Winning Tax Advocacy & Security Clearances: The “Whole-Person Concept”

THE PROBLEM A history of tax and financial problems jeopardized a Contractor's security clearance. The job represented millions of dollars and the stakes were high. 

WHEN THE CHIPS ARE DOWN You need a vigorous advocate to protect your rights. 

THE SOLUTION Selig & Associates successfully represents Contractors and Subcontractors before the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance, the Department of Justice Tax Division, the Internal Revenue Service, the District of Columbia Office of Tax and Revenue, the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue, the Georgia Department of Revenue, the California Franchise Tax Board and the Defense Office of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA).  

ACTUAL DECISION: “Security concerns under this guideline also can be mitigated by showing that “the person has received or is receiving counseling for the problem and/or there are clear indications that the problem is being resolved or is under control.” AG ¶ 20(c). Applicant has obtained professional assistance to resolve his tax delinquencies, and all three debts alleged in the SOR are being resolved. I conclude that AG ¶ 20(c) is established.”

THE OUTCOME “I conclude that it is clearly consistent with the national interest to grant Applicant eligibility for a security clearance. Eligibility for access to classified information is granted.”

THE RULES Under AG ¶ 2(c), the ultimate determination of whether to grant eligibility for a security clearance must be an overall commonsense judgment based upon careful consideration of the guidelines and the whole-person concept. In applying the whole- person concept, an administrative judge must evaluate an applicant’s eligibility for a security clearance by considering the totality of the applicant’s conduct and all relevant circumstances. An administrative judge should consider the nine adjudicative process factors listed at AG ¶ 2(a):

(1) the nature, extent, and seriousness of the conduct; 

(2) the circumstances surrounding the conduct, to include knowledgeable participation; 

(3) the frequency and recency of the conduct; 

(4) the individual’s age and maturity at the time of the conduct; 

(5) the extent to which participation is voluntary; 

(6) the presence or absence of rehabilitation and other permanent behavioral changes; 

(7) the motivation for the conduct; 

(8) the potential for pressure, coercion, exploitation, or duress; 

(9) the likelihood of continuation or recurrence.

Call Selig & Associates (212) 974-3435