‘Cyber Hall of Shame’ targets delinquent taxpayers (Colorado)

Channel 9 News, Denver, Colorado ^ | 27 March 2003 | Adam Schrager

[PatrioticAmerican]

 

‘Cyber Hall of Shame’ targets delinquent taxpayers	created: March 26, 2003 - 5:27 PM updated: March 27, 2003 - 5:50 AM
9NEWS Legislative Reporter Adam Schrager
<!null CB> RELATED State of Louisiana latest delinquent taxpayer accounts Connecticut delinquent taxpayer list DENVER - Public shaming could soon be in store for Colorado's worst tax evaders. State lawmakers are debating a plan to publish the names and addresses on the Internet of those who owe the state of Colorado at least $20,000 in income taxes. Its sponsor calls House Bill 1210 a "Cyber Hall of Shame." 9NEWS Reporter Adam Schrager talks with a lawmaker who hopes to shame Colorado residents who owe thousands in back taxes, 4 p.m. March 26, 2003. "These people have received plenty of notice and they've just ignored the law," said Rep. Alice Madden, D-Boulder, who is sponsoring the measure. "These are people who have received letters from the state, phone calls from the state and in many cases been taken to court by the state and still, they have thumbed their noses at the law." According to the Colorado Department of Revenue, there are 1,541 individuals and businesses who owe more than $20,000 each in overdue income taxes. The list of their tax identification numbers makes up 34 pages of single-spaced typed copy and the cumulative total they owe is $96.8 million. The largest single debtor owes Colorado $5,384,512.50 with the top 10 delinquents owing almost $13 million in back taxes. The debate comes as state lawmakers take on Colorado's worst budget crisis since World War II. They have been required to cut $890 million from this year's $13.2 billion budget and are expected to have cut more than $800 million from next year's budget before the session ends in May. "I was completely shocked when I saw this. Matter of fact, it took my breath away," said Madden. "I just thought here we are laying people off for the state. We're cutting off medical coverage. We're taking away textbook funding and there's people who owe this much money out there who think that's just fine." Currently, under state law, information on taxes owed is confidential. It would take legislative approval to not only publish the names of the tax debtors, but to do so on the Internet. Louisiana and Connecticut also publish the names and addresses of delinquent taxpayers on their state-run Web sites. Connecticut revenue officials indicate they have increased their collection of overdue taxes by $115 million in the five years there since the public shaming became state law. Madden says she hopes people will "give up and pay up" before their names ever have to receive worldwide attention. "We have to run our government efficiently," Madden said. "No business would let their accounts receivable just slide by. This is efficient government. Of course, you go after the people who owe you money." Opponents of the measure fear the impact on potentially innocent civilians. At least 90 days before the names could be released to the public, the Department of Revenue would send a notice by certified mail to the delinquent taxpayer. However, some critics say it sometimes takes much longer than that for the government to realize it's made a mistake in labeling someone a tax evader. They also worry about the 15 days it would take for the taxpayer who does pay up to be removed from the list. "I think it's creating a situation that's going to cause problems for folks and some of them are going to be innocent," said Rep. Bill Cadman, R-Colorado Springs, who cast the only vote against the measure in the House Information and Technology Committee where it passed 10-1. "I think it just really starts to pull us in the wrong direction. You may see other agencies saying 'Hey, we can't get our job done, let's publish a list we think will help effectuate the outcome we're looking for.' "I don't think it's good government. It's not good public policy." The biggest hurdle for the measure though is reflected in its cost. Implementing the program would cost under $50,000 in the next couple years, but finding any money for new programs, even those which may pay for themselves, is increasingly difficult to find. The measure is expected to come before the House Appropriations Committee, which allocates the money, as soon as next week. "We fully expect people to pay up before they ever get on the list," said Madden. "This would be money well spent."   (Copyright 2003 by 9NEWS KUSA-TV, All Rights Reserved)

 

[PatrioticAmerican]

It seems without a conviction of criminal activity, Colorado seems to want to publish libel against her citizens. We all know how inaccurate the goobermint can be, such that innocent people will most likely be the target of such publications.

Will Colorado accept lawsuits for libel that causes harm?

Will someone lose a job or contract?

Will a company or person become blacklisted by their peers over a false publication?

I agree that a conviction may be the source for a publication, but to publish based upon an inaccurate computer tax record would be negligence in the first degree.

[proxy_user]

Even if you do owe money to someone, it's not a crime. If you can't pay now, they creditor will just have to wait until you can pay.

[banjo joe]

And what will be done when some of the delinquints turn out to be state law-makers, judges, department heads or political appointees? Hmmm??? Will they also be posted?

[PatrioticAmerican]

Good question.

[cricket]

"I agree that a conviction may be the source for a publication, but to publish based upon an inaccurate computer tax record would be negligence in the first degree."

. . .negligence and ignorance create the worst circumstances; leave it to Liberal Colorado to demonstrate both.

[cricket]

Compassionate Liberalism at work. . .

[templar]

there are 1,541 individuals and businesses who owe more than $20,000 each in overdue income taxes. The list of their tax identification numbers ...

Pay up or have your name, address, and SS# published on the internet. That'll teach 'em.

[Roscoe]

Connecticut revenue officials indicate they have increased their collection of overdue taxes by $115 million in the five years there since the public shaming became state law.

Tax cheats must hate it.

[Eala]

Pay up or have your name, address, and SS# published on the internet. That'll teach 'em.

Pay up or be subject to identity theft. Nice.

[PatrioticAmerican]

The issue is that the state's records are notoriously innaccurate. I deal primarily with the state government computer systems and know very well that all of these systems have serious problems.

Innocent people will be branded as tax cheats.

If the state wants to get their money, they have the courts to do that. Why the publications? That would seem slanderous and a grudge, not a respectable method of tax collection.

Fact is, if they know who is cheating, enough to publish their names, then they have enough to prosecute.

[PatrioticAmerican]

"$115 million in the five years "

Is that $115mm per year or total? Besides, $115mm?? That isn't squat.

[N. Theknow]

Unreal.

In Connecticut they had pictures of sexual predators on the web and Someone (ACLU?) sued to have them removed.

[Roscoe]

The issue is that the state's records are notoriously innaccurate.

Source, please.

[Roscoe]

Is that $115mm per year or total?

It's an exact quote from the article that YOU posted.

You didn't read your own post?

[PatrioticAmerican]

"Source, please."

Me, and every opther computer professional dealing with these systems. You can FOI document after document for assessments performed against these systems and find problem after problem.

Do you have a source that states these systems ARE accurate? Accurate enough to be the source of personal publication?

[PatrioticAmerican]

What's with you Roscoe? What makes you so cranky?

[Roscoe]

Me, and every opther computer professional dealing with these systems.

I don't think so.

[PatrioticAmerican]

Are you an expert in state computer systems?

[Roscoe]

Are you an expert in state computer systems?

I suspect that I might know more about the reliablity of such information than you. That's why asked for a source, that's why you keep blowing smoke.

[Middle Man]

Hear, hear! The state and federal governments need to do a lot of more housecleaning before they go after anyone for tax "crimes". We need public hearings in every "piggyback" state like we had with the Roth Senate hearings on the IRS in 1997.