Elec. Privacy Info. Ctr. v. Internal Revenue Serv.
910 F.3d 1232
D.C. Cir.2018Background
- EPIC (a privacy nonprofit) submitted FOIA requests to the IRS seeking President Donald J. Trump’s individual income tax returns (2010 onward) and any records indicating financial ties to Russia.
- The IRS refused to process the requests because the materials sought were tax "returns" or "return information" protected by I.R.C. § 6103(a) and because EPIC did not supply taxpayer consent or Joint Committee approval required under IRS rules and § 6103(k)(3).
- EPIC administratively appealed; the IRS again declined and said § 6103(k)(3) does not create a FOIA right to third-party tax records and that future requests on the subject would not be processed.
- EPIC sued under FOIA (missed deadlines, failure to segregate, wrongful withholding) and the APA (wrongful withholding and failure to seek Joint Committee approval). The district court dismissed; EPIC appealed.
- The D.C. Circuit affirmed: it held FOIA does not entitle EPIC to the President’s tax records because § 6103(a) exempts such records from FOIA unless a statutory exception applies, and § 6103(k)(3) confers discretionary, conditional authority on the IRS (not a public right to request disclosure).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether I.R.C. § 6103(a) exempts requested tax records from FOIA | EPIC: some requested material may not be "returns"/"return information," so nonexempt portions must be segregated and disclosed | IRS: the request by its terms would confirm existence/content of returns/return information, so § 6103(a) bars disclosure | Held: § 6103(a) covers the requested material; disclosure would itself reveal protected return information, so FOIA exemption applies |
| Whether § 6103(k)(3) creates a FOIA-accessible right to compel IRS disclosure | EPIC: § 6103(k)(3) permits disclosure to correct misstatements and IRS must consider using it on EPIC's request | IRS: (k)(3) grants discretionary authority to disclose only after Joint Committee approval and does not create a public right to request disclosure | Held: (k)(3) is discretionary, conditional, and silent as to public-request rights; it does not give FOIA requesters a right to obtain disclosure |
| Whether EPIC failed to exhaust administrative remedies under FOIA rules | EPIC: it filed an appeal and fully explained the basis for disclosure; IRS refusal terminated the administrative process | IRS: EPIC violated IRS published rules (e.g., consent/authorization requirements), so remedies not exhausted | Held: exhaustion doctrine inapplicable here because EPIC pursued appeals and IRS effectively closed the administrative process; but claims fail on the merits anyway |
| APA claims that IRS unlawfully withheld action by not seeking Joint Committee approval | EPIC: IRS had a duty to seek (k)(3) approval and the Internal Revenue Manual creates a non-discretionary obligation | IRS: (k)(3) is discretionary and the Internal Revenue Manual is non-binding guidance | Held: (k)(3) imposes no mandatory duty to seek approval; the Manual is directory; APA claims fail (no unlawfully withheld nondiscretionary act) |
Key Cases Cited
- Milner v. Dep't of Navy, 562 U.S. 562 (2011) (FOIA includes statutory exemptions; agency need not disclose exempt records)
- Tax Analysts v. IRS, 117 F.3d 607 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (I.R.C. § 6103 is an Exemption 3 nondisclosure statute under FOIA)
- Church of Scientology of California v. IRS, 792 F.2d 146 (D.C. Cir. 1986) (relationship between § 6103 confidentiality and FOIA exemptions is harmonious)
- Oglesby v. U.S. Dep't of Army, 920 F.2d 57 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (administrative exhaustion doctrine in FOIA cases)
- Wilbur v. CIA, 355 F.3d 675 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (limits on exhaustion where purposes of exhaustion are not served)
- Hidalgo v. FBI, 344 F.3d 1256 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (exhaustion jurisprudential framework)
- Assassination Archives & Research Ctr. v. CIA, 334 F.3d 55 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (agency must disclose all reasonably segregable nonexempt portions)
- Kissinger v. Reporters Comm. for Freedom of the Press, 445 U.S. 136 (1980) (elements of a successful FOIA claim)
- Norton v. S. Utah Wilderness All., 542 U.S. 55 (2004) (§ 706(1) relief requires a discrete nondiscretionary duty)
- Chevron U.S.A. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984) (courts give effect to Congress's clear intent over agency rules)