Bill Overview
Title: Disarm the IRS Act
Description: This bill prohibits the Internal Revenue Service from acquiring ammunition.
Sponsors: Rep. Gaetz, Matt [R-FL-1]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals subject to IRS enforcement
Estimated Size: 332000000
- The IRS is a federal agency that operates within the United States and its activities primarily impact U.S. residents and citizens.
- The primary purpose of the IRS is tax collection and tax law enforcement in the U.S. Therefore, any legislation affecting the IRS could indirectly affect taxpayers and IRS employees.
- This specific bill restricts the IRS from acquiring ammunition, which doesn’t directly impact the general public but might affect the IRS's enforcement capabilities.
Reasoning
- The 'Disarm the IRS Act' primarily affects IRS enforcement policy rather than individuals directly.
- The target population comprises all potential tax subjects but the actual impact may be on IRS operations and perceptions about IRS activities.
- With the policy's budget constraint, the direct financial impact is relatively low for such a large population, suggesting indirect psychological impacts more than substantial material effects.
- The varied perspectives reflect differences in personal interaction or perception of the IRS.
- Simulated interviews attempt to show how different demographics perceive IRS enforcement capabilities, even if they are not directly impacted.
Simulated Interviews
Small Business Owner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm all for making the IRS less intimidating. I don't like the idea of government employees who deal with taxes being armed.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Freelance Writer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't know if disarming the IRS changes much. It doesn't really affect how I see tax collection.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired (Austin, TX)
Age: 59 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The IRS should focus on accuracy and efficiency, not weapons. The public might appreciate this change.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Financial Analyst (Miami, FL)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The measure is a step towards reducing unnecessary aggression. I think it's about time for such changes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Tax Attorney (Boise, ID)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could change the dynamics in audits, making them less daunting for clients.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Public School Teacher (Detroit, MI)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've always seen the IRS as just tax collectors. I hadn’t considered enforcement, so it makes no difference to me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Graduate Student (New York, NY)
Age: 23 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Disarming the IRS seems like a move towards less militarized government—all for it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Police Officer (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 48 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not sure this is a good idea; sometimes enforcement needs backup and security.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
NGO Worker (Seattle, WA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 12.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This seems like a small step towards reducing federal brute force. I hope for more systemic reforms.
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 | 8 | 5 |
Retired Nurse (Louisville, KY)
Age: 64 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the IRS could afford to be less aggressive. This change is more reassuring.
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 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $8000000)
Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $8000000)
Year 5: $5000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $8000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- Securing IRS funding or redirecting resources to replace armed enforcement capabilities with non-lethal means could be required.
- Reevaluation of the overall IRS enforcement strategy in the absence of armed units may be necessary.
- Potential public perception impacts, as the presence of arms may be seen as excessive by some, or as necessary by others for effective enforcement.