AN ANALYSIS OF THE BASIC PILOT WORK VERIFICATION PROGRAM

The U.S. Government aids and abets illegal alien workers by having designed the Basic Pilot work verification program to fail.

By Hal Netkin

Question: Does the Basic Pilot flag all unauthorized workers. Answer: No.

Even if the use by employers of the Basic Pilot work verification program were made mandatory, some industries could continue to keep and hire unauthorized workers (illegal aliens). The program has so many flaws, that one can only conclude that it was intentionally designed to fail.

As the President of a California Political Recipient Committee I joined the government's Basic Pilot program so I could test it by hiring myself as treasurer.

The Basic Pilot does not flag rented, stolen or borrowed names and numbers even if the same SSN and matching names are being used by more than one illegal worker.

From the Inspector General's report on page 8, 5th Paragraph: "...a potential weakness of the Basic Pilot is the failure to detect identity fraud. The user noted that he did not always have assurance the individuals who walked into his office were in fact the individuals issued the employment authorization documents..."

The report says further, on Page 8, 7th Paragraph: "Such disclosure ...under the Basic Pilot would most likely be restricted under the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. ? 552a as amended) and Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. ? 6103), which limit the amount of personal information that can be disclosed."

It's no accident that the IRS encourages illegal immigration by not reporting illegal alien tax filers who use ITINs whom the IRS knows are unauthorized to work in the U.S.

My research uncovered the fact that the IRS already knows who the illegals are who are filing their income tax returns. Ironically, those illegal workers who present fake documents to employers who don't use the Basic Pilot, are detected by the IRS anyway when they file tax returns. This suggests that the DHS (Department of Homeland Security) wouldn't need to rely entirely on the Basic Pilot if the IRS reported illegal workers who file their taxes with them.

On March 10, 2004, the House Ways and Means Subcommittees on Oversight on Social Security held a hearing on the use and misuse of ITINs (Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers). These numbers, which closely resemble social security numbers (all start with the number "9"), were devised to capture revenue from individuals who have earnings in the United States, but do not have Social Security numbers, such as investors. Since the IRS first began issuing these card ID numbers in 1996, over seven million have been issued (as of 2004), mostly to illegal aliens. In recent years some states have begun to accept the ITIN in lieu of a social security number in issuing driver's licenses or other state identification documents -- even though the IRS itself says that ITINs are not meant for identification purposes (See IRS ITIN revision notification to all governors,  fifth paragraph).

There is a conflict between laws against illegal immigration and tax laws requiring all individuals who earn money in the United States to pay taxes, regardless of authorization to work. This conflict is made worse because neither the IRS nor the Social Security Administration (SSA) is permitted to provide information to the Department of Homeland Security. The result is that both IRS and SSA know from tax returns and Social Security tax payments who may be working illegally and where, but are barred from providing this information to immigration enforcement authorities.

EXPLICIT APPROVAL

At the hearing, the Commissioner of the IRS, Mark Everson, testified that the principle mission of the service is to collect taxes and to cultivate a climate of taxpayer cooperation. He made it clear that sharing information with the Department of Homeland Security would drive illegal aliens and their taxes underground. His recommendation was to do nothing to change the law to permit information sharing.

Testifying on behalf of the U.S. General Accounting Office, Michael Brostek criticized the IRS for its laxness in issuing ITINs. He stated that his investigators were able to easily gain access to an ITIN and then used it in one state to register to vote. Brostek further stated that employers face no effective penalties for ignoring fake ITINs. This assertion was substantiated by earlier testimony that virtually no employer fines were collected last year (2003).

WORKING THE SYSTEM WITH THE GOVERNMENT'S APPROVAL

Most Illegals file their returns using ITINs (Individual Tax payer Identification Numbers), but attached to their returns are their W-2s bearing a social security number that belongs to someone else. View an illegal alien's actual tax return. As can be seen, the IRS does not  turn incriminating evidence of fraud over to the DHS, but goes right ahead and processes fraudulent tax returns in which the W-2 forms issued by the employer have phony or stolen social security numbers, but the tax return itself is filed using an ITIN.

On the IRS web site, it states that ITINs are issued to persons who are not eligible to receive a social security number. If the attached W-2s had valid social security numbers, then the tax filers wouldn't need ITINs. When I asked one agent at the IRS office in Camarillo, California, why the IRS ignores these obvious conflicts, I was told that his instructions were to do so.

The IRS does not deny that it does its own flagging of multiple users of the same SSN and is completely aware of fraudulent users, but they use the excuse that it's a privacy issue that prevents them turning the information over to the DHS and from informing the true tax payer that others are using the same SSN.

But the privacy excuse doesn't hold water even with those of us with low IQs.

Use this analogy: You are a teller at a bank. You are sworn to keeping clients' personal and private information confidential, which you do. But you become aware that one of the bank's clients is embezzling from his company. Do you keep that information private, or do you report it? Common sense tells you that once you know that a crime is in progress all of the client's privacy rights are void, and you would not be breaking any privacy policies to report the crime.

When the IRS does not report unauthorized workers who are known by them to be committing fraud, to the DHS, it doesn't take a lawyer to figure out that the IRS is actually guilty "Obstruction of Justice."

The Basic Pilot doesn't work well because of the following:

I used different variations to test the Basic Pilot. For example, I used my real name with a fake SSN. My real SSN with a fake name. In each case, I had to pretend to hire myself. Where I was flagged as not authorized to work, I had to send DHS an on-line resolution saying that I voluntarily terminated myself.

I found that I had to study a 103 page on-line Manual, pass a lengthy on-line test, and fax a signed MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) to the DHS. I concluded that the Basic Pilot may not be practical for some small employers who would be forced to hire a government certified third party to administer the Basic Pilot for them.

There are loopholes that allow employers to legally keep and hire unauthorized workers. Here's why:

Incredibly, the employer cannot use the system to pre-screen applicants for employment -- the worker must be hired first.

Employers are not allowed to go back and check employees hired before the company entered to participate in the Basic Pilot program. In other words, any company who enters to participate in the program, may not verify the work authorization of existing employees -- only new hires.

The Basic Pilot only flags an employee as unauthorized when that employee's social security number does not match the name, but does not flag multiple use of matching name and social security numbers. This allows any number of unauthorized workers using the same valid stolen or borrowed social security numbers to work at different jobs at the same time.

In those cases where an employee was hired and then flagged as unauthorized, the employer must allow the employee eight government business days (10 or more with weekend or holiday) to straighten out the "error." If the employee cannot prove that errors were made, the employer must terminate the employee, but may not report the employee as a suspected illegal alien to the DHS. The straightening-out period would allow some illegal workers such as those hired off the street by building contractors to stay nearly steadily employed by job hopping. Moreover, employers must pay bumped workers for the short time they worked and the workers may file tax returns using ITINs to receive tax refunds.

Employers must make verification inquiries within 3 business days of hire. In other words, if the person at a company who is responsible for administering the Basic Pilot program is out "ill" for three days and unable to verify the employment authorization of an alien who was hired three days before, that alien gets a free pass -- and there is no sanction against the employer for allowing the three day expiration.

Employers may NOT use the system to re-verify employment authorization. In other words, if the employer suspects that an alien mistakenly received work authorization when first hired, the employer may NOT re-check the work authorization of that worker again.

Given as reported by Rep. Steve King of Iowa on CNN on July 5, that the U.S. government itself employs over 49,000 unauthorized workers making it the largest employer of illegal workers in the nation, it can only be concluded that the Government's Basic Pilot flaws are intentionally designed.

.