was targeting groups thought to be conservative in membership.

I wonder what percentage or republican donors are audited? I donated to a campaign this past year for the first time ever…tax refund was delayed several months for the first time ever as well. Coincidence? I wonder…

FreeManOtis on May 23, 2013 at 11:21 AM

We adopted our son from the “waiting child” program in China, back in 2008, and we adopted our daughter domestically in 2003. We’d claimed the adoption tax credit for many years (you can spread it out, obviously, up to the total amount, until it’s expended), having provided massive quantities of paperwork for both, but especially the international adoption. Then, in 2010, we were audited. In the end, I had to provide – by certified mail, yet again – the same exact paperwork morass that I had already sent in previous years. The best part is that my employment requires a great deal of financial transparency with the Federal gov’t anyway, so they know everything they need to know about me already.

We ended up getting slightly more than I’d claimed, after several months of back-and-forth, and instances of the right hand not knowing what the left was doing. ‘Twas a tooth-gnasher.

So I guess we would have been one of the evil 55% who tried to “cheat” the IRS, apparently. Oh, and for what it’s worth, the tax credit doesn’t come close to covering the cost; it merely makes it less crushing for a family like ours. We’re finally (after nearly five years) getting ready to “pay off” our son’s loan, and we’d do it again in half a heartbeat. Worth every penny, tear, sleepless night, and desperate prayer.

jakeller74 on May 23, 2013 at 12:04 PM

What’s the problem?
nonpartisan on May 23, 2013 at 9:35 AM

Maybe they should be more diligent with
Illegal Alien Child Tax Credit

LoganSix on May 23, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Maybe they should be more diligent with
Illegal Alien Child Tax Credit

LoganSix on May 23, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Thanks. I vaguely remembered that story but didn’t have the link handy.

I’m sure there are standing orders in the IRS to avoid any inspection of all EIC, since EIC abusers are surely democratic party voters.

slickwillie2001 on May 23, 2013 at 12:23 PM

jakeller74 on May 23, 2013 at 12:04 PM

Similar story, jakeller74. We’re so blessed.

hoosiermama on May 23, 2013 at 1:26 PM

But, were teh ghey parents who wanted to adopt also audited????

I doubts it.

ted c on May 23, 2013 at 8:25 AM

Well, that would explain the 31% of adoptive parents who were NOT audited.

wren on May 23, 2013 at 1:36 PM

I wonder how many IRS audits Kermit Gosnell had to sit through?

paulus1 on May 23, 2013 at 1:38 PM

Absolutely demonic. The luciferian government worshipers are evil.

tom daschle concerned on May 23, 2013 at 1:54 PM