Bill Overview
Title: Rural IRS Accountability Act
Description: This bill changes the time period for sending notices of delinquency to taxpayers from annually to quarterly. It also revises the period for bringing civil actions for unauthorized tax collection practices. The bill provides that tax payments made through the Electronic Federal Tax Payment System of the Department of the Treasury that are required to be made within a prescribed period or on or before a prescribed date shall be treated as made on the last day of either such prescribed period or on such prescribed date, thus making the mailbox rule (also known as the posting rule) applicable to such payments. Such rule provides that payments are considered made on the date they are postmarked. The bill also requires the Government Accountability Office to study and report on tax filing efforts in rural areas.
Sponsors: Rep. Jackson, Ronny [R-TX-13]
Target Audience
Population: Taxpayers impacted by IRS notification and payment rules changes
Estimated Size: 150000000
- The bill primarily affects individuals and entities who are taxpayers in rural areas, as it targets tax-related processes in these locations.
- The change from annual to quarterly notifications of delinquency will particularly impact individuals who have tax delinquencies, as they will receive notices more frequently.
- The revision of the civil actions period for unauthorized collection practices may impact taxpayers who have issues with how their taxes are collected.
- The mailbox rule adjustment affects any taxpayer using the Electronic Federal Tax Payment System, which includes a wide range of individuals from various demographics, not limited to rural areas.
- The GAO's study on tax filing efforts in rural areas highlights potential administrative or systemic issues specific to rural tax filers, indicating that rural taxpayers are a significant target of the bill.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily affects rural taxpayers, especially those with tax delinquencies and using the Electronic Federal Tax Payment System. There is a national impact due to provisions extended to electronic payment and filing rules.
- The policy's impact could be directly observed in how frequently taxpayers receive delinquency notifications, which could cause both stress and proactivity changes.
- The budget considerations mean it's economically targeted, perhaps reaching office restructuring, system navigation, and notification mechanisms. However, the reach must be limited and strategic.
- A larger portion of the document focuses on compliance, accountability, and adjustments in notification rhythm—suggests that primary impacts include modifications in taxpayers' financial planning and stress levels about tax prediction and management.
Simulated Interviews
Farm Owner (Rural Ohio)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Receiving more frequent delinquency notices would be stressful, but it might force me to budget better.
- It's helpful that the payments are considered on time if made online by the due date.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
School Teacher (Rural Alabama)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't think I'll be affected much by these changes. Payment timing adjustments are good, but my finances are stable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Accountant (Rural Texas)
Age: 51 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Quarterly notices complicate clients' perceptions of risk but improve accountability.
- Electronic payments aligning with the mailing rule will alleviate some stress.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Tech Company Executive (Urban California)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy seems targeted at a specific niche, so minimal personal impact.
- The uniformity in electronic payment recognition is sensible and supports broader taxpayer bases.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Freelance Writer (Rural Nebraska)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More frequent notices will likely cause stress, but could push for better diligence.
- Procrastination on electronic payments is less risky with rule adjustments.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Homemaker (Rural North Dakota)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Quarterly notices will create a recurring point of stress tied to our finances.
- The changes might minimize late penalties, which is a small relief.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Retired (Rural Vermont)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Keeping up to date with tax changes is important, but this won't impact me directly much.
- Electronic payment dates aligning to deadlines is clear and better for people.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Rancher (Rural Arizona)
Age: 38 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Quarterly notices could be frustrating, but electronic payment leniency helps manage periods of low income.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Coal Miner (Rural Kentucky)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think I'll benefit from the less harsh electronic payment deadlines.
- It's annoying to think about quarterly notices, a constant reminder.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Tourism Guide (Rural Montana)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about having to constantly check for notices now, but I like the clear dating on payments.
- This policy might make my off-season payments more manageable.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $75000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $100000000)
Year 2: $80000000 (Low: $55000000, High: $105000000)
Year 3: $85000000 (Low: $60000000, High: $110000000)
Year 5: $90000000 (Low: $65000000, High: $115000000)
Year 10: $95000000 (Low: $70000000, High: $120000000)
Year 100: $100000000 (Low: $75000000, High: $125000000)
Key Considerations
- Increased notice frequency raises administrative costs but may also drive higher compliance.
- The GAO study, while initially a cost, could yield long-term process improvements that reduce IRS operating costs in rural areas.
- Adapting systems for the mailbox rule is an upfront cost but aligns with simplifying tax payment processes for taxpayers, potentially easing compliance burdens.