1989 Subpart A
No employer or any officer, employee, contractor, subcontractor, or agent of the employer is prohibited from retaliating against an employee for those protected activities. See 1989.102(a) which lists the persons who may not discharge, demote, suspend, threaten, harass, or otherwise retaliate against an employee.
Yes — informing a person with supervisory authority over you about suspected tax underpayment is a protected activity. Section 1989.102(b)(1) explicitly protects providing information to a person with supervisory authority or to any other person at the employer who has authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct.
Not necessarily — providing information to a coworker who does not have authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct is generally not covered by this provision. 1989.102(b)(1) protects information given to officials (like the IRS), supervisors, or other employer personnel who have authority to investigate or act, so the coworker’s authority matters.
Yes — testifying in or otherwise assisting an IRS administrative or judicial action related to alleged tax underpayment is a protected activity. See 1989.102(b)(2).
Actions such as discharging, demoting, suspending, threatening, harassing, intimidating, restraining, coercing, blacklisting, or disciplining an employee are examples of prohibited retaliation. The list in 1989.102(a) is illustrative and not limited to those exact terms.
The protection applies when the employee lawfully provides information or assists in an investigation that the employee reasonably believes constitutes a violation of the internal revenue laws or related federal tax fraud laws. See 1989.102(b)(1). The standard protects lawful acts taken based on a reasonable belief, not necessarily a correct conclusion.
An employee is protected when providing information to bodies such as the Internal Revenue Service, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, the Comptroller General, the Department of Justice, or the United States Congress. These examples are listed in 1989.102(b)(1).
Yes — contractors and subcontractors who are officers, employees, agents, or otherwise part of the employer’s operation are also prohibited from retaliating against an employee. That scope is specified in 1989.102(a).
Yes — causing information to be provided by someone else on your behalf is a protected act under the rule. 1989.102(b)(1) protects providing information or causing information to be provided in investigations of tax underpayment or related violations.
Yes — non-physical actions such as isolating an employee, hostile treatment, or spreading damaging rumors can fall under harassment or other forms of retaliation prohibited by 1989.102(a). The regulation uses broad language (including "harass") to cover a wide range of adverse actions.
Yes — assisting in any administrative or judicial action taken by the IRS, which can include helping with evidence or participation that aids the IRS case, is covered as a protected activity under 1989.102(b)(2).
Yes — reports made through an internal compliance hotline are protected if the report provides information to, or results in information being provided to, someone who has authority to investigate or address the misconduct, or to an external authority listed in the rule. See 1989.102(b)(1).
Yes — adverse changes to terms and conditions of employment like reduced hours or unfair performance reviews can be retaliation if they are in reprisal for protected activity. 1989.102(a) covers retaliation in the terms and conditions of employment.
Yes — providing information to the Department of Justice about suspected tax underpayment or related tax fraud is a protected act under 1989.102(b)(1).
Yes — the rule prohibits retaliation regardless of the employer’s stated reason; if an adverse employment action is a reprisal for protected activity, it is prohibited under 1989.102(a). Employers bear the burden to show legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons when claims are raised.
Yes — providing information to the Comptroller General of the United States about suspected tax underpayment or tax fraud is explicitly listed as a protected action in 1989.102(b)(1).
No — an employee who lawfully provides information based on a reasonable belief that the conduct violates tax laws is protected even if the report later proves incorrect, as described in 1989.102(b)(1). The key is that the act was lawful and based on a reasonable belief.
Yes — threats, intimidation, coercion, and similar conduct are specifically mentioned and are prohibited forms of retaliation under 1989.102(a).
Yes — assistance that contributes to administrative or judicial actions by the IRS, including preparation that aids prosecution, is protected under 1989.102(b)(2).