Private IRS Collectors Waste Taxpayer Money While Squeezing Low-Income Families

Program costs three times the amount collected from financially-strapped taxpayers

Boston – New data from the National Taxpayer Advocate for the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) shows that a congressionally-mandated program requiring the IRS to use private debt collectors, like past efforts, targets financially vulnerable families while costing taxpayers three times more than it recovers.

IRS data show that 44% of taxpayers who made payments to the IRS after being subjected to private debt collectors had incomes below 250% of the poverty level ($24,200 for a family of four), and 28% made less than $20,000 per year. Meanwhile, the IRS private debt collection program cost $20 million to operate while only generating $6.7 million in revenue.

“The IRS private debt collector program is the epitome of waste and abuse in government programs,” stated Chi Chi Wu, a staff attorney at National Consumer Law Center. “Forcing the IRS to use private debt collectors to put the squeeze on vulnerable low-income families simply lines the pockets of these private collectors while jeopardizing the economic well-being of families.”

In her annual report to Congress, the National Taxpayer Advocate conducted an analysis of 4,141 taxpayers who made payments to IRS after being subjected to private debt collection. The analysis revealed that:

  • 19% of these taxpayers had incomes below the federal poverty level, with a median income of $6,386;
  • 25% had incomes above the federal poverty level but below 250% of that threshold, with a median income of $23,096; and
  • 28% had annual income of less than $20,000.

The data also show that the private collectors – including one previously terminated from federal student loan collections for providing inaccurate information to borrowers – are pressuring families into making payments they cannot afford while meeting basic living expenses.

The National Taxpayer Advocate reported that 45% of taxpayers who agreed to payment plans with private collectors had incomes that were less than their “allowable living expenses.” This is a measure used by the IRS to estimate the amount of income needed to pay for essential living expenses, such as housing, utilities, transportation, food, and out-of-pocket healthcare costs. IRS payment plans are usually calculated to leave the taxpayer enough funds to pay for these living expenses; if taxpayers’ income is below this amount, collection attempts are suspended. But it appears that private debt collectors may have squeezed taxpayers into agreeing to payment plans despite being too poor to pay. This means that financially strapped families could be left with insufficient funds to pay for life necessities, putting their health, shelter, or well-being at risk.

The IRS has tried using private collectors twice before and both attempts were big money-losers. The first attempt in the mid-1990s was scrapped a year after the program was launched, after losing $17 million. The second experiment began in 2006 and ended three years later after a net loss of almost $4.5 million to the government. This third attempt has resulted in a $13.3 million loss, and private collectors have only managed to collect less than 1% of the $920 million in tax debts assigned to them.

For this go-around, the IRS was forced by a 2015 law to place certain tax debts with private collectors. “Congress should repeal this wasteful use of taxpayer money and instead make a more responsible investment in funding for the IRS to do its job properly,” Wu urged.

Wu also noted that one of the four private collectors hired by the IRS includes Pioneer Credit Recovery (owned by Navient), whose contract to collect student loans was terminated in 2015 by the U.S. Department of Education because it provided inaccurate information to borrowers. Unfortunately, the Department, under Secretary DeVos, recently reversed the firing of Pioneer, which is also now seeking a new contract to collect federal student loan debts. Pioneer was also sued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for providing bad information, processing payments incorrectly, and illegally cheating struggling borrowers out of their rights to lower repayments.


National Consumer Law Center contacts: Chi Chi Wu ([email protected]) or Jan Kruse ([email protected]); (617) 542-8010

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

May 16, 2021
By Cathy Moran, Esq., (Redwood City, CA) Have I got a story for you. A rousing tale of schedules, hearings, frustrations, and ultimately fortunes, traceable to a good story in the fee application. Maybe that's a bit overblown, but I'm telling this story with a purpose. Good stories lead to fair compensation for bankruptcy attorneys. Fee applications aren't hard Filing...
M Joseph Photo 2-1-22
June 12, 2022
It is always troublesome when an individual bankruptcy petition is filed by power of attorney. It may be less of a concern in a chapter 7 case when the debtor is in the military, incarcerated, or temporarily disabled. More worrisome is the incompetent or advanced aged debtor who has been placed in a chapter 13 by someone holding a power...
November 19, 2023
It is with sadness that we report the passing of William (“Bill”) Schantz formerly of the Office of UST.
January 23, 2022
Max Gardner’s Top Ten Reasons The late Waylon Jennings had a hit song years ago called “Sick and Tired of Getting Up Sick and Tired.” The song related to the chronic consumption of alcohol but the analogy to the need for a mandatory rule for mortgage payments through the Chapter 13 Trustee is not that far-fetched. As a debtor’s attorney...
June 18, 2023
By Regina Logsdon, Academy Executive Director Erin M. McCartney was appointed as the Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the District of Nebraska beginning on January 1, 2022.  Erin stepped into metaphorically very large and capable shoes as she replaced retiring Kathleen Laughlin.  Erin grew up in Illinois, graduating college from Bradley University in Peoria (Go Braves!).  Law school required a...
NBR cropped 2
May 14, 2023
Dear Readers: Want to know why your 1L Civ Pro course is your best friend when it comes to “undue hardship” cases?  Because burdens of proof matter.  (They matter in other cases, too, but I’m in love with the case of Love v. U.S. Dept. of Education (In re Love), Case No. 19-20532-C-7, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern...
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
March 26, 2023
A 34-year-old Chapter 7 debtor could discharge his student loan obligation by establishing that he could not reasonably make payments on the balance, could not maintain a reasonable standard of living, and because the expiration of his payment term had already passed, his standard of living was likely to persist, with no realistic future prospects. (Silverstein) In re Wolfson, No....
May 28, 2023
Retirement of Judge David Robert Duncan
November 6, 2022
Introduction This year sees changes in the Code and numerous new and amended Rules of BankruptcyProcedure that are to be effective December 1. The statutory amendments and the changes in therules that do not relate to cases under subchapter V of Chapter 11 are summarized below. They will be followed, by a digest of other new and amended rule and...
October 1, 2023
In conjunction with The Academy’s recent webinar on Student Loans, Scott and Josh offer a follow-up check list – a MUST READ! “With all the new student loan servicing changes, what should debtor attorneys be doing as to pending chapter 13 cases where their clients owe federal student loans? Here’s the short list:”