tions and in taxpayer conditions in this country. There will continue to be differences, and it is up to us to manage our resources effectively but not manage them so as to try to create a uniformity which can only be created by mismanagement.

Senator KENNEDY. Well, why shouldn't the public know whether people in the business community pay more in terms of their taxes, than people in another aspect of our economy, the workers. Rural communities pay more than urban areas. Just in terms of public information about statistics, why shouldn't we know that, lawyers pay more, certain professions pay more, doctors, whatever the case may be. Why shouldn't that be available?

Mr. ALEXANDER. This is part of the overall problem that we are pursuing, Mr. Chairman, and we are concerned about the beginning of the process as well as the end of the process. Perhaps we are overly concerned about it and perhaps our concerns about the beginning of the process will be eliminated by a finding by the Department of Justice Committee that statistics which involve the beginning of the process are indeed not protectable. That indeed will be the end of it if there is such a finding. But maybe as an agency we are mindful of the resources we have as compared with the job we have. We have increased our resources and we have increased our audit coverage and we made 300,000 more audits last year than we did the year before. But as Mr. Whitaker pointed out, we can't audit everyone. We think that in balancing our responsibilities to disclose and our responsibilities to administer the laws, the beginning of the process is important and the matters that you referred to go to the allocation of resources at the beginning of the process.

Now, this concern like our other concerns is subject to reconsideration and you can be sure that we will give it further thought. This is the second prong of the two-pronged problem that I mentioned in connection with the statistics.

First is whether they are protectable at all and second, even if protectable should they be protected?

Senator KENNEDY. I agree with you. I don't understand how they are protected myself.

TAXPAYER CLASS DATA

Mr. ALEXANDER. Now, the question, by the way, specifically as to taxes by classes of taxpayers along the lines you described, by occupation, we publish a great deal of data to this very effect in the statisticsof-income series and we will be glad to supply that for the record to show you what we give to the public.

[The material referred to follows:]

STATISTICS OF INCOME SERIES

Statistics of Income-Business Income Tax Returns.-Provides annual statistics derived from proprietorship and partnership tax returns on the selfemployment income and expenses of farmers, businessmen, doctors, lawyers, and other professionals.

Statistics of Income-Corporation Income Tax Returns.—Annual estimates classified by industry and size of assets, liabilities, receipts, deductions, profits, income tax liability, tax credits, and distributions to stockholders, and computaton of the corporate tax base.

Statistics of Income-Individual Income Tax Returns.-Provides annual estimates of taxpayers income, exemptions, standard and itemized deductions, tax refunds, tax due, and total tax liability. The data are classified according to adjusted gross income size, marital status, tax rates, States, and, biennially, by standard metropolitan statistical areas.

Statistics of Income-Local Area Data.-Provides biennial statistics on number of returns filed, exemptions, income, and tax liability, classified by size of income for each county and, in the past, for each of the 38,000 postal ZIP code

areas.

Statistics of Income-Depletion Allowances.-Provides statistics on depletion allowances and income and expenditures for various minerals and statutory percentage depletion rates by industries and foreign and domestic properties.

Statistics of Income-Corporate Foreign Income and Taxes.-Provides statistics on the foreign operations of United States corporations. The country and geographic area.

Statistics of Income-Domestic International Sales Corporations DISC.—A new report will provide statistics on the operation of the DISC legislation. Data will be shown for export receipts by industry product and country of ultimate destination.

Statistics of Income-Fiduciary Income Tax Returns.-Provides estimates of total income and its composition, deductions, taxable estate, and tax for personal trusts with income $600 or more according to type of trust, size of total income, and tax rate.

Statistics of Income-Estate Tax Returns.-Provides estimates of gross estate by types of property, deductions, taxable estate, and tax for decedents with gross estate in excess of $60,000 by size of estate, tax rate, and State.

Statistics of Income Personal-Wealth Estimated from Estate Tax Returns.— Provides estimates of the number and wealth of persons with assets of more than $60,000 by age, sex, marital status, as well as various measures of gross and net wealth.

Statistics of Income-Sales of Capital Assets Reported on Individual Income Tax Returns.-Provides estimates of capital gains transactions by type of property, gross sales price, basis of property and expense of sale, and net gain or loss reported on individual income tax returns with sales of capital assets.

Statistics of Income-Returns of Private Foundations Exempt from Income Tax.-Provides estimates of the receipts, expenditures, net income, assets and liabilities of organizations classified as private foundations.

Statistics of Income-Farmers' Cooperative Income Tax Returns.-Provides estimates of the receipts, deductions, net income, tax, assets and liabilities for both exempt and nonexempt farmers' marketing and purchasing cooperatives according to type of service and commodity marketed, and State.

Statistics of Income-Returns of Employees' Pension Plans and Pension Trusts. Provides estimates of the receipts, disbursements, assets and liabilities of individuals or organizations who maintain employees' pension plans or pension trusts. Type of entity, type of plan, method of funding, and number of employees are also estimated covered and non-covered.

Statistics of Income-Returns of Organizations Exempt from Income Tax.Provides estimates of the receipts, expenditures, assets and liabilities of organizations (other than private foundations) exempt from income tax. Important classifications include the subsection of the Internal Revenue Code under which exempt and the principal business activity.

Senator KENNEDY. On the other question about national norms and geographical distribution, of course, in compliance program, review of southwest region, reading on page 24, "achievements and significant accomplishments under field audits for several years southwest statistical accomplishments and field audit have been poor in comparison to U.S. averages." Then you go down into the various details comparing other different sections of the country, and then you do it for various other aspects of the program. It is not a public document, but it does show that you people are interested in these kinds of disparities, and these disparities do exist, according to this, which isn't a public document but rather dramatic in form.

Mr. ALEXANDER. That is not a public document, at least most of it isn't.

Senator KENNEDY. I am not going to do anything with it.

Mr. ALEXANDER. I hope it will remain not public until we get these two threshold questions resolved. I do appreciate your concern, Mr. Chairman, and believe me Internal Revenue is grateful for this opportunity to exchange views with you on this very important subject.

SHIFT OF IRS ACTIVITIES TO JUSTICE DEPARTMENT

Senator KENNEDY. Now, the Treasury Department has a number of law enforcement and investigative capabilities, overlapping with some of those of the IRS, and there have been some suggestions that such activities ought to be concentrated in the Justice Department. What would be your personal attitude about that?

Mr. ALEXANDER. I certainly hope not. I didn't become Commissioner of Internal Revenue with the intent to preside over the liquidation of the Internal Revenue Service.

Senator KENNEDY. From a management point of view?

Mr. ALEXANDER. From a management point of view I think that the Internal Revenue Service should be lodged elsewhere although I respect and admire my friends across the street in the Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigation, I suppose some questions can be raised about having the investigators and the lawyers under the same roof, although Mr. Whitaker and I get along pretty well under the same roof.

I would see little advantage and many disadvantages in shifting the Internal Revenue to the Department of Justice, which to say the least has quite enough these days for it to handle.

Senator KENNEDY. You are not aware of any plan to do So, either within the Justice Department or

Mr. ALEXANDER. I have heard rumors about some sort of suggestion but I have surely seen no signs of that on the part of our friends in the Justice Department or elsewhere. I think that it would be a long step in the wrong direction.

DELAY IN ANSWERING FOI REQUESTS

Senator KENNEDY. Just finally, I am sure you are aware of our interest in delays and the charges in the Freedom of Information requests. We have outlined in that new legislation which passed the Senate, the House, and is now in conference, some specific time frames for response both for the initial request as well as for various appeals. I am not going to go over now some of the specific cases, but this is an important area of concern. We have gotten a number of examples of people, many in this town that have waited an extraordinary amount of time to get various requests, not only the Longs themselves. Just in one particular case last month, Mr. Leon Irish, who is an attorney, indicated a case history reflecting initial request on April 25, 1973, followup request letter of September 25, 1973, denial on November 1, 1973, and appeal November 10, 1973, followup appeal letter of February 15, 1974, and response from IRS June 17, saying that the Service "must first examine the records to make sure that the infor

mation may be disclosed." That is 1312 months later and he still hasn't any further response.

Then Mr. Brandon, who filed suit last week, after going over 9 months with no reply to his request for information. These are instances. I would appreciate your following up on those particular situations, since they have been brought to our attention. There certainly should be a greater sense of urgency about responding to requests and fulfilling the requirements of the new law, which gives ten days for responding to requests initially and 20 days for appeals. This is something which I think is extremely important, and something we hope you will move on the way you have been moving in many of these other areas.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Chairman, we will look into these two matters you mentioned. I am familiar with Mr. Brandon's request and we will supplement the submission we have already made on this important issue.

Senator KENNEDY. OK.

[The following was subsequently submitted by the Commissioner for the record:]

IRISH AND BRANDON CASES

Mr. Irish's request pertained to the Special Agent's Handbook, which included exempt law enforcement materials. Preparation of a response necessitated the careful review of several hundred pages of text, coordination with the Department of Justice's Freedom of Information Committee, and detailed editing of the materials to be provided. We except to make a response to Mr. Irish very shortly.

Mr. Brandon requested very extensive statistical reports, many of which are similar to those being considered by the Department of Justice's Freedom of Information Committee. As stated at the hearing, we hope to learn the Committee's views shortly. We will make a final response to Mr. Brandon as soon thereafter as possible.

Senator KENNEDY. We want to thank you, Mr. Commissioner, for coming up. I think you have indicated to us your desire to carry forward the spirit of the Freedom of Information Act. and have outlined for us this morning a number of procedures which you feel will be helpful in preserving the integrity of the office, its relationship with the White House, and the Congress. Quite clearly from your responses here, you have indicated that there are certain statutory changes that are underway, that you are taking various administrative steps within the department to insure as complete an amount of public disclosure as possible in terms of certain classes of rulings, and that you are prepared to carry forward on the mandates of the Freedom of Information Act in terms of response within the period of time which has been outlined in the legislation and the appeal I just want to say that we appreciate the efforts that are being made in this direction. There are still other issues and questions regarding what we are going to do about the statistics, manual rulings, and the regional directive, and some of these other questions which we went over briefly this morning. We are going to follow up on those and we are hopeful we can make progress on these areas. We want to commend you on this constructive effort and look forward to working with you to make future progress in these other areas. We want to thank you and your group very much for coming.

Mr. ALEXANDER. Thank you very much, Senator Kennedy. We have appreciated the opportunity to appear before you on this matter and we will keep your committee advised.

[The following statement by Mr. Lester Bridgeman was submitted for the record:]

STATEMENT OF LESTER M. BRIDGEMAN

The following comments are submitted, at the invitation of the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Administrative Practice and Procedure, with respect to the Internal Revenue Service's implementation of the Freedom of Information Act. I am a member of the firm of Bridgeman & Pyeatt in Washington, D.C.; have been a member of the District of Columbia Bar for 22 years and have, over the course of the past 11 years, represented Mr. Bart B. Chamberlain, Jr. of Mobile, Alabama, and companies in which he is involved, in litigation in various courts.

My experiences with respect to IRS practices in the field of Freedom of Information Act litigation have been as one of counsel for Mr. Chamberlain, as Plaintiff, in a suit now pending against the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, the Internal Revenue Service, and certain officers and employees of IRS, in the United States Dstrict Court for the Southern District of Alabama in Chamberlain v. Alexander, et al., CA No. 7742-73P. Since that litigation is still pending I will attempt to describe those experiences by drawing basically on the public records in the Court while attempting to avoid drawing conclusions for your Subcommittee with respect to matters still pending in the litigation.

It is both possible and permissible, however, initially to draw two conclusions that are, I think, of material interest to your Subcommitee:

1. Our experiencc, which apparently conforms to that of others in litigation with the IRS, is that the Internal Revenue Service will energetically seek to thwart the statutory injunction that FOI Act litigation shall "take precedence . . . over all other causes and . . . be assigned for hearing and trial at the earliest practicable date and expedited in every way." It appears to be IRS policy to bar revelation of any records that it has not itself previously chosen to make public, without regard to their relationship to statutory exemptions. For example, 16 months after our original administrative request for information, we still have none of the essential documents we seek, nor do we have a court decision on the merits of our FOI Act request.

That situation results simply from the failure of the IRS to permit the matter to reach a posture in which the Court may decide; from the failure and refusal of IRS (1) clearly to identify individual documents and their content; (2) to relate specific documents or parts thereof to specific related exemptions; (3) to provide a consistent statement of the asserted grounds for failure to produce documents. IRS tends generally to hinder, rather than aid, judicial comprehension of the issues presented, and to delay production of any documents so far as possible. IRS foot-dragging has been such that after more than a year of active pretrial litigation, they ultimately produced for our inspection and copying several hundred pages of documents the production of which they had never expressly opposed at any stage of the litigation. They had simply refrained from revealing its existence or nature.

2. No person of low or moderate income and no organization of moderate means, without the assistance of counsel who is willing and able to provide free service, can hope to survive in FOIA litigation against the IRS. Our client fortunately has both the will and the finances actively and energetically to litigate against the IRS as we have done. Absent independent financial means his efforts to obtain records from the IRS would long since have been unsuccessfully terminated.

A short procedural history of the Chamberlain litigation may provide some basis for those conclusions:

That litigation arose principally out of Mr. Chamberlain's efforts to obtain information respecting, principally, possible IRS activities in the areas of unlawful electronic eavesdropping, discrimination against political campaign con