Bill Overview
Title: Ban IRS Biometrics Act
Description: This bill prohibits the Department of the Treasury from requiring taxpayers to provide biometric information as a condition of filing any tax return, receiving any service, or accessing taxpayer information. The bill defines biometric information as any information regarding any measurable physical characteristic or personal behavioral trait used to recognize the identity, or verify the claimed identity or location, of an individual, including facial images, fingerprints, and iris scans. Treasury must also develop a plan for the safe and secure destruction and disposal of any biometric information collected or used prior to the enactment of this bill.
Sponsors: Sen. Scott, Rick [R-FL]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals and entities interacting with the IRS for tax purposes
Estimated Size: 331000000
- The bill directly impacts any individual or entity that interacts with the IRS for tax purposes.
- Biometrics had been considered for verifying identities in tax filings and accessing taxpayer information, it affects those who would have been required to provide such information.
- In the U.S, the IRS serves all taxpayers, meaning this legislation applies to nearly all individuals, businesses, and other entities that pay taxes.
- Globally, while the legislation itself pertains specifically to the U.S., the implications of not using biometrics for tax purposes could indirectly affect international entities or individuals interacting with the U.S. tax system.
Reasoning
- The policy impacts a wide group, specifically anyone who files taxes in the U.S., which is approximately 331 million people, including individuals and businesses.
- Biometric systems, while adding security, also raise ethical and privacy concerns which this bill addresses.
- The policy may be received positively by privacy advocates but could concern those who view biometrics as an effective fraud prevention tool.
- Given the large number of people interacting with the IRS, it is key to understand variations in opinion based on occupation, tech literacy, and privacy concerns.
- This bill does not require new technology implementation but requires systems to destroy biometric data securely, impacting IRS processes and potentially easing taxpayer interactions.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy improves my trust in the IRS by not requiring biometric data which I consider sensitive.
- I feel more secure about my personal data not being stored potentially vulnerable in government databases.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Accountant (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 42 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The removal of biometrics might increase identity fraud risk, although I understand privacy reasons for this bill.
- This adds some uncertainty for my clients regarding secure authentication methods.
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 |
Small Business Owner (New York, NY)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy alleviates my worry about the misuse of biometric data, a major privacy concern.
- However, it also raises questions about what the IRS will use to authenticate identity without biometrics.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Farmer (Rural Kansas)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don’t mind not having to provide biometric data as it feels invasive.
- Mostly, it doesn’t change much as I don’t deal extensively with IRS services.
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 | 5 | 5 |
Retiree (Miami, FL)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate not needing to understand biometric requirements; simplicity is key for me.
- I feel slightly more secure knowing my private data isn’t additionally harvested.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Graduate Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 24 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe the safeguards on privacy are important, especially for someone wary about personal data misuse.
- Minimal effect on my life currently but possibly crucial for future privacy.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Entrepreneur (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While privacy is important, I feel digital solutions like biometrics offer a level of seamlessness I value.
- It’s important to balance privacy with security; now they need an alternative plan.
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 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
School Teacher (Chicago, IL)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The ban on biometrics eases my privacy concerns significantly.
- However, it's crucial the IRS maintains the same security level with whatever alternative measures they consider.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Freelance Artist (Portland, OR)
Age: 32 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This seems to address concerns I have about biometric data security and privacy.
- On the flip side, greater clarity on how IRS plans to implement security would be beneficial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
Tech Startup Employee (Seattle, WA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Happy to see measures favoring privacy, as security can be achieved without collecting biometrics.
- I wonder how this will impact the IRS’s fraud detection measures, though.
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 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $15000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $20000000)
Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $15000000)
Year 3: $5000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $7000000)
Year 5: $3000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $5000000)
Year 10: $1000000 (Low: $500000, High: $1500000)
Year 100: $100000 (Low: $50000, High: $150000)
Key Considerations
- Implementation costs associated with system adaptations and data destruction.
- Long-term potential savings from not maintaining biometric systems.
- Rights and privacy concerns surrounding biometric data.
- Public trust and acceptance of alternative identity verification methods.