Fired Oklahoma IRS worker warns agency cuts will leave tax cases unaddressed, lead to lost revenue, increase state tax burden
OKLAHOMA CITY (KFOR) — A former IRS employee, who moved his family to Oklahoma for a fresh start is now out of a job less than a month after starting, and is raising concerns that cuts to the IRS will leave tax cases unresolved, cost the government valuable revenue, and increase the burden on state taxes to fill in the gaps.
The man, News 4 is calling 'John' to protect his identity, had only been working for the IRS in Oklahoma City for about three weeks when he was let go last Friday as part of thousands of federal workers fired in an effort from the federal Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to reduce the federal workforce.While he says he's not angry about losing his job, he has concerns about how the country can continue to move forward while taking in much less money in tax revenue, due to the elimination of roles like his.
Warner Bros. demands removal of Chickasha's iconic leg lamp
'You don't work in federal employment for the pay,' John said. 'You're not going to get rich doing that.'Public service runs in his blood.'My dad was in the Marines during Korea,' he said. 'He was in the Army during Vietnam. He retired out of the Air Force. My mom was in the Air Force. My mom's dad served during Korea.'John followed that family tradition as soon as he turned 18.'Eleven days after high school graduation, I went to basic training,' he said.He served for several years as an Army mechanic before being medically discharged in 2004.He and his family settled in Washington state, where he built a civilian career.'I worked in retail,' he said. 'I was a salaried manager at a large retailer.'But he never quite felt fulfilled.'I'm a disabled vet,' he said. 'Since I got out of the military in '04, that always just seemed like something was missing.'Last year, he made a big decision.He, his wife, and their two kids uprooted their lives and moved to Oklahoma.They bought a farm near Chickasha.John got a job with the IRS in Oklahoma City.'It took about a $24,000 pay cut in order to take this job,' he said. 'Finally getting accepted into the IRS or into a government job, it felt like almost like I was going back home. I like serving the federal government. I believe in the Constitution. I believe in the country as a whole.'He started with the IRS on January 27.'I was under the impression I was going to spend another 15 years there,' he said. 'I was expecting to finish out my retirement there.'His job was to make sure businesses actually sent the IRS the tax money they withheld from employees' paychecks, instead of keeping it.
He told News 4, for every $1 the federal government spent paying his salary, he could bring in, on average, $20 in payroll tax revenue companies owed the federal government, but hadn't paid.He thought things were going well.'I was continually told by my trainer that I was way above where everybody else was because I had tax background prior to that,' he said.But last Friday, less than a month into the job, that all changed.'I went in and was training and the manager comes to our side of the building,' he said.His manager gave him the news: John was one of thousands of federal workers fired on orders from President Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) as part of an effort to cut spending.'[My manager] wasn't given a reason,' John said. 'He wasn't given any information other than here are the names in the list. Terminate these people.'On Monday, John received his official termination letter in the mail.It said he was fired due to 'current mission needs.''That blows my mind because the office itself is supposed to have ten revenue officers,' he said. 'With me there, we had four. Clearly, it's not a mission need thing. There are hundreds of cases that aren't getting touched in that one office out of three.'The letter also cited poor job performance as a reason for his termination.'I printed out my performance reviews,' John said. 'It says there is no performance history to display… We all know why I got terminated. It had nothing to do with performance. It's because somebody decided they don't need a collections agency.'This past week, President Trump and DOGE leader Elon Musk have celebrated the firings at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) convention.'We're removing all of the unnecessary, incompetent, and corrupt bureaucrats from the federal workforce,' Trump said at the CPAC convention on Saturday. 'That's what we're doing.'Trump has maintained that the federal workers who were fired were a burden weighing down the government.'We want to make government smaller, more efficient,' Trump said at CPAC. 'We want to keep the best people, and we're not going to keep the worst people.'John said hearing the President of the United States speak about him and his public service in that way — doesn't make him angry.'They could be 100% right,' he said. 'I'm not mad at people that voted for this administration. I understand why they did it. I agree that cuts need to happen.'But it does make him worry.'There's a way to do things with integrity,' he said. 'There's a way to do things honestly. And there are processes in place to make sure that that stuff gets taken care of that way.'He says, with the IRS being gutted, money the federal government is owed and needs will slip through the cracks.
'The loss of revenue is really going to hurt us,' he said. 'My concern is what are we going to replace it with? The government has to be funded. That's going to put a greater burden on the states. In a case like Oklahoma, where it's mainly agricultural, you would have to increase state tax. The people here can't afford that big of a jump in state tax.'
He thinks about Oklahoma's members of Congress, and the questions he'd like to ask them.
Arrests warrants issued for OK couple after viral video surfaces of child in cold
'I'd like them to have a solid plan as to how to protect the Oklahomans,' he said.And – he thinks about the decision he made just 11 days after graduating high school.
His lifelong commitment – to a country he hopes will remain prosperous, despite deciding: it doesn't need him.
'I believe in the Constitution. I believe in the country as a whole,' he said. 'It bothers me a lot that now I think we're going in a direction where we're not trying to do things the right way. Being right and being ethical, I think, is what really drove me and why I took pride in it.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
an hour ago
US strike on Iran has been ‘inevitable' since 1979: Military analyst
Retired Army Maj. Mike Lyons says U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict is an opportunity to 'move the Middle East toward a peaceful solution.'
Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Senator Says War Powers Resolution Against Trump Will Have GOP Support
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, says that Republican lawmakers in his chamber have expressed support in voting for a War Powers Resolution following President Donald Trump's authorization to strike three Iranian nuclear facilities on Saturday. Newsweek has reached out to Kaine's office via email for comment. Why It Matters Trump on Saturday evening announced what he described as a "very successful attack" against three Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. The president's decision came after Israel and Iran have exchanged consistent strikes since June 13. Israel had urged the U.S. to target Iran's nuclear facilities, saying that Tehran was moving close to creating a nuclear weapon. Iran maintains that its nuclear program is for civilian purposes—not for weapons. The strikes have sparked concerns from some Democrats and some Republicans about a wider war breaking out—with some lawmakers accusing the president of violating the U.S. Constitution with the strikes. Kaine's resolution pending in the Senate has been mimicked in the U.S. House of Representatives, where Republican Representative Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Democratic Representative Ro Khanna of California introduced a resolution last Tuesday. What To Know The War Powers Resolution of 1973 was enacted to limit the president's ability to commit U.S. armed forces to hostilities abroad without congressional consent. Kaine told Punchbowl News on Monday that he is privy to Senate GOP support of his resolution, saying that lawmakers have expressed interest in signing off on whether Congress and not just the president should have a say to attack other nations. "I know I will have Republican support. How much is unclear," Kaine said. "The day-to-day events will affect is a very evolving situation." A vote that requires a simple majority for passage is expected to happen before the chamber's July 4 recess, the senator added. Kaine's latest remarks come one day after he told Shannon Bream on Fox News Sunday that Trump's order to strike Iran went beyond traditional protocols outlined in the Constitution and gives him "grave concern." "It's unconstitutional for a president to initiate a war like this without Congress," Kaine said on Sunday. "Every member of Congress needs to vote on this." It harkens back to the politics that led to the invasion of Iraq in 2003, Kaine added, saying the present moment mirrors two decades ago when a Republican president and administration gave "false information" about Iraq's weapons program. Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, speaks at a press conference at the U.S. Capitol on April 2 in Washington, D.C. Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, speaks at a press conference at the U.S. Capitol on April 2 in Washington, People Are Saying Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, said in a press release: "It is not in our national security interest to get into a war with Iran unless that war is absolutely necessary to defend the United States. I am deeply concerned that the recent escalation of hostilities between Israel and Iran could quickly pull the United States into another endless conflict." Representative Ro Khanna, a California Democrat, said in a statement: "Stopping Iran from having a nuclear bomb is a top priority, but dragging the U.S. into another Middle East war is not the solution. Trump's strikes are unconstitutional and put Americans, especially our troops, at risk. Congress needs to come back to DC immediately to vote on Rep. Thomas Massie and my bipartisan War Powers Resolution to ensure there is no further conflict and escalation. Americans want diplomacy, not more costly wars. We need to deescalate and pursue a path of peace." Representative Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican, wrote on X, formerly Twitter, on Sunday: "I introduced a War Powers Resolution on Tuesday, while Congress was on vacation. We would have had plenty of time to debate and vote on this." What Happens Next? Along with the resolutions introduced by Kaine, and jointly by Massie and Khanna, other lawmakers are also reportedly going to introduce similar war powers legislation. Democratic Representatives Gregory Meeks of New York, Adam Smith of Washington, and Jim Himes of Connecticut—ranking members of the Foreign Affairs, Armed Services and Intelligence committees, respectively—are drafting their own War Powers resolution, according to Punchbowl. Also, 12 Democrats in the House—all military veterans—sent a letter to the White House on Monday, asserting congressional authority over war powers. In response to the U.S. strikes on Iran, the country's foreign minister said Iran reserves "all options to defend its sovereignty." The U.S. military is preemptively preparing for any attack from Tehran.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
History shows prosecuting officials challenging ICE raids won't be easy
President Trump's promised retribution against what he has called the 'core of the Democrat Power Center' includes siccing thousands of ICE agents on 'blue cities.' The assault has already led to the prosecution of public officials who challenged his abusive immigration seizures. But the Trump administration will likely lose those cases, thanks to the strong American tradition of jury resistance, sometimes called nullification, dating to before the Civil War. In New Jersey, Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-N.J.) was indicted for allegedly interfering with the arrest of Newark Mayor Ras Baraka during an immigration protest rally at an ICE detention center. If convicted of the two forcible felonies, McIver would face a maximum sentence of eight years. McIver denies the accusations, pointing out that she had a legal right to inspect the facility as a member of Congress. She has raised the Constitution's speech and debate clause as a defense. In Wisconsin, the Trump administration brought criminal charges against Milwaukee County Court Judge Hannah Dugan for allegedly preventing the arrest of a migrant in her courtroom. Dugan pleaded not guilty and moved to dismiss the case on the basis of judicial immunity. McIver's and Dugan's defenses are robust and may well prevail. But even if the prosecutors manage to overcome the immunity arguments, they will still have to face juries in Newark and Milwaukee, two of the heavily Democratic cities reviled by Trump. As detailed in my book, 'Fugitive Justice: Runaways, Rescuers, and Slavery on Trial,' American juries have historically refused to enforce unpopular laws against sympathetic defendants, in cases far more extreme than McIver's or Dugan's. In September 1851, shortly after the passage of the infamous Fugitive Slave Act, a band of slavehunters from Maryland, holding a federal warrant and under the leadership of a deputy U.S. marshal, attempted to apprehend four alleged runaways near the village of Christiana, Pennsylvania. When the posse's presence was discovered, the local Black community, along with some white allies, rallied to the defense of the fugitives and drove it away in a hail of rocks and bullets. One would-be kidnapper was killed in the melee, and the deputy marshal was humiliated. The fugitives escaped to Canada with the assistance of Frederick Douglass. The Millard Fillmore administration obtained indictments against 41 defendants — 36 Black and five white — accusing them of forming a 'traitorous combination' to 'prevent the execution' of the Fugitive Slave Act. The formal charge was treason, which carried the death penalty. The first defendant brought to trial — ironically, in Philadelphia's Constitution Hall — was a white miller named Castner Hanway. The prosecutors wrongly claimed that Hanway had been a mastermind of the rebellion, because they could not believe Black people capable of organizing a successful resistance against heavily armed whites. Hanway was represented by Rep. Thaddeus Stevens (R-Pa.), one of the great abolition advocates of his time and later author of the 13th Amendment. Stevens put on a defense that emphasized the frequent 'kidnapping and carrying away of colored persons' to nearby Maryland. As an explanation for the resistance, he noted the seizure of 'Black people … by force and violence and great injury and malice, without authority from any person on earth.' It took the jury only 15 minutes to acquit Hanway. Recognizing the futility of proceeding, the prosecution eventually dropped the charges against all defendants. Also in 1851, an alleged fugitive named Shadrach Minkins was arrested in Boston by agents operating under the Fugitive Slave Act. He was hustled into a federal courtroom where abolitionist lawyers volunteered to represent him. As the court convened the next day, about 20 Black men shoved their way through the doors and carried Minkins into the street. Onlookers cheered while 'two powerful fellows hurried him through the square,' later to be taken by wagon to Canada. Two of the most important leaders of Boston's free Black community were arrested for violating the Fugitive Slave Act: a prominent merchant named Lewis Hayden and attorney Robert Morris, one of the first Black lawyers in the U.S., as well as a white newspaper editor named Elizur Wright. All three defendants were represented by Richard Henry Dana, author of the memoir 'Two Years before the Mast,' and scion of one of Boston's oldest families. Despite substantial evidence of the defendants' participation in the rescue, there were no convictions, with two acquittals and a hung jury. As tensions increased between North and South, there were fizzled prosecutions in Syracuse, Milwaukee, again in Boston, and elsewhere. Even when prosecutions succeeded, sentencing judges could be unusually lenient. More important than any of the individual outcomes was the political movement built around the Fugitive Slave Act trials. Before the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, many northerners were content to condemn enslavement from a distance, expressing disapproval but taking no action to oppose it. Afterward, the repeated arrests of alleged runaways and the trials that followed, of both fugitives and rescuers, made it impossible to ignore the federal government's intrusive role in enforcing human bondage. The McIver and Dugan prosecutors will have to contend with potential jurors appalled by Trump's indiscriminate pursuit of migrants, just as jurors in antebellum Boston and Philadelphia were appalled by the kidnapping of fugitives and arrests of rescuers. Defense counsel will surely highlight the hypocrisy of prosecuting McIver and Dugan for minor incidents, versus Trump's mass pardons of the Jan. 6 insurrectionists. In the 1850s, northern opposition to the spread of slavery, sharpened by confrontations with slave hunters and federal marshals, led to Abraham Lincoln's election in 1860. Will the prosecution of Democratic officeholders and the arrests of countless migrants by masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents have the same impact on the mid-term elections of 2026? Steven Lubet is the Williams Memorial Professor Emeritus at the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law. He is the author of 'Fugitive Justice: Runaways, Rescuers, and Slavery on Trial' and other books on abolitionist lawyers and political trials.
