Leaderboard

I disagree with denying the IRS the power to regulate preparers, but first let me disagree with Tom. The IRS did not release those numbers of wealthy people. If I'm wrong please direct me to your source. Statistics are released on national tax filings, and the identities of some of the people at the top may be guessed because there aren't many who make $55 billion or whatever a year. That tax info can also can be gleaned from public records (like when companies bid on projects and have to disclose tax records of officers, etc). The focus on conservative nonprofits was in my opinion entirely justified and part of the required legal process of vetting nonprofits to make sure they fill the bill. Many of the groups that lost nonprofit status had no public benefit purpose but operated mainly in the politics arena. Some legit organizations that really do some public good got caught in the net, but that didn't justify letting pseudo-nonprofits off the hook, which is what happened and continues. As for Frog believing IRS will just shut tax prep offices down at will, I really don't think so. Until recent years, the IRS has treated tax pros as stakeholders and often said it couldn't carry out the tax laws without them. The new commissioner and Sect of Treasury seem to voice the same. I have attended seminars given by the Office of Professional Responsibility, and they always assured the audience that they don't go after people for a mistake here and there but look for patterns. Like when the normal audit selection process pulls five of your EITC clients and every one of them says they don't have a business and don't know how that Sch C got on their return, then they pull maybe 100 more; If the majority of them have the same issue, a case against the tax pro is opened. OPR is an office by itself and not necessarily affected by understaffing and overwork in other parts of IRS. I firmly believe that licensing will improve accurate filings. Right now taxpayers have to trust that the person doing their taxes knows more about the law than they do. At least the license will weed out those who don't necessarily cheat but just don't know what they're doing. If you know of a preparer who's been cheating for decades, too bad IRS audit rates are down so much because of lack of money and staff. We had a couple of CPAs in our area who did the same thing for years and are now out of business thanks to IRS auditors. And I have read many times that the accuracy rate of returns in states that license preparers is higher than elsewhere. Sure there may be a few outliers like the one near cbslee, but perhaps that firm was taking on clients that were beyond their level of expertise? I have had several clients who came to me because their prior preparer said their return was getting too complicated for their knowledge level. Some preparers just won't admit it, which is what you saw. Licensing at least proves a minimal level of competency, which is more than taxpayers have now.

I am with the "frog" on this one. How many of us think the IRS is going to look at HRB? JH? LIberty? They are not going after the pop ups either, cause they are gone by the time the return is reviewed. The revocation of the PTIN just gives the IRS another intimidation factor against legal preparers. Accept the audit findings or lose the ability to efile (which would shut you down). The PTIN was instituted to protect preparer's SSN. Now it will be a weapon used against us. Tom Longview, TX

I agree completely with Bulldog Tom and Corduroy Frog. The IRS, given this power, will not prosecute the well-known fraudsters - because they already have that authority, they already have the necessary information, and they already know (or could easily retrieve from their own databases) who those persons/companies ARE. They have not. They will not - except for a few really egregious and public, but relatively small-potato, cases, to remind people that they can, as well as to make the publilc think they actually give a rip. This power, if given, will be used to intimidate those who disagree with IRS positions. I would expect for it first to be used against the most-successful Representation groups of those who are not nationally or regionally known. The ones who stop the service from wrongfully destroying people's financial lives over taxes assessed but not actually owed. They will leave the less-successful groups to flop and flail - and fail - at protecting taxpayers. And any tax preparer who protests an audit finding will do so at risk of their professional future. Unless you want to show me, in the text of the bill itself, where preparers are protected against claims made by any IRS employee or internal group with whom they have had recent cases heard. Disagree with me all you want. But ask yourself, first, when the last time was that you personally saw a *taxpayer* (not a tax pro) treated with respect (and not as a suspect) by the IRS, and how fast they will turn that same level of scorn and suspicion on you if they are given this power.

Well Tom, that is the thing about opinions, everyone has one. However we seem to live in alternate realities.

cbslee - who is going to make the determination that a preparer is incompetent? How will the OPR get the referrals to investigate? How does the appeal process work? Will you be able to continue to work if accused by a RO or Agent of incompetence until a hearing is held? Our PTIN is critical to our profession. IF the IRS has unfettered ability to revoke without recourse, we lose our ability to practice. I fear that kind of control in the hands of public servants who have shown ethical lapses during my career. Remember when they went after conservative non-profits? Remember when they released wealthy taxpayer confidential information just a few months ago? Why did the Clinton administration have to pass a Taxpayer Bill of Rights to curb abuses by the IRS? I have no faith in the workers at IRS anymore. They don't have the tools or resources, are overworked, underpaid, and the last thing you want to do is give a marginally talented, stressed out government employee is a weapon to take your business away because you disagree with their findings. You may not fear them, but I would much rather see an organization outside the Treasury Department having oversite of preparers. I don't trust the IRS with that power. Tom Longview TX

and it did not! it was animal day in the office - inside mama cat had issue with bad outside black cat = and there was a nasty mess. she then bit my ankle 3 x and scratched and bit the other one as she was trying to move the 3 kittens into my own office out of their luxury cat castle! she won until this am - back locked in so she is pacing as all she wants to do is move them back.. time for them to get homes and her fixed! Therapy Puppy wouldn't sit still like normal Tense trying to make a list of entities due 9/15 - how do you keep track of that? and then the daughter of a long time client who passed away called and said she closed the account and address of where the refund was to go! I do think clients now can be less smart then myself for having animals in the office! Friday is better D

I may be the only one to disagree, but I think the IRS has bigger problems to deal with - like the ones addressed by Olsen every year in her review. This doesn't mean I support bad preparers or bad tax returns. None of us do, and I wish they weren't out there. Especially shifty-eyed Sam across town who will deduct anything or lie for his customers. But Sam would be most likely to be shut down by increased audit activity than regulation. The problem with regulation of any industry is the enforcers pick and choose who to scrutinize. They are quick to go after low-hanging fruit to justify their jobs, but are not so anxious to tangle with difficult violators who can effectively throw up roadblocks. In other words, they could shut me down for accidentally failing to sign a return, or a failure to observe a petty regulation in Cir 1230. But a very bad preparer in a nearby town some 30 miles away has been spewing out inaccurate returns for 30 years, but is married to a Federal Judge. Big companies support regulation and in public relations campaigns they decry bad practices in their industry. Regulators can eliminate small competitors by shutting them down, but if a regulator knocks on the door of a Fortune 500 company, they are told "Our lawyers will be in touch" and that will be the end of it. I don't expect "like" emoticons from the group, but this is where I stand.

Well said, Sara