To answer the last question first, we both know that such is not an area of my expertise; however, as a party of both group that's being taxed, as well as the beneficiary of the group that's doing the taxing I believe I'm entitled to some opinion on the matter.
I don't disagree that systems and policies of the enforcement arm of the IRS have flaws which need to be corrected, and that means the entity needs investment (though I will acknowledge and concede that investing in officers without investing in foundational systems is a flawed approach). Ideally you need both an improved foundation as well as the enforcement staff needed to actual review accounts (unless we could make such accounting automatic which H&R Block et. al would cry about)
I think as far as the heavy handed nature of enforcement goes... it's not that different in practice from any police force, and if you're going to complain about the heavy handed nature of tax enforcement, you should be complaining about the heavy handed nature of criminal enforcement.
Where I do have professional experience is at a regulatory agency that collected revenues from ad valorem in addition to providing regulatory oversight in business practice and public safety. What I will say about that the heavy handedness of agencies is typically purposeful. Those that aren't heavy handed tend to put up with / ignore quite a few bad actors and that ultimately ends up costing the public large sums of money, either from lost revenue or from cleaning up after businesses.
I've dealt with quite a few small businesses that shouldn't have been allowed to operate in the state at all because of their disregard for laws on public health & safety or the environment.