T. Keith Fogg v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 21-2502 (8th Cir. 2022)
Annotate this Case
In June 2019, Plaintiffs submitted a FOIA request to the IRS seeking disclosure of the terms of a third-party authentication process set forth within IRM Sec. 21.1.3.3, pertaining to the tax professional authentication process. in August 2019, the IRS denied Plaintiffs' request citing the material was properly withheld pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552(b)(7)(E), and then plaintiffs filed an action in federal court.
The district court granted the IRS’s motion for summary judgment, rejecting Plaintiffs' request for an in-camera review of the documents.
The Eighth Circuit reversed, remanding for the district court to conduct an in-camera inspection of the documents. To meet its burden under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552(b)(7)(E), the IRS must prove the withheld material was “compiled for law enforcement purposes." Here, to effectively determine whether the IRS meets the requirements of 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552(b)(7)(E), an in-camera review is necessary. Thus, the district court erred in failing to hold an in-camera review.
Court Description: [Grasz, Author, with Stras and Kobes, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Freedom of Information Act. In reviewing the IRS's claim that it could withhold certain information under Exemption 7(E) of FOIA, the burden is on the government to show that the withheld provisions of the Internal Revenue Manual were compiled for law enforcement purposes; on the record provided, the court could not be certain that the IRS fairly described the withheld materials and adequately stated the reasons for nondisclosure without in camera inspection; here, an in camera inspection would well serve the process of determining whether the IRS met its burden, and the district court's summary judgment in favor of the IRS is vacated, with directions to conduct an in camera review of the challenged materials.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.