not enough, says national tax advocate.
by 卡塔尔世界杯常规比赛时间 research
the covid-19 crisis hit the internal revenue service pretty hard.
- employees were sent home to quarantine.
- entire operations were shut down.
- most taxpayer-to-agent communication was impossible.
- taxpayer assistance centers were shuttered.
more: the top six irs #fails this tax season (so far)
exclusively for pro members. log in here or 2022世界杯足球排名 today.
complicating matters, congress passed a number of initiatives that the irs had to execute even as it was stripped down to the skeleton crew:
- on march 21, the tax filing deadline was postponed to july 15.
- on march 25, the people first initiative began providing compliance relief, postponing collections and most enforcement.
- on march 27, the coronavirus aid, relief and economic security (“cares”) act was enacted.
- on march 30, all irs personnel who could work from home were evacuated from irs offices.
- on april 24, the paycheck protection program and healthcare enforcement act put more funding into the cares act.
- on june 1, the irs began to reopen, recalling certain employees.
- on june 5, the paycheck protection program flexibility act was enacted.
the new programs adjusted a whole host of irs rules:
- installment agreements were delayed and streamlined.
- deadlines for offers in compromise were extended, and payments were suspended.
- many liens and levies were suspended.
- offsets of overpayments against outstanding liabilities were allowed to be bypassed for reasons of hardship.
- delinquent accounts were not forwarded to collection agencies, which were temporarily prohibited from pursuing payments.
- in-person appeals conferences were suspended.
- collection due process hearings were postponed.
it’s all been an ironic turn of events. suddenly the irs was struggling to comply while taxpayers were relieved of compliance obligations.
do faqs constitute authoritative guidance?
the taxpayer advocacy service praised the irs for accomplishing so much under such duress, but it pointed out a significant shortcoming: formal, authoritative guidance for all the above.
developing formal authoritative guidance is necessarily time-consuming. legislation sets timetables for mandatory public comment, reviews and final approval.
pending issuance of formal guidance, the irs issues informal guidance in the form of frequently asked questions. faqs have a certain level of legal standing, but they are informal and subject to change. today’s “do” could be tomorrow’s “don’t.”
mutating guidance can be an inadvertent trap for taxpayers, who have a legislated right to be informed. if they are informed of guidance that subsequently changes, they have actually been misinformed.
the tas has asked the irs to issue a formal statement that says:
- the irs must number and provide dates for all faqs and will be prohibited from deleting faqs from its website even if guidance changes.
- for penalty relief purposes, taxpayers can rely on faqs as authoritative for returns filed before a given faq is obsoleted. if an faq is changed, it should be added to, not deleted.
the tas raises a good point. under the prevailing covid-19 conditions, the irs has little choice but to issue informal guidance, but it needs to clarify that such guidance is, in fact, temporarily but immutably authoritative. pulling a switcheroo on rules will only set off a pandemic of headaches and court cases – the last things anybody needs.