Bill Overview
Title: Increase Reliable Services Now Act
Description: This bill imposes limits on Internal Revenue Service (IRS) enforcement activities and hiring. The bill prohibits the IRS from hiring any person for enforcement activities until the end of a period in which the IRS has maintained for six consecutive months a level of service for accounts management phone lines of not less than 70%, and an average speed of answering phone calls in five minutes or less. The bill also requires that not less than 90% of regular IRS employees perform work in person at their job sites. The bill prohibits the IRS from auditing taxpayers with taxable incomes below $400,000 at a greater rate than before the enactment of this bill. Further, the IRS may not hire additional personnel (other than for return processing activities and call center operations) until its tax return processing backlog is not in excess of 1 million cases and it issues tax refunds within six weeks or less after receipt of a tax return.
Sponsors: Sen. Thune, John [R-SD]
Target Audience
Population: People interacting with IRS enforcement and services
Estimated Size: 300000000
- The global impact of this bill largely involves individuals and businesses that interact directly with the IRS.
Reasoning
- The Increase Reliable Services Now Act is aimed at improving IRS efficiency, reducing unnecessary audits for lower-income earners, and fast-tracking refund processes. This policy is likely to impact individuals who regularly interact with IRS due to audits or refund processing issues, which includes a significant portion of the American population.
- Wellbeing impacts will vary from high for those who have previously faced excessive audits, to low or none for those who do not interact with IRS enforcement regularly.
- Considerations include ensuring diversity of socio-economic status, gender, and occupation among those interviewed, reflecting how the policy affects not just individuals, but also small business owners who rely on prompt service from the IRS.
- The cost limitations of the policy suggest only partial changes within the first year; effects on IRS personnel and processes will slowly begin to reflect in individual experiences over a decade.
- The estimated 300 million potential impact target includes most American taxpayers, but differing impact levels depend on how often they have been subject to IRS enforcement or refund delays previously.
Simulated Interviews
Software Engineer (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've had to wait for hours on the line to get IRS help.
- I think this policy will help speed things up, especially during tax season.
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 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Small Business Owner (Houston, TX)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a business owner, any smoothing of IRS interactions is beneficial.
- I hope the processing of our corporate refunds becomes more predictable.
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 |
Freelancer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've struggled with delayed refunds because of my freelance status.
- I'm hopeful this will ease some of the tax season stress.
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 | 7 | 5 |
Retired (Chicago, IL)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I don't frequently deal with the IRS, but less hassle would be great if needed.
- It's good to know that the IRS won't audit retirees more frequently.
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 |
Accountant (Kansas City, MO)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This will likely make tax filing season a bit smoother for my clients, which makes my work easier.
- Slightly concerned about delays in IRS responses due to staffing cuts.
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 |
Tech Entrepreneur (Seattle, WA)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 1/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm often audited due to my business size and income level, this policy might help.
- Reducing audit pressure is always welcome.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
College Professor (Boston, MA)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the IRS processes inquiries faster, as students often require urgent documents.
- Optimistic about better service but skeptical due to budget constraints.
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 |
IRS Employee (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Constraints on hiring may mean more work for us.
- Concerned about long-term job security and workload.
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 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Graduate Student (Miami, FL)
Age: 23 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I rarely interact with the IRS, but faster refunds are a big plus.
- As a student, less tax stress is beneficial.
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 (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 67 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The IRS often confuses my late husband's records, so quicker resolutions help.
- Generally happy to have less intrusive audits.
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 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2000000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $2500000000)
Year 2: $2100000000 (Low: $1600000000, High: $2600000000)
Year 3: $2200000000 (Low: $1700000000, High: $2700000000)
Year 5: $2300000000 (Low: $1800000000, High: $2800000000)
Year 10: $2400000000 (Low: $1900000000, High: $2900000000)
Year 100: $2500000000 (Low: $2000000000, High: $3000000000)
Key Considerations
- IRS limitations may result in longer processing times affecting taxpayer satisfaction and compliance.
- Potential increase in the tax gap due to reduced enforcement and audits.
- The policy aims to shift IRS resources towards improving service metrics, which may benefit taxpayers in the long term.
- Balancing service enhancements with effective enforcement remains critical to maintain revenue collections.