Muslim World Report

DOGE's Controversial Role in DOJ Tax Division Closure Sparks Outcry

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Apr 9, 2025 10:01 AM | 6 min read | 1200 words

TL;DR: The potential closure of the DOJ’s Tax Division, primarily influenced by DOGE and Elon Musk, raises serious concerns about increased tax evasion and erosion of governmental oversight. This situation could lead to a significant crisis in public trust and exacerbate socio-economic disparities, compounded by the invasive surveillance capabilities of AI.

The Situation

In a development that raises profound concerns about governmental oversight and the potential for exacerbating socio-economic inequality, the cryptocurrency DOGE has become intertwined with alarming proposals to close the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Tax Division. Reportedly driven by a surge of tax evasion worries, this move signals a troubling trend where financial accountability is eroded under the guise of deregulation.

Critics argue that dismantling the enforcement capabilities of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) could lead to:

  • Increased tax evasion,
  • Undermined government revenue streams essential for public services, including military funding,
  • Disproportionate impacts on marginalized communities (Dubin, 2007; Yamen, 2021).

The interplay between high-profile figures in the tech industry, particularly Elon Musk, adds a complex layer to this narrative. Musk’s DOGE initiative has faced scrutiny, mainly due to allegations that it employs artificial intelligence to monitor federal employees for perceived political dissent. These actions raise serious ethical and privacy concerns, creating a climate of fear among employees and stifling free expression and dissent in governmental agencies, which are vital for a functioning democracy (Zuboff, 2022).

The implications of these developments are profound and multifaceted. Should the DOJ Tax Division close, we could foresee:

  • A marked increase in tax evasion benefiting wealthier individuals,
  • Significant revenue losses, leading to diminished support for essential services targeting low-income populations,
  • A potential crisis of public trust, civil unrest, and heightened political volatility as governments grapple with increasingly sparse resources (Pickard & Williams, 2013).

What If Tax Enforcement is Significantly Reduced?

The proposed closure of the DOJ Tax Division would:

  • Rapidly diminish effective tax enforcement capabilities,
  • Create a regulatory vacuum leading to a surge in tax evasion, particularly benefiting wealthier individuals (Atkinson et al., 2011).

The potential loss of billions in tax revenue could cascade into:

  • Essential services and social programs being severely impacted,
  • Greater public distrust in government,
  • A risk of civil unrest and political instability, with governments resorting to austerity measures (Aderonke Olaboye et al., 2024).

Speculation in cryptocurrency markets may intensify, potentially leading to:

  • Individuals searching for alternative assets to protect their wealth,
  • An already volatile economic landscape becoming further complicated (Chamola et al., 2020).

Internationally, nations with lax tax enforcement might seize this opportunity to become havens for digital investment, complicating international cooperation aimed at curbing tax evasion and illicit financial flows, thereby pushing the global economy toward greater instability (Lefèbvre et al., 2011).

What If AI Surveillance Expands Beyond Federal Employees?

Reports of AI surveillance targeting federal employees for anti-Trump sentiment raise critical questions regarding privacy rights and corporate power. If this practice extends into private industry, we may witness:

  • A chilling effect on free speech nationwide,
  • Employees feeling compelled to self-censor their views, risking manipulation or retaliation from employers.

This dynamic could create a dangerous environment where dissent is equated with disloyalty, further undermining democratic engagement and civil liberties.

The normalization of AI surveillance could extend to broader privacy invasions within civil society, leading to:

  • Erosion of digital privacy becoming the new normal,
  • Increased scrutiny of individuals’ digital footprints for compliance with political narratives (Olaboye et al., 2024).

As citizens become increasingly surveilled, the danger of coercive monitoring fostering a culture of fear grows, stifling creativity and critical inquiry across sectors (Raghunandan, 2024).

What If the Disbanding of the Crypto Fraud Team Leads to Increased Scams?

The recent disbanding of the DOJ’s cryptocurrency enforcement team occurs at a precarious time, potentially leading to:

  • An increase in fraudulent activities, endangering investors,
  • Jeopardizing the credibility of the crypto industry.

Without robust regulatory oversight, the public risks significant financial losses akin to repercussions experienced during the Great Depression. As more individuals engage with cryptocurrencies without adequate understanding or safeguards, the potential for widespread financial ruin increases, leading to calls for stringent regulations that may negate the principles of decentralization on which cryptocurrencies were founded.

Furthermore, inadequate protections could breed distrust in financial institutions and government oversight, pushing individuals towards risky investment alternatives. On the international stage, other nations may exploit this regulatory void, further fracturing the global crypto landscape into unregulated territories, inviting increased fraudulent activities and eroding consumer confidence in the financial system.

Strategic Maneuvers

In light of these alarming developments surrounding DOGE and the evolving political landscape, it is imperative for various stakeholders to adopt proactive measures:

For the Government

The government must prioritize:

  • Reinstatement of robust regulatory frameworks for effective tax enforcement, including restructuring the DOJ Tax Division (Emmanuella Eneh et al., 2024),
  • Transparency in operations and accountability for those exploiting loopholes,
  • Legislative measures addressing the ethical implications of AI surveillance, ensuring protections for workers’ rights to free speech (Hassib & Shires, 2022).

For Civil Society

Civil society organizations should:

  • Actively monitor the intersections of taxation, surveillance, and cryptocurrency regulation,
  • Mobilize public awareness campaigns emphasizing the risks associated with dismantling enforcement divisions and the dangers of AI surveillance (Pickard & Williams, 2013),
  • Enhance public understanding of cryptocurrencies, financial literacy, and consumer rights to empower informed financial decision-making (Amir et al., 2018).

For Corporations

Corporations in technology and finance must:

  • Embrace ethical standards prioritizing consumer well-being and the integrity of financial systems,
  • Engage in meaningful dialogues regarding their societal responsibilities, ensuring technological innovations adhere to principles of fairness and accountability (Zuboff, 2022),
  • Establish independent oversight bodies to bolster public confidence and provide checks against potential ethical ramifications.

References

  1. Aderonke Olaboye et al. (2024). Socioeconomic Dimensions of Tax Policy. Journal of Economic Policy Research.
  2. Amir, A., S. A. M. Ali, & M. K. Tariq. (2018). Cryptocurrency Awareness and Participation. Journal of Finance.
  3. Atkinson, A. B., et al. (2011). Tax Evasion and Inequality. Economic Journal.
  4. Dubin, J. A. (2007). “The Effect of Taxation on Income Distribution: Evidence from the U.S.” Public Finance Review.
  5. Eneh, E., et al. (2024). Trust in Government and Economic Disparity. Governance Studies Journal.
  6. Chamola, V., et al. (2020). The Future of Cryptocurrency: Market Trends and Predictions. International Journal of Financial Studies.
  7. Guyton, J. L., et al. (2021). Understanding Tax Evasion in the U.S. National Bureau of Economic Research.
  8. Hassib, A., & Shires, T. (2022). Regulatory Responses to AI Surveillance: A Policy Framework. Journal of Technology and Society.
  9. Kim, K., et al. (2018). International Cooperation and Tax Evasion. Global Policy Journal.
  10. Lefèbvre, N., et al. (2011). The Growing Divide: Tax Havens and Global Financial Accountability. International Economic Journal.
  11. Nwafor, C. (2023). Corporate Surveillance and the Erosion of Employee Rights. Journal of Labor Studies.
  12. Olaboye, A. et al. (2024). The Future of Digital Privacy in an Age of Surveillance. Civil Liberties Review.
  13. Pickard, V., & Williams, S. A. (2013). Civic Engagement in the Age of Technology: New Approaches to Grassroots Advocacy. Journal of Political Communication.
  14. Raghunandan, V. (2024). Surveillance in the Workplace: Impacts on Workers’ Rights. Journal of Human Resource Management.
  15. Yamen, O. (2021). “Deregulation and Its Impact on Tax Compliance: An Analysis.” Accounting and Finance Research.
  16. Zuboff, S. (2022). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. Public Affairs.
← Prev Next →