Bill Overview
Title: Presidential Tax Filings and Audit Transparency Act of 2022
Description: This bill requires the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to conduct an examination to determine the correctness of a Presidential income tax return as rapidly as practicable after it is filed. The IRS must disclose and make publicly available (on the internet) an initial report, periodic reports, and a final report on the examination of such tax returns. The final report must include the date on which the IRS examination of the return was completed, a list of audit materials, and a description of each proposed adjustment to a return and any controversy relating to its examination. This disclosure of tax return information is an exception to the general rule of confidentiality of taxpayer returns. The bill provides criteria for approving a request for an extension of the filing of a tax return and for failing to file a return within the required time period. The bill defines Presidential income tax return as any relevant income tax return of (1) a president while the president is in office, (2) the spouse of a president, (3) a corporation or partnership controlled by a president or a president's spouse, and (4) the estate of a president or a president's spouse.
Sponsors: Rep. Neal, Richard E. [D-MA-1]
Target Audience
Population: People affected by mandatory tax audits and disclosures under the Presidential Tax Filings and Audit Transparency Act
Estimated Size: 3
- The bill primarily affects the President of the United States as it mandates audits and public disclosure of their tax filings.
- The President's spouse is also directly affected as their tax returns are subject to the same scrutiny and disclosure requirements.
- Corporations and partnerships controlled by the President or their spouse will have their tax filings scrutinized and made public, potentially affecting their business operations and stakeholders.
- Presidential estates and those of their spouses are also affected, as any relevant tax returns will be included in the auditing and disclosure process.
Reasoning
- The target population for this policy is extremely narrow, focusing on the President, their spouse, and any business entities or estates they control.
- Given the limited number of people directly affected, it is crucial to evaluate how these individuals and entities perceive the policy's impact on their privacy, transparency, and any potential operational implications.
- The budget primarily allows for adjustments in the IRS to handle these special audits and release of information while ensuring compliance with legal and technological requirements.
- The simulated interviews will attempt to capture the range of reactions and effects on a few types of entities under this policy.
Simulated Interviews
President of the United States (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 74 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy ensures accountability and transparency, which is important for the office I hold.
- There are concerns about financial privacy and potential misinterpretations by the public.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
First Lady (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 70 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I support transparency, but I am concerned about how this affects my own ventures and privacy.
- The public scrutiny could be stressful.
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 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
CEO of Family-owned Corporation (New York, NY)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy might lead to negative media narratives affecting our stock price.
- Transparency should be balanced with business security.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Tax Attorney for the President's Estate (Chicago, IL)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This will increase the workload significantly, but also raises the importance of my role.
- Concerned about legal ramifications and privacy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Journalist (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy is a goldmine for investigative journalism.
- It allows greater insight into presidential financial dealings, which is vital for democracy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
CFO of Large Corporation (New York, NY)
Age: 47 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Even if our direct control is not affected, shareholders might react to any market rumors stemming from this policy.
- We need clear guidelines from the IRS on what to expect.
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 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Small Business Owner (Houston, TX)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate moves toward transparency, but skeptical about privacy implications.
- This policy doesn't directly affect me now, but could set precedents for broader disclosure.
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 |
Tax Consultant (Boston, MA)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any increase in IRS scrutiny always worries clients due to the trickle-down effect.
- Although not directly affected, some clients might get anxious.
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 |
Retired IRS Agent (Seattle, WA)
Age: 64 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This kind of transparency can be good, provided it's properly managed.
- The IRS will need more resources to handle these responsibilities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Ensuring privacy in such disclosures is crucial, and technology will need to evolve to support this.
- This law might inspire more secure digital filing processes.
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 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $7000000)
Year 2: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $7000000)
Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $7000000)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The bill applies to a very small group directly, limiting widespread implementation costs.
- The transparency requirements demand legal validation and IT infrastructure to ensure accurate and lawful public disclosures.
- Potential political implications influencing the IRS and public reception can impact perceived and real costs.