Policy Impact Analysis - 117/S/3546

Bill Overview

Title: SNOOP Act of 2022

Description: This bill modifies requirements for third party settlement organizations to eliminate their reporting requirement with respect to the transactions of their participating payees unless they have earned more than $20,000 on more than 200 separate transactions in an applicable tax period. A third party settlement organization is the central organization that has the contractual obligation to make payments to participating payees (generally, a merchant or business) in a third party payment network. This reverses a provision in the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 that lowered the reporting threshold to $600 with no minimum on the number of transactions.

Sponsors: Sen. Hagerty, Bill [R-TN]

Target Audience

Population: Individuals using third-party settlement organizations worldwide

Estimated Size: 20000000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Freelance Graphic Designer (Austin, Texas)

Age: 30 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 9.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The previous reporting requirement at $600 made filing taxes more complicated and stressful. I had to pay more attention to each transaction, which was a bit overbearing.
  • The SNOOP Act is a relief. I no longer have to worry about crossing the $600 mark and managing extra paperwork or unexpected taxes.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 9 5
Year 20 9 5

Full-Time Uber Driver (New York, New York)

Age: 49 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 6.0 years

Commonness: 7/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I'm on the edge with these services, and having to report made it awkward and a bit taxing as a side hassle. It's a bit of a weight off my mind now.
  • This reform should just make it easier for me to handle taxes and focus on my primary job.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 7 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 7 5

Full-Time Employee and Weekend Hobbyist (Detroit, Michigan)

Age: 26 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The $600 rule was a bit absurd for a small-time operation like mine focused on things like refurbished goods.
  • With the SNOOP Act, I can sell at my pace without the anxiety of additional tax dues.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 9 7

Retired, Ebay Seller (Miami, Florida)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 8/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The extra financial paperwork was a risk of frustration in every tax cycle.
  • Now, I can spend more time crafting instead of number crunching.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 8 5

Social Media Influencer (Columbus, Ohio)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 7.0 years

Commonness: 12/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The SNOOP Act simplifies tax scenarios for small outfits like mine.
  • I can stay under the radar and manage earnings easier without increased bureaucratic requirements.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 9 8
Year 2 9 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 9 8
Year 20 9 8

College Student (Portland, Oregon)

Age: 22 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 3.0 years

Commonness: 18/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Even though the $600 limit was unlikely to affect me, it was always in the back of my mind.
  • The SNOOP adjustment gives me clearer way on how to manage occasional sells.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 8 7

Tech Consultant (San Francisco, California)

Age: 45 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The new exceptions don't quite address my scenario as I still exceed the income limits.
  • But less demand for filling forms out could shift some operational weight off as the general tide lowers.

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

Non-profit worker (Chicago, Illinois)

Age: 29 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 14/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The reporting was quite detailed for such small amounts and added to stress during tax season.
  • I'm glad to have it rearranged so non-profits aren't burdened with unnecessary reporting just because we sell fundraiser tickets.

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 7 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Small Business Owner (Phoenix, Arizona)

Age: 40 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 0.0 years

Commonness: 6/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Big businesses like mine still have to report, but I think some new systems under the lower limit might reduce my overall administration.
  • The principle of it matters – fair to have some form of threshold.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 7 7
Year 20 7 7

Part-Timer and Occasional Reseller (Denver, Colorado)

Age: 32 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 4.0 years

Commonness: 13/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Reselling isn't a primary income but offered fun and bit extra cash-flow, and the threshold was worrisome.
  • The SNOOP Act helps me keep it low-key, with less pressure to pull out complicated tax ensures.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 8 6
Year 20 8 6

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $7000000, High: $15000000)

Year 2: $10200000 (Low: $7140000, High: $15300000)

Year 3: $10404000 (Low: $7282800, High: $15606000)

Year 5: $10824300 (Low: $7568010, High: $16234500)

Year 10: $11813124 (Low: $8269187, High: $17719686)

Year 100: $35162062 (Low: $24613443, High: $52743093)

Key Considerations