REVIEW AND FACT REPORT ON RESEARCH APPROACH CAP 11 by JAAP UIJLENBROEK DG Tax Administration

Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
REVIEW AND FACT-REPORT RESEARCH APPROACH CAP 11
Client Jaap Uijienbroek DG Tax Administration
Implementation by |
Tax Administration Fees
10 2 6
Version 1 0
Report date: June 7, 2019
1
Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
1 Job description

Assignment
Review and factual report of the research approach carried out at CAP 11 from the start of the investigation in September 2013 to the time of sending the question and counter letters and the termination of the childcare allowance in the summer of 2014

Frame of reference
The relevant laws and regulations, Control, approach, tax authorities and General principles of good administration were used as a frame of reference.

Review period
September 1, 2013 to August 31, 2014
Review approach
The review was carried out and the preparation of the factual report took place by holding discussions with former employees of Toeslagen and the Tax Authorities-wide CAF team who carried out the investigation in 2013 and 2014 and the coordinator of the CAF team and review of the underlying investigation file, which consists of paper and digital records. The draft report of the review was submitted to the CAF team leader and the former Enforcement Director team leader for factual determination. Surcharges

Relevant context
CAF 11 is a Toeslagen project that focused on suspicions of organized abuse of childcare allowance at a specific childcare agency and its affiliated childminders and childcare providers in the period 2012 to July 2014. This project was carried out jointly with the Tax Administration's Combiteam Approach Facilitators (CAF). The CAF was founded with the aim of tackling fraud committed by facilitators in a structured and visible way and proposing measures to address fraud committed by facilitators in a structured and visible way. identified fraud to prevent from now on The CAF started in September 2013. CAF 11^ was inserted into the CAF in October after initial analysis. In Supplements. Each department of the Tax Administration made employees available to the CAF. The employees of Surcharges who worked in the CAF team fell under the responsibility of the coordinator CAF De for that part of their tasks.
coordinator CAF reported to the Director of Taxation at the time, CAF 11 started in September 2013 in response to a signal from the GGD and analysis of internal data from Supplements. As a result, the CAF 11 team conducted research with 16 childminders and at the childcare agency. The CAF 11 team consisted of a fixed core of 2 employees of Surcharges and 2 employees of the MKB Tax Administration. In addition, a number of employees of the MKB Tax Administration were involved in visiting childminders. The employees were also involved in visiting childminders. The employees were also involved in visiting childminders. from Fees on reported their findings orally and as part of a monthly overview to the management of Allowances at various times.

During that period, the CAF team leader also writes a weekly progress report on the relevant CAF files to the General Director of Taxation.
Based on the findings of the CAF 11 team, Surcharges decided to take action on the paid and current childcare allowance for 302 parents. This group consists of parents who used childcare by a childminder mediated by the childcare agency in question in 2012, 2013 and/or 2014.
• The actions carried out by Surcharges can be specified as follows
• For 235 parents who had a current childcare allowance, the allowance was stopped as of September 1, 2014
• The childcare allowance for 67 parents who were affiliated with this childcare agency in 2012 and/or 2013 were stopped retroactively (CAF 11 was the number used within the Tax Administration, wide CAF was used for this case).
2
Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
When assessing the information provided by parents after 1 September 2014, Surcharges found that many parents were not entitled to childcare allowance.
Over the years 2012, 2013 and 2014, the parents lodged 92, 206 and 166 respectively, objections to the termination of the allowance.
The resolution of these objections took several years. Since 2017, a lot of attention has been paid to the treatment of the parents involved in CAF 11 by the House of Representatives, the media, the National Ombudsman and the Data Protection Authority.
3
Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
2 Review findings and factual report
General
The audit staff fully cooperated in carrying out the review and, where necessary, explained matters orally or via email. The employees talk enthusiastically about the activities of the CAI^ team.
The research file consists of a paper file from the visit to the childcare agency on May 21, 2014 and a digital file consisting of several folders containing e mails, excel, word and pdf files. The digital folder of one of the
Audit staff at Toeslagen consists of 1,027 documents without division into sub-folders. The file name of the stored documents is often impossible to determine the content of the document, by whom it was prepared and on what date During the review.
it has regularly been found that several copies of a document are stored in the digital file, sometimes under a different file name. In the CAF digital file, documents are included in sub-folders. This information partly corresponds to that in the Surcharges file.
The review findings with regard to the CAF 11 research approach are broken down into the following components:
1 Pre-investigation signals
2 Relationship with other childcare agencies
3 Analysis query September and October 2013
4 Survey: 16 childminders (November 2013)
5 Order to stop childcare allowance
6 Childcare Agency Survey May 2014
7 Requesting bank statements in July 2014

In addition to the above components, the research file also found other elements that indicate internal analyses and information exchange between the members of the research team.
The review does not clearly show what the role of these elements was in determining
has been the continuation of the research approach and completion of the research
1 Pre-investigation signals
• In 2011, Surcharges received two emails from the GGD about childminders who work at the
childminding agencies are connected and a document with findings about 31 childminders in
the Rijnmond region Findings of the GGD indicate or are a lack of VOG, bad
command of Dutch language has already stopped as a childminder The GGD gives 19
childminders have a negative opinion
• The information from the GGD was provided as a signal for possible further internal research in
September 2013
• The CAF 11 case description of October 7, 2013 states that the GGD in early 2013
has carried out an inspection where almost all childminders at this agency were visited
due to signs that things would not be right, 31 out of 35 are also mentioned.
that in this study, approximately 60% of the childcare parents are substantively negative
reviewed
• The passage in the case description does not match the GGD document from
2011 The difference consists of the range of 31 childminders in the Rijnmond region. The
childminding agency mediated for more childminders throughout the Netherlands In the
research files are not documents from the GGD with a date after 2011
found that could support the passage in question
• Over the years 2011 to 2013, the GGD issued public inspection reports on
the childminding agency In 2011, the GGD recommends maintaining the municipality at 7
shortcomings In 2012, the GGD notes that the holder succeeded in the previous
to solve shortcomings in a constructive way The GGD advises the municipality to
maintain 2 shortcomings In 2013, the GGD compliments the holder for the
4
Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
taking sufficient preventive measures to address the shortcomings of 2012
lessons The GGD advises the municipality not to enforce in 2013
• The public inspection reports were not found in the CAF 11 investigation file
• On 14 January 2013, a report was prepared by the MKB Tax Administration aimed at the
childminding agency as a result of a study with the aim of determining whether the
childcare agency has amounts of childcare allowance over the years 2005 to 2011
received for people who were no longer entitled to it In the report is
included that a specific balance sheet item has been checked and that a possible excess
amount received from Surcharges is referred to as stored funds. In the report,
states that until 2010, it happens sporadically that the allowance goes directly to the
childminding agency goes In 2010, it will be standard that the allowance goes directly to the
childminding agency goes and from 2011, the allowance will go directly to the parents again De
The conclusion of the report is that the childminding agency must pay an amount of €1,976
reimburse to the tax authorities Fees
• The report in response to this book study was during the review of the
research approach found in the paper file associated with the investigation at the
childminding agency that started on May 21, 2014 From the CAF 11 research file comes
does not specify whether and how this report affected the
research approach
2 Relationship with other childcare agencies
• The investigation file found comments about two others
childminding agencies that would have a relationship with the childminding agency under investigation
• About one of these childcare agencies (hereinafter “A”) is an internal e-mail from June 8, 2012.
included, pointing to the website of childcare agency A that its customers
refers to a possible switch to the childminding agency under investigation
• Childcare agency A was investigated by the FIOD. When reviewing the research file,
found that the FIOD investigation was completed in July 2011 and that the
owners of childminding agency A received a transaction in March 2013 The
team leader CAF notes that the CAF had no information about the progress of the
investigation and that, according to him, it was not necessary to find out this information He
indicates that CAF was established because the directors had indications that signals
stayed lying
• The review did not determine the extent to which customers have switched and whether the
the working method of both childminding agencies is similar
• About the second childminding agency (hereinafter B), receives Allowances in late 2013 and early 2014
six e-mails from the GGD with signals about possible irregularities | Childcare agency
B was deregistered from the LRK on 29 January 2014 and the bankruptcy was declared as of
July 31, 2014
• The investigation file states that, on May 21, 2014, the control officer with
the childminding agency under investigation has discussed the takeover of a childminding agency
B. The owner of the childcare agency under investigation sent an email to
the control employee sent with receipts for the takeover
• The review did not determine the extent to which customers of childminding agency B are
switched and whether the working methods of both childminding agencies are similar
3 Analysis query September and October 2013
• On September 27, 2013, the Supervisory Inspector requests a query request
to analyse internal data about question parents. The results are used
to assess the risks of organized abuse of childcare allowance The
the following information is requested
o The BSN
o The name
at the OL address
o Date of birth
o The genus M V
o Nationality_l and nationality_2
o The possible immigration date
5
Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
o Date of issue of BSN
o Date of start of the allowance
o Whether this is VOW
o Whether it is health insured according to RIS
o Whether the 01 address is in the Netherlands Antilles
o Income cf. Last tax return in 5 years
o Income decline 10% cf last two income reports from TVs
o Whether it meets the concept of undeliverable return mail
o The children [with any KGB and/or KOT], where BVR must be used to check whether
an older child is a relationship between the applicant or the possible partner and this child
o Per supplement for the 2013 tax year, the amount of the last decision to
mention If no surcharge has been requested, mention the value 1j
o Determine what amount is real per surcharge for the 2012 and 2013 allowance years
paid, transferred and non-refundable
o If an applicant has applied for an allowance but no amount
has actually been paid, the value 0 must be supplied
o If an applicant does not have one of the possible surcharges at all
requested, a space must be returned
o For each fee actually paid, state the account numbers where it is
amounts have been paid
• Bind September and in October 2013, the audit officer received the data
combined and analyzed in excel files These files are included in the
research file
• In one of the excel files, the childcare hours (those in the allowance applications) were analyzed.
are included The amount of the childcare allowance depends, among other things, on the
amount of childcare hours The overview below concerns the number of children in the
research population whose childcare hours are divided into different ranges
o hours 50
o 50 hours 100
o 100 hours 150
o 150 hours 200
o 200 hours 230
o 230 hours
133
189
143
83
26
26
4 Survey: 16 childminders (November 2013)
• In October, the control officer will make a selection of 16 childminders who are in 4 regions
Amsterdam The Hague Eindhoven East are visited These 16 childminders include 23
questioners connected According to the employee, the selection was made on the basis of high
hours of older child relationship between guest and question parent and childcare at the address of the
question/parent: The result of this selection is included in an excel file per region.
these are included in the research file
• On November 13, 2013, the 16 visits will take place by 4 couples consisting of 2
auditors of the MKB Tax Administration The visits are not in advance
announced The announcement letter will be on site, according to the control officer
handed
• The findings of the audit staff are recorded in excel forms and in a
overarching word document This word document states the following: Note:
VO'S are question parents GO are childminders
o Hours too high often/no proofs, monthly statesj 5 VO s
o Childcare will stop 7 VOCs
o Preschools are listed for hours of KOT 2 VOS
o Nov 6, monthly statements already filled until Dec 31, 2013 2 VO s
o Children found almost nowhere (2), yes.
o children do not sit with the childminder who is specified but with another 1
VO
GO has been affiliated with another childcare agency since July 2013 (1 GO).
Almost never, contracts, timesheets, invoices, proofs of childcare available
Giving miscellaneous items to the childcare agency requests KOT with Digid (question parents)
o
o
O
6
Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
• A report will be drawn up from 2 visits addressed to the childminder Van de
According to the control officer, other visits have no feedback on the
childminders occurred Apart from the 2 reports, there are no feedbacks
found in the research file During the review, the CAF team leader states that
it was common that no report was prepared and that is why couples do it
conducted research
• The 2 reports state that the administration looked tidy and that the
financial flows could be monitored. 1 report states that the child was not present because it
do not visit on a babysitting day. The information from the reports is not included
in the overarching word document
• Apart from the feedback forms, there are no underlying documents of the 16
visits found in the research file
• As of December 11, 2013, a total file with data about the 16 childminders was in excel
created This does not include the information from the 2 reports. 5 questioning parents
a counter letter is recommended Note: this means a request for information to the
to hand over the tax office The investigation report does not show whether to
this advice has been followed up
• On June 2, 2014, the childminder office will display the monthly statements of the person visited
childminders copied over the months of November and December 2013 The monthly statements
of children 31 and 32 are included in the file documents dated May 21, 2014 The monthly statements
are signed by the childminder and question parent per child in the
research file found no analysis of these monthly statements with the findings
during the visit on November 13, except for children 31 and 32 During the review of the
On the basis of these timesheets, the following overview was made:
Not a child
present at
visitation
Received
child
Childcare hours
November
Childcare hours
December
Childcare hours
filled in
13 11
1 182 194 Yes 11 hours None
annotation
in file
2 102 134 Yes 6 hours None
annotation
in file
Also on 1 and
2 ^ christmas day
3 128 144 Yes 10 hours None
annotation
in file
Also on 2®
christmas day
4 58 81 Yes 4 hours None
annotation
in file
Also on 2^
christmas day
5 80 70 No
Also on 1®
christmas day
6 80 70 No
Also on 1^
christmas day
7 104 86 No
Also on I
christmas day
Not a child
present
8 168 176 Yes 8 hours
Also on 1^ and
2^ christmas day
Not a child
present
9 84 83 Yes 6 hours
Also on I® and
2® Christmas Day
10 230 230 Yes 10 hours None
annotation
in file
Who, that kid?
to school
goes
Also on 1® and
2^ christmas day
7
Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
11 150 160 Yes 7 15 hours None
annotation
in file
Also on 1 and
2^ christmas day
12 207 207
Also on 1® and
2^ christmas day
Yes 8 hours Child not
present
Not a child
present
13 164 164
Also on 1^ and
2^ christmas day
Yes 9 hours
Not a child
present
14 87 5 0 Yes 7 5 hours
Stopped by
1 12 2013
Not a child
present
15 55 0 Yes 5 hours
Stopped by
1 12 2013
Not a child
found
questioner
since 15 2
2013
unemployed
16 174 174 days are
Total only Totally empty
Not a child
present
fits after
school at
17 38 5 70 Yes 3 5 hours
18 70 66 5 Yes 3 5 hours Child not
present
fits after
school at
19 42 52 5 No
20 102 85 No
21 67 70 No
22 145 140 No
23 145 140 No
24 145 140 No
25 106 108 Yes 5 hours Babysitting on
address
questioner
26 100 115 No
27 214 210 No
28 100 115 No
29 200 194 No
30 95 94 No
31 220 200 Yes 15 hours Child not
present
32 200 230 Yes 15 hours Child not
present
• During the review of the research file, based on the above overview,
found that
o No childcare hours have been filled in the monthly statement on 13 November for 14 children
o For 1 child from the monthly state, it does not appear on which days childcare takes place
o For 17 children, childcare hours have been filled in on November 13 in the monthly statement
o Of these 17 children, the internal feedback included 11 times that the
child not found: 3 - 5 childcare hours are available for 2 children on this day
filled in the monthly statement and filled in 5 childcare hours for 9 children
o 6 of these 17 children have not been recorded in the internal feedback
recorded about the child's presence
• During the review of the research file, based on the above childcare hours, it is
created the following overview
8
Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
hours 50
50 hours 100
100 hours 150
150 hours 200
200 hours 230
230 hours
o 2
o 9
or 8
o 6
or 4
o 1
5 Childcare Agency Survey May 2014
• On May 7, 2014, the control officer sent an announcement letter for a
book survey at the childcare agency signed with on behalf of the inspector
• The scope of the book investigation is indicated in the announcement as VOIGt
o Owner's income tax 2012 and 2013
o Corporate tax 2013 from the childminding agency
o Accuracy: compliance with the rules of the Childcare Allowance Act, specifically art 38 AWIR Act and
art 1 Implementing Decision
o Collection of information in the context of taxation and surcharges of
third parties
• On May 21, 2014, the first day of the investigation will take place by 2
auditors An internal report of findings was made from this study
According to the control officer, this report has not been shared with the childminding agency In this
report included comments and questions about the working method of the
childminding agency and the documents that were viewed During the review, the team leader notes
CAF notes that the statements of the 2 control staff together have a 4 eye principle
must ensure that what is actually going on gets a good picture of what is actually going on. The team leader
CAF explains that this is the result of experiences that are found to be wrong:
interlocutor would not be willing to sign a report
• On May 21, 2014, the control employee and the owner of the childminding agency
10 customer files reviewed. Of these, 1 file appears to be duplicate and 1 only a
dispute with the questioner concerning The remaining 8 files are invoices
agreements between the question parent and childminding agency, annual statements and/or monthly statements
copied Of these 8 files, not all of these documents are in the research file
recorded
• The research report dated 4 May 2016 contains the findings of the 8
investigated files listed
• During the review of the research file, the following overview is provided of the 8 files
rendered
Number of weeks
childcare
conform
monthly states
Dossier
report
Dossier
paper
Childcare hours
conform
monthly states
Childcare hours at
non-existent
days
Childcare hours
conform
match
1 8 200 240 hours 52 95 hours
2 3 120 hours no 50 130 hours
3 2 230 hours yes not
included
52 230 hours
2 children
into
annual review
4, 4, 200, 230 hours, 52, 210 and 120 hours
[2 children]
no
6 6 160 184 hours
and 80 90 hours
52 148 hours
2 children
no
7 5 10 100 hours
lx 188 hours
50 49 71 hours
4 children
no
5 1 200 240 hours 52 148 hours
8 7 140 200 hours no 52 148 hours
• The numbering of the files in the paper file and in the investigation report will be
does not match The findings below are the numbering in the research report
apprehended
9
Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
• The findings about files 1, 4 and 6 in the investigation report are consistent with the
findings in the review of the research file
• In case of file 2, the control officer noted that the questioner is monthly for
130 hours of pay. This finding does not correspond to the copied annual overview and
the monthly statements Based on the monthly statements, there is a total of 1,382 hours of childcare per child
enjoyed The annual review states 1,084 hours per child
• File 3 includes documents for multiple childminders and questioning parents For the
The requested parent is, according to the monthly statements, for child 1 12x230 2 760 hours of childcare
enjoyed in the annual review, 2,300 childcare hours are indicated. This corresponds to the
start date of the reception agreement as of March 1, 2013 10 months x 230 hours In the
February's monthly statement is filled on February 29, these hours are not included in the
annual review
• In file 7, the control officer noted that 42 hours were booked twice. With the
review of the research file has not been established on which this finding is based
• In file 8, the control officer noted that the forecast hours and
actual hours differ In the annual overview, there are a total of 2009 childcare hours
indicated, on average, this is 167 hours per month compared to 148 hours, according to
the placement agreement
• The book investigation report will be issued by the audit officer on May 4, 2016
drawn up and by Fees to the lawyer at the childminding agency in December 2016
sent During the review, the CAF team leader states that
it was assumed that when requesting information to the questioning parents in 2014, there
additional findings would arise that would give rise to further
research at the childcare agency whether they would provide more information about
perpetrator or guilt
• The scope of the book research in the report is as VoiGT
o Corporate tax 2013
o Accuracy: compliance with the rules of the Childcare Allowance Act, specifically art 38 AWIR Act and
art 1 Implementing Decision
o Collection of information in the context of taxation and surcharges of
third parties
o Information obligation (article 18 AWIR)
• The scope of the report lacks the Income Tax section as it is
included in the book investigation announcement The information obligation of
article 18 AWIR was not included in the announcement
• The report states that the book investigation on behalf of the tax authorities is Toeslagen
set this is not included in the announcement
• In the final paragraph, the report states that before corporate income tax 2013, the
childminding agency, no corrections are made and that the submitted declaration is
followed
6 Order to stop childcare allowance
• On April 22, 2014, the control officer will create the internal order form
create a production register containing the following description
o Order to stop surcharges as of 1 June 2014 and to send out letters
211 applicants desk letter 2014_KOT and 86 applicants question letter none
2014_KOT and 2013_KOT
o Order description The current KOT surcharges are stopped and the
substantiation of the KOT requests are provided The supplied
data must be compared with the data from the administration where
particular attention should be paid to payments from B. Surcharges
from applicant to a childcare organization and from a childcare organization to the
childminder: The granted 2014 allowances must be stopped: the KOT
applicants for 2014 are asked to substantiate from 1:1: 13
delivery m b v a counter letter to the KOT applicants for 2013 who did not have a KOT in 2014
have to receive a question letter asking them to provide the information
deliver Any changes to the KOT for these applicants must first be
checked whether there is the full written evidence necessary to
10
Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
legality to assess The documents must be submitted within three weeks of
date will be provided If this period is exceeded, the
surcharges are stopped for the entire allowance period starting on 1 January
2013 and, if relevant, should be the data for the 2012 tax year
requested For all changes, including objections and appeals, etc., in the KOT for
these applicants must first be checked or the full written
there is evidence that is necessary to assess the legality This
substantiation must be provided for the entire allowance period If this
substantiation is missing, must the allowance or appeal, or objection, etc. be filed?
rejected
• The research file does not include when the assignment form is in the
production register has been processed During the review of the research approach, the following is
detected
o The order form was incorporated into the production register on April 24, 2014 This
means that you can send the letters and stop the allowance
be started
o The execution of the order will take place from 1 July 2014 by sending
counter and question letters The cessation of the surcharges will take place from 1
September 2014
o In April 2014, no visit to the childminding agency has yet been made by the
control officer
• The research file does not include whether and at what time the discontinuation by a
authorized officer has been approved. The review remained unclear whether this
agreement should be a condition for stopping the surcharge
• The review of the research approach found that in the internal
monthly summaries of ongoing CAF cases becoming MT members of Surcharges
sent the intention to stop surcharges at CAF 11 was included from
April 2014
7 Requesting bank statements in July 2014
• The investigation file states that the control officer on July 15 and 17
receives requested bank details from two childminders who were on November 13, 2013
visited
• The bank details were requested from the banking institution under article 53 AWR
• The bank details show that monthly transfers take place with childminder A.
from the childcare agency to the childcare childcare provider ca | I0 2 e | then
then monthly cash withdrawals from
• The review shows that the control officer does not investigate this further
has executed There are no bank statements from the questioner in the research file
present During the review, the CAF team leader explains that there are still questions during that period
with the AWIR, powers for surcharges
• The bank details show that childminder B makes monthly transfers
from the childcare agency to the childcare childcare provider, these include varying
amounts of, for example | 10 2 e ^nl 10 2 Counterbookings are diverse in nature and scope
• During the review, it is reported that payments are made via this bank account to the
question parent The review shows that the control officer on this
has not carried out any follow-up research There are no bank statements from the questioner in
the research file is available
• During the review, the CAF team leader explains that the request to the bank took place as
test to see what information the bank statements would provide Before the query at
the questioner, according to him, this information was no longer necessary. The team leader indicates
that the information might be important for determining the
demand for guilt and being able to demonstrate collusion
10 2 6 take place
11
Version 1 0 June 7, 2019
3 Signing
Date: June 7, 2019
10 2 and
12