US Tax Agency Violated Privacy Laws 42,695 Times by Sharing Taxpayer Data with Immigration Enforcement
Washington, 27 February 2026
A federal judge has blocked the Internal Revenue Service from sharing taxpayer addresses with Immigration and Customs Enforcement after finding the tax agency violated privacy laws approximately 42,695 times. The ruling addresses protections established after Watergate, highlighting how the IRS disclosed confidential information on 47,000 individuals without proper statutory requirements, raising significant concerns about government overreach in immigration enforcement.
Court Ruling Exposes Massive Privacy Violations
On 26 February 2026, US District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly delivered a scathing assessment of the Internal Revenue Service’s data-sharing practices with Immigration and Customs Enforcement [1]. The judge found that the IRS disclosed taxpayer information approximately 42,695 times to ICE, violating IRS Code 6103, which prohibits the disclosure of tax return information without consent [1]. Judge Kollar-Kotelly stated that “The IRS not only failed to ensure that ICE’s request for confidential taxpayer address information met the statutory requirements, but this failure led the IRS to disclose confidential taxpayer addresses to ICE in situations where ICE’s request for that information was patently deficient” [1]. The government has already begun appealing the decision [1].
The Scale of Information Sharing Revealed
The magnitude of the privacy violations became clearer when Dottie Romo, chief risk and control officer for the IRS, revealed on 7 February 2026 that the tax agency had provided the Department of Homeland Security with information on 47,000 individuals out of the 1.28 million people that ICE had requested [1]. This represents approximately 3.672 percent of the total requests made by the immigration enforcement agency. The data-sharing arrangement originated from a memorandum of understanding signed on 7 April 2025 between the IRS and the Department of Homeland Security for “non-tax criminal enforcement” purposes [1]. The agreement was signed by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, a move that prompted the resignation of the then-acting commissioner of the IRS [1].
Legal Challenges Mount Against Third-Country Deportations
The privacy violations occur alongside broader legal challenges to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies. On 26 February 2026, US District Judge Brian Murphy ruled that the administration’s policy of deporting immigrants to “third countries” to which they have no ties is unlawful [2]. Judge Murphy determined that immigrants challenging the Department of Homeland Security’s policy have the right to “meaningful notice” and can object before they are deported to a third country [2]. This ruling addresses concerns about deportations to nations like Cameroon, where between January and February 2026, 17 migrants with legal protections were deported despite having no connection to the African nation [5].
Public Opinion Divided on Enforcement Methods
Public sentiment reflects the complexity of current immigration enforcement debates. A Reuters/Ipsos poll released on 26 February 2026 found that 61 percent of US adults support deporting immigrants living in the country illegally, with 92 percent of Republicans and 35 percent of Democrats backing Trump’s immigration crackdown [4]. However, only 39 percent of Americans support the administration’s enforcement tactics, while 58 percent oppose the methods being used [4]. The poll, conducted from 18-23 February 2026 among 4,368 people with a margin of error of 2 percentage points, also revealed that roughly 60 percent of adults believe ICE has “gone too far” during operations [4]. Senate Democrats have blocked Department of Homeland Security funding since 14 February 2026, demanding reforms including unmasking agents and tightening warrant requirements during raids [4].
Watergate-Era Protections Under Scrutiny
The current legal battle centres on privacy protections instituted after the 1972 Watergate scandal, which the Center for Taxpayer Rights cited when suing the government over the disclosure [1]. Nina Olson, founder of the Center for Taxpayer Rights, emphasised the significance of the ruling: “This confirms what we’ve been saying all along: that the IRS has an unlawful policy that violates the Internal Revenue Code’s protections by releasing these addresses in a way that violates the law’s requirements” [1]. Despite the 26 February ruling, two separate court orders have blocked the agencies from massive transfers of taxpayer information and prevented ICE from acting upon any IRS data, with these injunctions remaining in place [1]. Meanwhile, on 25 February 2026, a three-judge panel for the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit declined to issue a preliminary injunction for Centro de Trabajadores Unidos and other nonprofits suing the federal government, with Judge Harry T Edwards stating the groups “are unlikely to succeed on the merits of their claim” [1].