Justice Manual § 6-4.130

The Assistant Attorney General, Tax Division, has delegated to the United States Attorney and other specified supervisory officials in United States Attorneys’ Offices the authority to approve search warrants in many matters arising under the internal revenue laws: a warrant directed at an office, structure, or premises of a target or subject of an investigation; a warrant directed to a provider of electronic communication services or remote computing services and relating to a subject or target of a criminal investigation; and a warrant directed to a disinterested third party owning a storage space business or similar business and relating to a subject or target of a criminal investigation. See Tax Division Directive No. 52 (2008), available at Criminal Tax Manual, Chapter 3. The United States Attorney’s Office must, however, submit a written request and obtain the approval of the Tax Division for any search warrant where the target or subject is reasonably believed to be

an accountant,

a lawyer,

a physician,

a public official/political candidate,

a member of the clergy,

a news media representative,

a labor union official, or

an official of an organization exempt from tax under 26 U.S.C. § 501(c)(3)

Except as provided above, the United States Attorney’s Office must also submit a written request and obtain the approval of the Tax Division for any search warrant directed at an office, structure, or premises of a third party, i.e., a person who is not a target or subject of the investigation.

Aside from questions of strict legality, search warrants in tax investigations involve potential problems and issues intrinsic to tax cases. The concept of seizing personal or business books and records as the evidence or instrumentality of a crime is not as direct or simple as the seizure of a contraband. These documents usually contain much personal and confidential information and these very same documents, which, by their own nature, are not unusual, illegal, or dangerous, will be the evidence of or the instrumentality of the crime to be charged. In addition to the controversial nature of such a seizure of documents, the requirement that the items to be seized must be named with specificity is more difficult to meet. In addition to specifying the items to be seized and the place searched, the warrant must also specify a time frame.