I pit the IRS

THe IRS lost Lerner’s emails? They were on her computer, not an exchange server? This proves that the IRS is not competent to do its basic job and should be disbanded. Companies are required to keep emails backed up for 7 years. The IRS, on the other hand, leaves them on individuals’ computers where they can be deleted at will. Gross incompetence, stupidity, and no court should ever trust their side of any story against a taxpayer again.

IRS: “This taxpayer owes us $45,000 your honor. Our records shows this to be true.”

Judge: “Your computer records?”

IRS: “Yes your honor.”

Judge: “Case dismissed. Computer records of the IRS are invalid as evidence.”

Which companies? Did you make that up?

Sarbanes-Oxley.

http://www.techrepublic.com/article/what-the-sarbanes-oxley-act-means-for-it-managers/

Although trivialized by mixed personal and business content, e-mails are, in fact, corporate documents and should be preserved. The courts will treat e-mail messages and attachments as business records that must be retained to achieve regulatory compliance. Most large companies have a policy on e-mail communication retention. But is this common practice? The answer may come from a PricewaterhouseCoopers survey titled “Digital Discovery and its Importance on the Practice of Litigation.” Surprisingly, respondents stated that their clients rarely act upon notice of litigation to stop automatic overwriting processes. In another section of the survey, almost 50 percent of the respondents said that e-mails are the most requested electronic data.

The scenario is common: A company gets a new Microsoft Exchange server, and the users are happy with the Outlook calendar and Internet e-mail capabilities. Messages go in and out, but there is no archival process. Backups are sent to tape, which are rotated weekly and overwritten. However, according to Sarbanes-Oxley, if your network administrator is instructed to overwrite the tapes, then your company knowingly allows potential evidence to be destroyed. Depending on your business risks, this scenario could become a malpractice time bomb. In addition, a simple backup of the Information Store with all the mailboxes in your Exchange server will not give you all the e-mails going in or out. So you are at risk when users delete messages, especially if they are engaged in some kind of misconduct.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act imposes strict penalties for the destruction, alteration and falsification of business records. Email and Instant Messages, given their transactional nature, are considered to be viable business records that are subject to legislation prohibiting their intentional destruction. The Act states that companies and their accounting firms must maintain records of their company audits (audit documents) for at least seven years and the Public Accounting Oversight Board stipulates this requirement. To comply, many firms keep their records in paper format, but the massive amounts of electronic data generated make it impossible to store this data for the required 7-year retention timeframe.

But, the Act is clear in that destruction of electronic records, including deletion, carries with it some stiff penalties. Section 802 of Sarbanes Oxley imposes fines of up to $1,000,000 and prison terms of up to 20 years for knowingly deleting an email with the intent to impede, obstruct or influence a current or future federal investigation. Section 103 mandates that audit work papers must be retained for more than five years and a failure to do so is punishable by up to 5 years in prison and/or a fine.

But the IRS, they can destroy their emails for any reason, just because they feel like it. Again, no court should ever trust the IRS over a taxpayers’ word again.

Could you cite the part of that law that says “Companies are required to keep emails backed up for 7 years.”

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that if you have all your journal entries or audit trails backed up to email you can delete it because ‘it’s email’, I’m just saying that I don’t see anything there that says I’m required to save all my emails for 7 years.

Wait a second, I’m confused. I thought the NSA was kind enough to keep all things like emails and phone calls in that big database of theirs.

Can’t we just ask them for it?

Where does it say anything about holding email for 7 years?

Oh geez, can we get anyone involved in compliance with companies to vouch for the 7-year requirement? NOt that it isn’t plainly stated. Emails are part of audits and SOX compliant companies archive their emails these days for 7 years.

Another cite:

What are the requirements?

Sarbanes-Oxley mandates that all electronic records, audit work papers and correspondence be retained for a period of seven years. Further, tamper proof resources are required to prevent corruption and modification of records.
What is the cost of non-compliance?

Heavy fines, up to 20 years imprisonment and loss of company reputation.
What is the significance of Sarbanes-Oxley compliance?

The rule is designed to protect investors from fraudulent activity and safeguard financial data. All public companies are responsible to implement and practice dependable record management policies that allow for disclosure of information and transparency of business practices.

I guess the public doesn’t need to know when it comes to the IRS.

The dog ate her emails. And yes, adaher is right.

The Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act of 2002 legislates the duration and method in which financial companies must store records. SOX safeguards against accounting errors and financial fraud. SOX specifically states that records, including email, instant messages, and other data files must be saved for at least “no less than seven years”. This allows financial regulators to easily audit transactions and email communications

I know we all want to instinctually argue with adaher at every given moment, but he seems to have provided some pretty good cites that emails probably should be backed up and saved for 7 years in order to keep compliance. And even if there is no law, it’s still inexcusible for the IRS to be throwing the excuse around that the emails were deleted. The IRS should have higher standards for record keeping - including emails - than the minimum that the law requires.

Pains me to say it, but adaher makes a good point in this pitting.

Wow, accountant’s flame wars are fucking stupid.

He’s claiming that retaining 7 years of emails is requried by law but can’t seem to point to where the actual Act says this.

By the way, The IRS came up with 24,000 Lerner emails from 2009 to 2011 and said it is producing 67,000 emails to and from Lerner, covering 2009 to 2013.

Also, The IRS has not always backed up all employee emails due to the cost the agency would incur for allowing 90,000 employees to store their information on the IRS’s internal system. IRS employees have the capacity to store about 6,000 emails in their active Outlook email boxes, which are saved on the IRS centralized network, with about 1,800 emails in their active folders prior to July 2011.

Yeah, for every negative thing that’s said, someone has to say something positive. :smiley:

I think he’s referring to this:

However, I’m not sure it applies. For one, is the IRS a public accounting firm? Second, this paragraph is referring to audit reports and not litigation. Normally, the rules of litigation state that data should be retained anytime there is litigation or a likelihood thereof. So the question then becomes, when did they learn and what steps did they take to salvage it.

But that’s all semantics. There is no way that the only copy of her email should have been on her work computer. That’s just idiotic from a technical standpoint. They’re going to get crucified and rightly so.

The law seems written broadly enough that it would take some case law precedence to determine if the IRS ran afoul. adaher isn’t a lawyer and neither are we (except a few of us), so it seems open to interpretation. Anyhow, the point still stands that even if the IRS didn’t break any laws, it’s still incompetent and inexcusable to use email deletion as a reason for not being able to provide evidence or information.

I see what they’re saying, but then the correct implementation would be to back up everything from the server, put strict mailbox limits on the employees so that they would have to back up and get rid of non-essential emails so that it’s not filling up space day-to-day, but everything still gets backed-up regardless.