[EVO X]

They were only recycling backups every 6 months, so by the time the scandal hit backups were long gone.

[kevkrom]

1) They had already been informed they were the subject of a Congressional investigation BEFORE Lerner's hard drive allegedly crashed. Even if they didn't restore, they were required to preserve the evidence.

2) That was the full-scale disaster recovery backup. Routine backups would have been under a different system (Sonasoft, specifically).

[Chances Are]

This is an enterprise at least 115,000 strong. All have computers (or should).

An enterprise this size requires multiple servers.

It is quite likely multiple vendors serve various tentacles on this octopus.

Because of the size of the enterprise, and the importance of the data they deal with on a daily basis, almost all (if not all) of those servers must have rather large capacities (doubtless, terabytes would be the norm).

Even as those servers get filled up on occasion, off site back up and storage would seem prudent and commonsensical, not to mention being required by law!

If they're using a system that requires recycling and destruction every 6 months, they have a long out-of-date system, one that should not be employed by an enterprise of this scope and importance.

This being the case, among the other accusations being leveled at the IRS we can add dereliction of duty. Why? This serves neither the enterprise nor the taxpayers any good purpose, given the technology available today. They have not done proper justice to the society they purport to work for and represent, and have not done due diligence for the scope of work legally required of them, given market plce options readily available to them.

And realistically, they cannot plead poverty! This outfit is the source of every golden egg the government receives, and if they want or need updated systems, then, by God, they are going to get them!

CA....