No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Supervision of Field Services in the United States Revenue Administration
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
Extract
The two revenue-collecting services of the United States government offer interesting contrasts in the methods used for the administrative control of their respective field services. This arises in large part from the fact that the Bureau of Customs has been the more decentralized service. Ever since its establishment in 1789, and in the course of a long and continuous existence, it has built up a background of traditional decentralization which contrasts with the policy of centralization characterizing the Bureau of Internal Revenue. The latter service has a much shorter history, really beginning in 1862, although internal taxes were levied by the federal government from 1791 to 1802, and from 1813 to 1817. By virtue of the fact that Congress conferred administrative powers directly upon the commissioner of internal revenue, rather than upon the Secretary of the Treasury (as was done in the case of the customs service), a more integrated and centralized system of control has been used in the internal revenue service since the beginning of its existence.
- Type
- Public Administration
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Political Science Association 1933
References
1 Act of July 31, 1789 (1 St. L., 29), establishing the customs service; act of July 1, 1862 (12 St. L., 432), establishing the internal revenue service.
2 In 1913, there were approximately 280 employees in the Washington office, and 3,584 employees in the field. Annual Report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 1918, p. 5 ff.
3 Treasury Department Appropriation Bill, 1933, Hearings before Subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations in Charge of, p. 261 ff. Hereafter this annual series of hearings will be cited as “Treasury Department Appropriation Bill [date], Hearings before House Sub-committee …”
4 The last reduction in the number of districts was made by executive order under the act of August 24, 1912, lowering the number from 126 to 49, the present figure.
5 Effected by the Economy Act of July 5, 1932 (72 St.L., 580).
6 Schmeckebier, L. F., The Customs Service, p. 30 Google Scholar.
7 42 St.L., 1450.
8 Deputy collectors of customs are under civil service, although deputy collectors of internal revenue were excepted from the classified civil service by the act of October 22, 1913 (38 St.L., 180).
9 A controversy arose between the Comptroller-General of the United States and the Treasury Department over this audit of collectors' accounts by the comptrollers of customs, the former asserting that he could not properly settle customs accounts on the certification of customs comptrollers. In 1923, he requested that the original papers covering customs transactions be transmitted to the General Accounting Office for audit, but hia request was refused by the Treasury on the ground that such papers were required in the field for the conduct of customs administration and that the tariff act of 1922, section 515, required that such papers be deposited with the Customs Court. In the end, the Comptroller-General had to give way, although Congress took no action toward settling the matter with remedial legislation. See Hearings of the House Committee on Ways and Means on H. R. 10939, 69th Cong., 1st Sess.; also House Report 1137, 69th Cong., 1st Sess.
10 Act of June 17, 1930 (46 St.L., 590), §523.
11 Comptroller ports are Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Chicago, New Orleans, and San Francisco. The act of September 21, 1922 (42 St.L., 858), required that accounts of all collectors be audited by comptrollers, and authorized the Secretary to assign to each comptroller a group of collection districts the accounts of which he was to audit.
12 Treasury and Post Office Departments Appropriation Bill, 1933, Hearings Before Senate Sub-committee, p. 6.
13 Customs Regulations of the United States, 1931, Art. 1193.
14 Customs Regulations, 1931, Arts. 1382 (c) and 1386.
15 Variations among collection districts in the size of their personnel are shown by the following figures: New York, 3,548; Boston, 550; San Francisco, 382; Seattle, 291; New Orleans, 282; Baltimore, 249; Chicago, 200; Los Angeles, 143; Great Falls (Mont.), 65; St. Louis, 45; Louisville, 6; and Salt Lake City, 3, (Letter from the Commissioner of Customs to the writer, March 31, 1933.)
16 This was not an innovation in the service, for Treasury Decision 34275 (March 16, 1914) had established a board of nine members who were experts in customs administration. At the request of a collector, this board was to make studies of customs offices and recommend to the collector improved methods and procedure. The board existed for three or four years.
17 Customs Regulations, 1931, Art. 1382.
18 Manual for the Use of United States Customs Agents Making Port Examinations, Form 601—Revised (September, 1929).
19 In a single year, internal revenue receipts increased four-fold—from $809,393,-640 in the fiscal year 1917 to $3,694,619,638 in 1918—as a result of war-revenue legislation.
20 On June 30, 1932, the personnel of the internal revenue collection service numbered 4,666, and the number of internal revenue agents was 3,441.
21 U. S. Code (1926), Title 26, §29.
22 Annual Report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 1920, p. 27.
23 On June 30, 1932, there were 34 supervisors of accounts and collections.
24 Not until 1924 did the bureau succeed in getting the accounts of all collectors to agree with those in the Bureau of Internal Revenue. Annual Report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 1924, p. 23–24.
25 Internal Revenue Manual, Part I, Title III (1927 edition).
26 Clerks in the internal revenue service are under civil service, but all deputies are excepted from the civil service law. In 1932, 13 clerks were serving as assistants and 39 as deputies. In 12 districts, the collector had not selected an assistant. Official Register of the United States, 1932.
27 Letter from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to the writer, March 21, 1933.
28 U. S. Code (1926), Title 26, §29.
29 Annual Report of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 1920, p. 27; also Internal Revenue Manual, Part I, Title III (1927 edition).
30 Letter from the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to the writer, February 7, 1933.
31 The history of the customs service is outlined in the monograph by L. F. Schmeckebier cited above.
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.