On 2023-10-09 15:15:41 +0000, J Burns said:
> On 10/8/23 10:57 PM, Your Name wrote:
>> On 2023-10-09 00:13:58 +0000, J Burns said:
>>>
>>> A week later, the IRS audits me. They say they know nothing about a
>>> $10,000 error. I don't know who impersonated an IRS agent, but under
>>> the concept of identity theft, the IRS is responsible. Until they can
>>> prove the person who phoned was not one of their 144,000 employees,
>>> they owe me $10,000.
>>
>> The person is just impersonating an IRS employee, but hasn't stolen
>> their identity (even if just telling you the name of a real IRS
>> employee).
>>
>> "Identity theft" usually involves obtaining documental "proof" that
>> they are that other person, e.g. getting a new birth certificate or
>> drivers license, so they can then go to the bank and take out a loan or
>> buy a car under that other person's name.
>>
>> They're two different crimes, although there may be some cross-over
>> between them as well.
>
> According to the dictionary in Ventura, identity theft is the
> fraudulent acquisition and use of a person's private identifying
> information.
>
> Suppose the caller says he's Joe Biden, and he wants to give me a break
> because prison is no place for the very wealthy. Suppose I know Biden's
> cell phone number because he used to phone me for advice.
>
> So I say, "Thanks, Joe. I'll send the money order right away, then
> phone to be sure you got it. What's your number?" So he gives me
> Biden's number, and it's correct.
>
> That would be identity theft, so why wouldn't Biden be responsible for
> the money I sent to the impersonator?

Because it wasn't anything to do with him, but it can be very difficult
for him to prove it, and while he is trying to prove that his credit
rating etc. will be in the toilet.

On 2023-10-09 15:19:00 +0000, J Burns said:
> On 10/8/23 8:37 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 2023-10-08 20:13, J Burns wrote:
>>>
>>> A week later, the IRS audits me. They say they know nothing about a
>>> $10,000 error. I don't know who impersonated an IRS agent, but under
>>> the concept of identity theft, the IRS is responsible. Until they can
>>> prove the person who phoned was not one of their 144,000 employees,
>>> they owe me $10,000.
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>> The IRS didn't perpetuate the fraud.  The money is gone and you will
>> never see it again. Ever.  And the IRS will still want their money if
>> they (in fact) were owned money from you.
>
> Exactly. Why should it be different if a stranger obtains money by
> impersonating me?

It's not different, but you have to prove it wasn't actually you
obtaining the money, which can be very difficult to do, and take a lot
of time and money.

The IRS in the example above would also have to do a lenghty
investigation (internal and then probably police) to make sure they
didn't actually get the money and it wasn't one of their staff.