Appeals will return non-docketed cases to IDTVA when Appeals determines the IDT or RPM claim is a new issue or that the taxpayer provided new information that was not previously considered, if there are at least 210 days remaining on the statute of limitations.

All returned non-docketed cases should be scanned and assigned directly to a CSR/TE. The assigned CSR/TE will review the documentation provided by Appeals and determine if the IDT or RPM allegation is valid following normal procedures.

If the campus cannot work the case (referred in error) or the IDT or RPM was previously addressed by IDTVA:

Upon review of the case, if the taxpayer is determined to be a Victim of IDT, complete all account actions, including adjustments. Do not return the case to Appeals. Close following normal procedures.

If the taxpayer is determined to be "Not a Victim of IDT" , document the determination on the Form 10467; do not return the case to the originating Appeals employee. Route the Form 10467 using the following link, Appeals Case Routing and the steps below:

On docketed cases where the IDT/RPM claim has not been considered, new information is received by Appeals not previously considered, or the IDT/RPM claim is considered a new issue, an Appeals Officer (AO) will forward the Form 10467 and information package to the appropriate IDTVA function via secured email.

Appeals will retain jurisdiction of the case. In docketed cases, time is of the essence. Docketed cases received from Appeals must be worked within 45 days of receipt, unless additional documentation is needed from the taxpayer. Review the documentation provided by Appeals and determine if the IDT/RPM allegation is valid following normal procedures.

If additional documentation is needed and the 45 day time frame cannot be met, contact the Appeals Officer (AO) to reach a new response date. If the taxpayer does not reply to a request for additional information, do not deny the claim. Inform Appeals of the determination. The denial will be addressed by Appeals.

If the case is determined to be IDT/RPM, "no account adjustments" will be input. Complete Form 10467 with sufficient information to determine the necessary account adjustments. Appeals will input the account adjustments based upon the settlement agreement from the Tax Court.

Complete the explanation section of Form 10467, documenting the determination. The explanation should be explicit, outlining all documentation received, determination made, and any potential account adjustments.

If the campus cannot work the referral package, (i.e., the IDT/RPM was previously worked by IDTVA or referred to IDTVA in error):

If an RPM claim is denied and meets the criteria to be referred to Exam, do not send to Cat A. Clearly identify the RPM issues between the posted return and the return as intended to be filed on the Form 10467. Appeals will address the Cat A issues.

If an IDT claim contains a return from the SSN owner that requires processing and meets the DIF Bypass Criteria, do not refer to Exam. Inform Appeals that the return from the SSN owner must be assessed.

Docketed cases received from Appeals will be scanned into CII, if the documentation was not previously scanned. The correct category code and OFP codes must be used when creating a case or sending the information to be scanned.

The Appeals Officer (AO) will forward Collection Due Process (CDP) referral packages to IDTVA via secured email, when Appeals determines the IDT/RPM claim is a new issue or new information was received that was not previously addressed.

The package will include documentation received in Appeals and Form 10467, Appeals Division Feedback Report and Transmittal Memorandum.

Appeals will retain jurisdiction of the case. In CDP cases, time is of the essence. Any CDP cases received must be worked within 45 days of receipt, unless additional documentation is needed from the taxpayer.

Review the documentation provided by Appeals and determine if the IDT/RPM allegation is valid following normal procedures.

If additional documentation is needed, and the 45 day time frame cannot be met, contact the AO to reach a new response date. If no reply to requests for additional information, deny the claim and return to Appeals following normal procedures.

If the case is determined to be IDT/RPM, all account actions and adjustments must be input prior to replying to Appeals. The explanation section of Form 10467 must be completed with the determination, all actions taken, and a copy of the closing letter to the taxpayer explaining the determination. If a CP 01 will serve as the closing letter, document Form 10467 with that information. Return the case to the originating Appeals employee via secured email.

If the campus cannot work the case, (i.e., the IDT/RPM was previously addressed by IDTVA or referred to IDTVA in error):

If the RPM claim is denied and must be referred to Exam, forward the case to Cat A following normal procedures. Include a statement that the case is CDP and request that the case be returned to Appeals upon completion of the audit. Include the Appeals employee’s name so the case can be referred back correctly. Inform the Appeals employee of the referral to Exam and all actions taken.

The instructions in this section should be used in conjunction with the instructions in IRM 25.23.4.3.4, IDTVA Specialties - Case Referrals from Compliance Functions and IRM 25.23.10.2, Case Batching

Upon receipt of potential IDT correspondence, the IDTVA Specialties, Automated Collection System Support (IDTVA Specialties ACSS) group should:

Upon return from the screener, the clerk should:

A screener is being utilized to identify the appropriate place for the case to be resolved and identify any levy issues.

Determine if a levy is active on the account. Release the levy, if applicable. See IRM 25.23.10.6.2.4, Levies, for additional information.

Research to identify the appropriate IDTVA function to work the case and document with the appropriate category code for the clerk. Proceed with IRM 25.23.10.6.2.1.1, IDTVA Specialties ACSS Initial Receipt Clerical Actions.

Provide Forms 3870 received from Field Collection to the IDTVA Specialties ACSS screener for determination of the category code for batching. These cases should be batched with Priority Code 2. No other batching action is required (i.e., no acknowledgement letters should be issued).

If an active levy:

If there is a balance due not attributable to Identity Theft, collection activities, including the appropriate use of enforced collection action, are not prohibited when a taxpayer has established that they were a victim of Identity Theft.

Review the case history for outstanding enforcement activity that may need to be corrected, (i.e., levies, liens).

A levy attaching the assets of the victim in a mixed entity case must be immediately released. Refer to IRM 25.23.10.6.2.2(8), IDTVA Specialties ACSS Technical Research an Initial Handling Procedures for guidance on mixed entity cases.

A levy attaching to assets of non-owner of the TIN for which:

When the taxpayer claims to be a victim of ID Theft and the Form 14039 and/or police report has been received, the levy should be released only for the tax modules affected by the ID Theft.

Follow IRM 5.19.4.4.10, Levy Release: General Information, for full and partial levy release procedures.

A thorough review of the account must be conducted to ensure that all tax years affected by tax related Identity Theft are blocked from the FPLP program.

When a TC 971 AC 501 or AC 506 has not posted to the entity for tax administrative ID Theft, employees must take steps to block outstanding FPLP levies.

All manual blocks expire after 52 cycles regardless of the actions on the case. If you want the block to remain beyond the allowed cycles, you will have to re-input the TC 971 AC 061 (and have it post to the MF) before the end of the expiration cycle.

When a TC 971 AC 501 or AC 506 is posted, FPLP will automatically block the tax modules entered into the secondary date field. However, depending on when the TC 971 AC 501 or AC 506 was input, there may be a need for an immediate release where the disbursement of the Federal payment is imminent. Follow the procedures in IRM 5.19.9.4.7.1, Immediate Release Through the FPLP Coordinator.

This section was developed to provide guidance for cases that involve ID Theft issues where the individual calling was levied, and levy proceeds have been sent to the Service. The caller may be the owner or non-owner of the TIN. Ensure the levy has been released.

The IRC distinguishes between "wrongful" levies and other types of improper or "erroneous" levies.

These procedures address cases where the owner of the SSN claims the Service levied on property they had an interest in to satisfy the tax liability that does not belong to them.

When the SSN owner is claiming a refund (i.e., levy proceeds), because of an assessment not belonging to the taxpayer, the limitations for returning the payments falls under normal statute procedures and time frames (2 years from the payment date). However, if the SSN owner is claiming a refund after more than 2 years from the payment date, follow the chart in IRM 25.6.1.10.3.3, Claims for Credit or Refund - General Time Period for Submitting a Claim.

Under the following circumstances, the levy proceeds should be returned to the SSN owner:

The non-owner of the TIN may file a wrongful levy claim for return of levy proceeds (from the assets of the non-owner of the TIN) already received and processed by the Service. See IRM 25.23.10.6.2.4.5, Identity Theft and Disposition of Levy Proceeds, for definition of "wrongful" levy.

A "wrongful" levy claim may be appropriate when:

When speaking with the caller, secure information to determine that the individual requesting the return of levy proceeds is the non-owner of the SSN and not the owner of the original SSN. Verify the following:

See IRM 5.11.2.3.2.1, Wrongful Levy, for appropriate action. Contact Collection Advisory to determine if the non-owner of the TIN would qualify for wrongful levy claim consideration.

If a levy is served where the Service:

IRM 5.11.2.3.2.1, Wrongful Levy, and IRM 25.23.10.6.2.4, Levies, provides guidance for cases that involve ID Theft issues and wrongful levies.

O0 inventory contains ACS accounts awaiting managerial approval. This inventory must be functioned out weekly.

ACSS CII referrals received from V1 work. This inventory must be functioned out weekly.

The O2 inventory is for IDTVA Specialties ACSS Correspondence cases received with the required Form 14039 and/or police report.

This inventory will also include faxed IDT documents forwarded from the ACS Call-sites currently in the V1 inventory. The case should be batched on CII to OFP 40231 (IMF) or OFP 10412 (BMF) and reassigned "TOO2,120,CORR".

See IRM 25.23.10.6.2.6, Expired O Inventories, for guidance on processing the expired follow-ups.

The IDTVA Screener will review incoming cases in O3 to ensure they meet the conditions for O3. If they do not meet O3 conditions, the screener will request IDTVA move the case to the proper Oscar inventory or return the case to ACS Compliance for appropriate action.

After the Screener in (1) above confirms the correct placement of the case in O3, IDTVA ACSS will refer BMF cases using guidance in IRM 25.23.2.4.3, Tracking Individual Taxpayers Reporting to be Victims of Business-Related Identity Theft.

BMF cases are assigned to the O3 inventory with a 90-day follow-up. (e.g., TOO3,90,IDTBMF)

Expired O3 cases follow IRM 25.23.10.6.2.6.1.2, Processing Expired O3-O7 & O9 Inventories.

The O4 inventory is for cases not meeting IDTVA Specialties ACSS criteria that are referred to IDTVA Specialties ASFR due to an ASFR assessment that needs an IDT determination by that function.

The cases are reassigned to the O4 inventory with a 90-day follow-up (e.g., TOO4,90,IDTASFR).

See IRM 25.23.10.6.2.6.1.2, Processing Expired O3-O7 & O9 Inventory, for additional information on cases meeting these criteria.

The O5 inventory is for cases not meeting IDTVA Specialties ACSS criteria that are referred to IDTVA Specialties AUR due to an AUR assessment that needs an IDT determination by that function.

The cases are reassigned to the O5 inventory with a 90-day follow-up (e.g., TOO5,90,IDTAUR).

See IRM 25.23.10.6.2.6.1.2, Processing Expired O3-O7 & O9 Inventory, for additional information on cases meeting these criteria.

The O6 inventory is for cases not meeting IDTVA Specialties ACSS criteria that are referred to another functional area (other than IDTVA Specialties ASFR, SFR, AUR, or Exam) to make the IDT determination (e.g., RPM, CAWR, FUTA, FRIV, AM, CIB, etc.).

The cases are reassigned to the O6 inventory with a 90-day follow-up (e.g., TOO6,90,IDTxxxx - "xxxx" = the function or operation the case was referred to such as RPM, CAWR, FUTA, FRIV, AM, CIB, etc.).

See IRM 25.23.10.6.2.6.1.2, Processing Expired O3-O7 & O9 Inventory, for additional information on cases meeting these criteria.

The O7 inventory is for cases not meeting IDTVA Specialties ACSS criteria that are referred to IDTVA Specialties Exam due to an Exam assessment that needs an IDT determination by that function.

The cases are reassigned to the O7 inventory with a 90-day follow-up (e.g., TOO7,90,IDTEXAM).

See IRM 25.23.10.6.2.6.1.2, Processing Expired O3-O7 & O9 Inventory, for additional information on cases meeting these criteria.

If an IRSN is required to resolve the case, refer to DITA. Reassign to the O8 inventory with a 90-day follow up (e.g.,TOO8,90,DITA).

O9 inventory is for cases referred from ACS Compliance. Cases include but are not limited to H7, V1, cases identified with CII images.

The cases are reassigned to O9 with a 1-day follow up (e.g., TOO9,01,XXXX).

See IRM 25.23.10.6.2.6.1.2, Processing Expired O3-O7 & O9 Inventory, for additional information on cases meeting these criteria.

If research indicates no Identity Theft involvement and/or the case may have been erroneously reassigned to an O Inventory, update to the appropriate ACS function for next case action.

Document CII. It is imperative/critical that thorough documentation is completed on these cases. Please be sure to include dates of all contacts with other functional areas, as well as documenting the discussion(s), any actions and/or resolutions taken on the account and future next case actions.

If you find a module belongs to IDTVA Specialty, update to the appropriate IDI category code.

Use OFP 40237 when taking next case actions or working O inventory listings. Count each entity processed.

Form 14394, Identity Theft/RPM Case Collection Alert Instructions will also be returned when a different function has completed resolution of the IDT issues and there is still a balance due condition involved

Review the account to ensure that closing actions of the IDT issue have been completed.

Cases should be updated to the next appropriate function based on IRM 25.23.10.6.2.3, Next Case Actions, Remaining Collection Issues, CII should be documented with "IDT issue resolved, to ACS XX for next case action" .

All IDT cases, both Open and Recon, require a control base to be opened on all tax year accounts (modules) impacted by identity theft. See IRM 25.23.4.3.1, CII and IDRS Case Controls for additional information. AUR IDT modules should be opened with a Category Code IDI2, including additional impacted years that do not contain an AUR issue, any spouses and dependents found while completing CCA.

IPSO identified IDT1 cases containing a TC 922. These cases were updated to IDI2. If the TC 922 has a last process code that would not be worked by AUR, see the chart below to determine if you will work or refer the case:

IDTVA-I and IDTVA-A will reassign cases containing a TC 922 to IDI2. If the case does not meet the criteria (refer to the table in (2) above) to be worked as an IDI2, return the case to the number that reassigned it with a case message of why it was rejected including the IRM reference.

When cases are assigned, verify that any open AUR case has a process code "SI" input on the AUR system. If a process code "SI" is not present on the AUR system, have the IDTVA Liaison contact the AUR IDT Coordinator to ensure that a process code "SI" is input on the case. Do not suspend the case waiting for the PC SI, continue processing.

IDTVA AUR is allowed up to 120 days from the date the PC "SI" was input to return open cases back to AUR. If the case cannot be resolved within 120 days, the IDTVA Functional Liaison will contact the AUR IDT Liaison to request up to an additional 40 days. If within 160 days the case has not been completed, AUR will close the case with a PC 26. Document the request for additional time in a CII case note. See also IRM 25.23.10.6.3.3, IDTVA Specialties AUR Closing Procedures.

IDTVA-I and IDTVA-A will send referrals to IDTVA Specialties functions directly rather than through their compliance counterparts. If a referral is received on an open AUR case that is not currently assigned to IDTVA inventory, the IDTVA Liaison should contact the AUR IDT Coordinator to ensure that a process code "SI" is input on the case.

If AUR did not input a TC 971 AC 522 UNWORK upon referral, do not reject the referral. Refer to IRM 25.23.2.4.4, Initial Allegation or Suspicion of Tax-Related Identity Theft – IMF Identity Theft Indicators, to determine if a TC 971 AC 522 is required to be input.

On cases with potential balance due issues, ensure the appropriate action(s) are taken to prevent balance due notices, tax offsets, and/or enforcement actions, see IRM 25.23.4.6(3) Research, Actions and Complete Case Analysis - Overview, for further instructions on the suspending of enforcement actions.

If after making a determination, the case will be suspended awaiting other case actions or will not be closed within five (5) business days, a Letter 5073C will be issued to acknowledge receipt of the taxpayer’s claim.

There are instances in which case files may not be scanned into CII that were referred by AUR. These cases are discovered by working the ADR Report Blanks tab, see IRM 25.23.4-15, ITVA HQ AUR ADR Report. A CII case will be created. The case should contain CII note "Case created from ADR report, work using images available on AMS or internal research," or similar verbiage. Attempt to make a determination using the available images or through internal research. If a determination cannot be reached, follow the instructions in IRM 25.23.4.18.2, Requests for Additional Information (Telephone and/or Written), to obtain the necessary information from the taxpayer. In your out call or outgoing letter, acknowledge the lost response, and include an apology.

To determine when additional documentation is needed to support an ID Theft claim, see, IRM 25.23.4.18.2, Requests for Additional Information (Telephone and/or Written).

Identity theft claims made on cases that have AUR involvement have an additional document requirement. On cases with AUR involvement the taxpayer must also identify in a statement which AUR issues they are disagreeing with. ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ ≡ If sending a letter to the taxpayer to obtain the information, include the following special paragraph or similar verbiage: “Although you indicated that you are a victim of identity theft, you have not stated which items reflected on the Notice CP 2000, previously issued for the tax period stated above, were attributable to identity theft. Please send us a signed statement indicating which items or tax returns are results of identity theft.”

Use the following table to determine when additional information must be requested from the taxpayer.

If the taxpayer's response indicates they filed the TC 150 return and some or all of the AUR issue(s) are the result of identity theft, follow the table below:

When the taxpayer is disputing TIN Perfected IRs, refer to the table below:

If the taxpayer responds and only disagrees with the amount of the underreported income, take one of the following steps below:

If the taxpayer is claiming possible BMF ID theft (i.e., the taxpayer claims to have no affiliation with the business/EIN) on a Form 14039 or Form 14039-B, follow IRM 25.23.2.4.3(8), Tracking Individual Taxpayers Reporting to be Victims of Business-Related Identity Theft.

When correcting AUR tax assessments made on accounts subsequently determined to involve identity theft (employment or a fraudulent tax return), determine if any overpayment previously offset is refundable. Adjust the transactions posted on the module to reflect the identity theft victim's tax return as allowable including all line items (such as tax, AGI, TXI, W/H, and credits). For more information see IRM 25.23.4.6.2, IDTVA - Additional Research and Required Actions.

If the taxpayer has submitted an unprocessed return with their response, process it as filed following the instructions in IRM 25.23.4.6.5.2, Unprocessed Documents. If the posted return needs to be moved to an IRSN account, refer the case to DITA using the instructions in IRM 25.23.10.5, Post Function Referral Procedures.

When the taxpayer submits a return but has not submitted a statement addressing which AUR issues they disagree with, take the following actions:

If the taxpayer’s response does not include a tax return, determine if the taxpayer has a filing requirement following the instructions in IRM 25.23.4.17(3), Determining Tax Liability/Form 2209 Instructions, and take the following action:

All Exam IDT cases require a control base to be opened on all tax year accounts (modules) impacted by identity theft. See IRM 25.23.4.3.1, CII and IDRS Case Controls for additional information. Exam IDT modules should be opened with a Category Code IDI1, including additional impacted years that do not contain an Exam issue, any spouses and dependents found while completing CCA.

IDT cases will have the activity code updated when specific case actions occur. Suspense dates will be indicated using Julian date format. Refer to IRM 25.23.4-11, IDRS Activity Codes and Definitions, for recommended activity codes.

Refer to IRM 25.23.2.4.4, Initial Allegation or Suspicion of Tax-Related Identity Theft - IMF Identity Theft Indicators, to determine if a TC 971 AC 522 is required to be input.

It is critical that the taxpayer is not harmed by the Service's actions once it has been determined that the taxpayer is a victim of IDT. To ensure that the taxpayer is not being harmed from a collection action or cases with potential balance due issues, ensure the appropriate action(s) are taken to prevent balance due notices, tax offsets, and/or enforcement actions, see IRM 25.23.4.6(3) Research, Actions and Complete Case Analysis - Overview for further instructions on suspending enforcement actions.

If after making a determination, the case will be suspended awaiting other case actions or will not be closed within five (5) business days, a Letter 5073C will be issued to acknowledge receipt of the taxpayer’s claim.

All statute year receipts will be reviewed for potential statute issues. See IRM 25.23.2.5, Statute Protection.

If multiple year or multiple function referrals include open AUR issues, research the AMS AUR History from the alerts section to ensure that a PC "SI" was input. If the last PC code entered on the AUR system is not PC "SI" , notify the appropriate AUR IDTVA Coordinator to have the process code input. If no access to the AUR system, contact the appropriate AUR IDTVA coordinator for assistance. See IRM 25.23.10.6.3.2.1, IDTVA Specialties AUR Technical and Initial Handling Procedures, for additional initial action requirements.

At any time during the account review, if there is evidence the taxpayer has a filing requirement but has not filed a return, solicit and encourage the taxpayer for a signed return. This applies to any years reviewed and impacted by the IDT incident. Follow guidance in IRM 25.23.4.17, Determining Tax Liability/Form 2209 Instructions is used to determine if the TP has a tax liability. Form 2209, Courtesy Investigation, will be completed at case closure if no return has been submitted per IRM 25.23.4.17, Determining Tax Liability/Form 2209 Instructions.

Field Exam will work all cases where IRS employee(s) allege IDT and the tax year(s) are currently open or closed in Exam. Return or forward any IDT claims to the site where the audit is in process or was completed. If the exam issue is open in the Field, forward any documents directly to the Field Exam liaison. If the exam issue is closed, refer the claim to the co-located Exam function for referral to Field Exam per IRM 4.19.11.3.2., Employee Returns.

When ICT is unable to determine the correct TIN, the CII case is assigned to all zeros. If:

Do not assume that the taxpayer filing the IDT claim is the true owner of the TIN. The examiner who reviews the case must consider all information received and available through research to determine the legitimate taxpayer and resolve the case thoroughly and accurately.

Use all available research tools to determine the validity of the IDT claim.

Perform research to determine the impact of the IDT on all tax years. See IRM 25.23.4.6.4, Complete Case Analysis. Creation of CII cases for additional impacted years identified through complete case analysis (CCA) will use the date on the 14039 as the IRS received date.

When working multi-functional or multiple tax years that include other compliance involvement, follow guidance in, IRM 25.23.10.4.1, Identity Theft Cases with AUR Involvement, IRM 25.23.10.4.2, Identity Theft Cases with ASFR Involvement, and IRM 25.23.10.4.2.1, Refund Hold Program.

Telephone contact with the taxpayer or representative may be attempted whenever possible. When telephone contact with the taxpayer, document the pertinent information in a CII case note for each contact attempted or completed, including the date and time. For example, if the taxpayer clarifies what was stated in the documentation or confirms the receipt of a refund, this should be included in the case notes. During any telephone contact, verify the taxpayer’s phone number on IDRS for all account related calls in which disclosure verification has occurred. Add or update phone numbers on IDRS and specify the type of number, (i.e., home, cell, etc). If contact information is provided on correspondence and it is determined to be from the valid TIN owner, add or update the phone number(s) on IDRS. Include any revised or new phone numbers(s) in CII notes. If IDRS is currently unavailable, perform follow-up action when the system is available. IRM 25.23.4.18.2, Requests for Additional Information (Telephone and/or Written) and IRM 25.23.4.18.2.1, Telephone Contact Guidelines (Associated with the Letter 5064C Common Number Questionnaire).

While resolving accounts, especially compliance-related accounts, other unique circumstances may affect the account resolution.

For closed Exam accounts with assessments we must be careful to not reverse the Exam TC 300 until we determine the validity and impact of the IDT claim. If the taxpayer claims IDT on the TC 150 return but their unprocessed/secured return claims the same dependents, exemptions, adjustments to income, Schedule A items, or credits, they will not be allowed when resolving the account. IDT does not make determinations on Exam issues. Exam will be notified of the IDT claim and issues for reconsideration after the IDT account resolution.

Questionable Refund Program (QRP) and other Exam programs often lend themselves to false claims of identity theft to avoid re-payment of refundable credits. It is imperative that each IDT claim is researched and reviewed to determine the validity of the claim. It is necessary to review the AIMS project code definition using the Exam Project Code Search tool found on the SERP IRM Supplement tab in addition to IDRS research and viewing CEAS notes.

Non-filer or Substitute for Return may identify income related identity theft issues. It is important to review all payer documents on CC: IRPTRL, the taxpayer filing history and address to determine the correct income for the SSN owner. In addition to determining income ownership, the following factors may need consideration:

If an unprocessed or secured returns are received with the claim follow IRM 25.23.4.6.5.2, Unprocessed Documents. A TRDBV or MeF return can be substituted for the original paper return.

If resolving IDT for the current and two immediately preceding tax years input TC 971 AC 850 when the IDT return requested a Direct Deposit.

In addition to the procedures outlined in this section, tax examiners are also responsible for any closing actions that may be contained in IRM 25.23.2, Identity Protection and Victim Assistance - General Case Processing, and IRM 25.23.4, IDTVA Paper Process, and IRM 25.23.13, Income Related Identity Theft. These IRMs contain guidance on information such as: (this list is not all inclusive)

If the taxpayer asked specific questions about the IDT claim, the examination, or other issues that will not be answered by the CP01, Letter 4674C is required to fully respond to the taxpayer. Do not include Pub 5 with the Letter 4674C or any letters issued on identity theft claims.

If the return filed by the taxpayer contains the same issues included in the examination adjustment, do not reverse the TC 300 as part of the nullification process. The TC 150 will be nullified, and if necessary, the TC 300 adjusted based on the valid return. A referral will be sent to Exam if the taxpayer provided new information for reconsideration.

Hold Code (HC) 4 will be input with any adjustment when there is a need to freeze or continue to freeze any credits and not release a refund on the account. This will be required when referring cases back to Exam to continue the examination.

HC 3 will be input on any account adjustment not requiring the refundable credits held.

If a recertification indicator posted on the account, determine whether the recertification indicators originated from the IDT tax year(s) and whether they need to be reversed. Recertification indicators are found on CC ENMOD and IMFOLE. Refer to IRM 4.19.14.7, Recertification, for additional guidance. If the IDT claim is allowed and the recertification issues were fully addressed by the taxpayer’s valid return, reverse the indicator(s). The indicator reversal is still required if the taxpayer qualifies for the credits based on different dependents/exemptions than those originally disallowed. Do not reverse the recertification indicators if the taxpayer is claiming the same dependents/exemptions, credits, or adjustments disallowed in the examination.

The TC 971 AC 5XX closing indicators are required on all resolved accounts. Input appropriate TC 501/506/504 ITVAC closing literals per IRM 25.23.2.6, Closing Identity Theft Issues.

CII case notes will be used to clearly identify research completed, analysis of documentation, determination and action completed. Case documentation must include sufficient information to support the determination and information used to justify the determination. Refer to IRM 25.23.2.3.4, Required Case and History Notes, for additional requirements.

Case notes should include any pertinent information from the Exam/AUR case information available from AIMS, CEAS, and/or AUR. Refer to IRM 25.23.2.3.4, Required Case and History Notes.

Follow all normal IDT research paths IRM 25.23.4.6, Research, Actions and Complete Case Analysis - Overview to determine whether the taxpayer is a victim of IDT.

Field Exam CEAS documents must be reviewed to determine whether the IDT allegation was addressed during the original audit. It may be necessary to request the closed Exam administrative file. Once reviewed, determine whether the case should be retained or returned to the appropriate Field Exam.

Cases that were no shows/no response in the Field Exam will be retained and worked in the campus.

Cases will be transferred back to the Field Exam if:

In cases where the IDT issues was resolved, do not return the case to the Field Exam. Follow normal procedures to resolve the taxpayer’s correspondence.

In cases where there is taxpayer contact and the IDT was addressed but the account was not corrected properly, (i.e., the refund issued due to the identity theft return was not moved to the GL 1545 account), do not return to the Field Exam, resolve the account.

Document CII with the reason the case is/is not being transferred back to the Field Exam (i.e., CEAS notes input by the Field Exam indicate the revenue agent (RA) or tax compliance officer (TCO) had contact with the taxpayer or the taxpayer submitted documentation during the audit).

Cases open with Field Exam PBC that meet the criteria in IRM 25.23.4-5, IDTVA Routing Matrix will be returned to Field exam.

When it is determined a case will be referred to the Field Exam due to an IDT allegation, the following information must be included as part of the case file: