Recommendation: The Chairman of NRC should direct NRC staff to consider socioeconomic consequences and fatalities from evacuations in the criteria for determining what security measures should be required for radioactive materials that could be used in an RDD. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: NRC disagreed with this recommendation, and NRC did not provide us with documentation of any actions it plans to take to implement this recommendation. NRC maintains that the current regulatory requirements provide for the safe and secure use of all radioactive materials, regardless of category. We disagree with NRC's assessment. We continue to believe that by implementing our recommendation NRC would have better assurance that it was considering more likely and more significant consequences of an RDD when establishing its security requirements for this material. We encourage NRC to take action to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Chairman of NRC should require additional security measures for high-risk quantities of certain category 3 radioactive material, and assess whether other category 3 materials should also be safeguarded with additional security measures. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: NRC neither explicitly agreed nor disagreed with this recommendation, but stated that it would consider our recommendation as part of a working group the agency has established. The working group provided a staff analysis on these issues to the Commission in August 2017, but NRC has not updated this analysis taking into account the new information we provided in our April 2019 report. We continue to believe that implementing our recommendation would provide greater assurance that NRC's requirements are sufficient to help ensure all high-risk radioactive material are protected from theft and use in an RDD. We encourage NRC to take action to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Chairman of NRC should require all licensees to implement additional security measures when they have multiple quantities of category 3 americium-241 at a single facility that in total reach a category 1 or 2 quantity of material. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Status: Open

Comments: NRC disagreed with this recommendation. NRC maintains that the issue of aggregation of radioactive material has already been considered and NRC has taken or is in the process of taking actions to clarify relevant guidance and procedures. We disagree with NRC's assessment. We believe that by implementing our recommendation NRC would have better assurance that licensees are not storing multiple quantities of category 3 americium-241 at a single facility that in total reach a category 1 or 2 quantity of material.

Recommendation: The Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue should assess options for improving enforcement of late W-2 filing penalties, for example, by mailing notices before the next filing deadline. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: As of October 2019, IRS continues to disagree with this recommendation. IRS stated that it does not have all the information required for calculating and sending late penalty notifications prior to the beginning of the next filing season. However, in its response, IRS did not consider other options that could be available prior to finalizing penalty calculations, such as communicating with the employers earlier in the process. As noted in our report, quickly responding to employers that filed late increases the potential for compliance, thereby increasing the availability of W-2 data for systemic verification to detect and prevent fraud and noncompliance. We continue to believe that assessing the options for improving enforcement of late W-2 filing penalties, such as through earlier communication, would help IRS identify potential opportunities to encourage compliance with the W-2 filing deadline and verify more wage information before releasing refunds. We will continue to discuss options with IRS regarding this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue should develop an evaluation plan to fully assess the benefits and costs, including taxpayer burden, of modifying the February 15 refund hold, and determine how this effort informs IRS's overall compliance strategy for refundable tax credits and fraud risk management. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, IRS has assessed the benefits of modifying the refund hold, but it has not assessed the costs, as GAO recommended in January 2018. In November 2018, IRS provided its assessment of the February 15 refund hold. In it, IRS reiterated its findings regarding the benefits of the refund hold. These benefits included potential savings if IRS modified the hold to include all taxpayers, extended the hold to a later date when more W-2 data are available, or made both changes. However, IRS did not include any assessment of costs to achieve these potential savings, such as the costs for IRS to review any additional returns that would be identified under a modified refund hold. It did not assess taxpayer burden, either. IRS also did not determine how the February 15 refund hold informs IRS's overall compliance strategy for refundable tax credits and its fraud risk management strategy. In January 2019, IRS took actions to hold more returns beyond the February 15 refund hold date using a risk-based selection method. Nevertheless, without a complete assessment of the benefits and costs, including taxpayer burden, IRS is making a decision based upon incomplete information. Further, if Congress or Treasury considered making any changes, they too would have incomplete information on which to direct IRS's actions.

Recommendation: Based on the benefits and costs assessment in Recommendation 3, the Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue should use IRS's existing authority to modify the refund hold such that it minimizes the risk of releasing fraudulent or noncompliant refunds. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, IRS has taken actions consistent with our recommendations by modifying its filters to hold more returns claiming the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) or Additional Child Tax Credit (ACTC) beyond the February 15 refund hold date based on a risk-based selection method. In addition, in May 2019, IRS officials told us they are making similar changes for the 2020 filing season to hold more high-risk returns not claiming EITC or ACTC until W-2 data are available. This action, if taken, would be consistent with our recommendations. In 2018, IRS assessed the benefits of modifying the refund hold, however, it did not assess or document the costs, including taxpayer burden, or determine how the February 15 refund hold informs IRS's overall compliance strategy for refundable tax credits and its fraud risk management strategy. Completing these actions, along with the planned modifications, would fully address our recommendations, which would enable IRS to make decisions based on completed information.

Recommendation: The Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue should assess the benefits and costs of additional uses and applications of W-2 data for pre-refund compliance checks, such as addressing underreporting, employment fraud, and other fraud or noncompliance before issuing refunds. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2019, IRS provided results for a pilot encouraging voluntary compliance through expanded systemic verification using W-2 data. In the pilot, IRS sent soft notices to a targeted group of taxpayers whose returns under-reported income compared to W-2 data. In its analysis, IRS reported that some taxpayers voluntarily amended their returns after receiving the soft notice, resulting in a net increase in tax revenue. If IRS determines that the benefits outweigh the costs of adopting this practice based on the pilot results, or assesses additional options to address other fraud and noncompliance before issuing refunds, it would satisfy our recommendation. We will continue to follow IRS's progress on the pilot and its results.

Recommendation: Based on the assessment in Recommendation 5, the Acting Commissioner of Internal Revenue should implement any identified changes to improve pre-refund compliance checks. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2019, IRS provided an evaluation of a pilot it conducted during tax year 2019. In the pilot, IRS sent soft notices to a targeted group of taxpayers whose returns under-reported income compared to W-2 data. In its analysis, IRS reported that some taxpayers voluntarily amended their returns after receiving the soft notice, resulting in a net increase in tax revenue. IRS told us they intend to continue the pilot during tax year 2020. We will continue to follow IRS's progress on the pilot and its results.

Recommendation: To help ensure that efforts to counter piracy and maritime crime are coordinated and prioritized to effectively address the evolving threat, the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, in collaboration with the Secretaries of Defense and State, should work through the Counter-Piracy Steering Group or otherwise collaborate with the Secretaries of Homeland Security, Transportation, and the Treasury, and the Attorney General to determine whether additional actions to address counterpiracy and maritime security, such as developing an action plan that includes elements of a strategic approach, are needed to guide and coordinate activities.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2014, the Executive Office of the President issued the United States Counter Piracy and Maritime Security Action Plan, which includes an annex specific to activities in and around the Gulf of Guinea. While the plan outlines some of the planned indicators of effectiveness for activities in and around the Gulf of Guinea, the extent to which the agencies have assessed or plan to assess costs and benefits are not explicitly addressed. The plan states that the Counter Piracy Steering Group will coordinate, implement, and monitor the objectives outlined in the plan and will assess methods and agency activities to reduce risk and protect the maritime industry from acts of piracy and related maritime crime. The plan identifies an increase in investigating and prosecuting cases and a reduction in the trend of piracy and related maritime crime as tangible indicators of successful implementation of the plan. However, GAO's past work on piracy off the Horn of Africa recommended that, as part of a strategic approach, agencies (1) identify the costs of U.S. counterpiracy efforts including operational, support, and personnel costs; and (2) assess the benefits, and effectiveness of U.S. counterpiracy activities. The 2014 plan and its Gulf of Guinea annex do not include a discussion of these elements of a strategic approach. In August 2018, officials from the State Department noted that the Action Plan has not been updated because the drafting of the U.S. National Strategy for Maritime Security-which was being led by the National Security Council staff and would have addressed the Action Plan-was indefinitely suspended in June 2018. As of September 2019, neither the Strategy nor the Action plan have been updated. Including these elements of a strategic approach in the plan can help assess the effectiveness of current efforts, prioritize future efforts, and leverage resources. GAO will continue to monitor progress in this area.