Management Advisory Report:
Progress Was Made to Provide Taxpayers With Correct Answers to Tax Law
Questions
August 2002
Reference Number: 2002-40-161
This report has cleared the Treasury
Inspector General for Tax Administration disclosure review process and
information determined to be restricted from public release has been redacted
from this document.
August
30, 2002
MEMORANDUM FOR
COMMISSIONER, WAGE AND INVESTMENT DIVISION
FROM: Pamela J. Gardiner /s/ Pamela J. Gardiner
Acting Inspector General
SUBJECT: Final Management Advisory Report -
Progress Was Made to Provide Taxpayers With Correct Answers to Tax Law
Questions (Audit # 200240053)
This
report presents the results of our review to determine if the Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) provides accurate and timely responses to taxpayers’ tax law
questions. In addition, we assessed
whether IRS employees were professional and courteous to Treasury Inspector
General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) auditors who made anonymous visits to
the Taxpayer Assistance Centers (TACs).
We also evaluated the adequacy of accommodations for issues such as
space, privacy, and cleanliness and determined if the correct office hours were
posted in the TACs.
This
review was conducted as a result of an amendment to the Treasury spending bill
for Fiscal Year (FY) 2002 proposed by Senator Byron Dorgan, (Democrat-North
Dakota), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Treasury and General Government. The amendment required the TIGTA to conduct
visits to all TACs and report to the Congress on whether taxpayers are provided
correct and prompt answers to their questions.
We will conduct anonymous visits to all TACs over a 2-year period. This is the third in a series of bi-monthly
reports that we will issue in response to the amendment to the Treasury
spending bill.
During May and June 2002, our auditors made 76 anonymous
visits to 39 TACs. The auditors asked
156 tax law questions and determined that IRS employees are not providing
correct answers to some tax law questions. For example:
·
Eighty-eight (56 percent) of the 156 questions were answered
correctly.
·
Thirty-six (23 percent) of the 156 questions were answered
incorrectly.
·
Thirty-two (21 percent) of the 156 questions resulted in the
IRS employee referring the auditor to IRS publications and generally advising
the auditor to do his or her own research to find the answer to the question.
In addition, we observed the
following during our visits to the TACs:
·
Office hours were not
posted for 17
(44 percent) of the 39 TACs shown on the IRS website. (Office hours posted at one TAC site were not the same as the
hours posted on the website.)
·
Taxpayer privacy was not adequate in 21 (57 percent) of 37
TACs we visited. (Auditors were unable
to assess the adequacy of privacy at two TACs because they were assisted in the
receptionist area.)
·
The TACs were clean in 39 (100 percent) of 39 sites we
visited.
·
The TACs were organized in 33 (85 percent) of 39 sites we
visited.
·
IRS employees were professional and courteous to the TIGTA auditors
in 71 (93 percent) of the 76 visits.
·
Wait-time for service was 30 minutes or less for 62 (82
percent) of the 76 visits.
We
will not make formal recommendations to the IRS in the bi-monthly reports. However, we plan to issue semi-annual trend
reports that may include appropriate recommendations to help ensure taxpayers
are provided accurate responses to their tax law questions. Our auditors will continue making visits to
the TACs throughout Calendar Years 2002 and 2003. We will also continue to issue bi-monthly reports on our results
to the IRS and the Congress.
Management’s
Response: The IRS continues to disagree with our
method of reporting referrals to publications when computing the accuracy
rate. However, based on our May and
June visits to TACs, the IRS has taken additional steps to address improper
referrals to publications. Beginning in
July, IRS managers conducted exit interviews of taxpayers as they left the TACs
to determine the level of service received.
This also identified improper referrals. Managers also shopped TACs other than their own to ask
questions. Both actions provided
immediate feedback.
The
IRS Quality Review Staff also began TAC visits in July 2002 to baseline quality
for account inquiries and tax return preparation. They are also measuring professionalism and courtesy. Early results show that, in almost all
cases, employees were professional and courteous. The IRS’ official results will be available in late August.
Management’s
complete response to the draft report is included as Appendix V.
Office
of Audit Comment:
As with their response to
our first in this series of bi-monthly reports, IRS management continues to
believe that the statistics cited in our report do not reflect the accuracy of
the IRS’ answers. Specifically, they do
not believe that referrals to publications should be included in computing the
accuracy rate. We disagree. As we previously stated, we do not believe
that simply referring taxpayers to a publication to do the research themselves
ensures a correct answer nor do we believe it qualifies as successful customer
service.
Copies of this
report are also being sent to the IRS managers who are affected by the
report. Please contact me at (202)
622-6510 if you have questions or Michael R. Phillips, Assistant Inspector
General for Audit (Wage and Investment Income Programs), at (202) 927-0597.
Taxpayers Are Receiving Incorrect Answers to Tax Law
Questions
Accommodations at Taxpayer Assistance
Centers Could Be Improved
Auditors Had Positive Experiences
When They Visited Taxpayer Assistance Centers
Appendix I – Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology
Appendix
II – Major Contributors to This Report
Appendix
III – Report Distribution List
Appendix IV
– States Visited During May and June 2002
Appendix V – Management’s Response to the Draft Report
The Senate Committee on Appropriations was deeply concerned
about the findings in a Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
(TIGTA) audit report on the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) Taxpayer
Assistance Centers (TAC). This report
showed that our auditors did not receive accurate or sufficient answers to 73
percent of their tax law questions posed during anonymous visits to the TACs
during January and February 2001. Based
on these results, Senator Byron Dorgan (Democrat-North Dakota), Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Treasury and General Government, proposed an amendment to the
Treasury spending bill for Fiscal Year (FY) 2002. The amendment required the TIGTA to conduct visits to all TACs
and report to the Congress as to whether taxpayers are provided correct and
prompt answers to their questions. We
will conduct anonymous visits to all TACs over a 2-year period.
The IRS’ Field Assistance (FA) office in the Wage and
Investment (W&I) Division has overall responsibility for the TACs. The TACs exist primarily to serve taxpayers
who choose to seek help from the IRS in person. The IRS employees who work in the TACs provide assistance in
interpreting tax laws and regulations, preparing some tax returns, resolving
inquiries on taxpayer accounts, and providing various other services designed
to minimize the burden on taxpayers in satisfying their tax obligations. There are currently no statistics on the
percentage of time spent by employees in the TACs on the various services
detailed above. The FA office is using
FY 2002 as a baseline to establish standards and other management information
in this area.
There are 414 TACs located throughout the United States,
including Washington, D.C. During FY
2001, the TACs served approximately 9.3 million taxpayers.
In addition to the anonymous visits being performed by our auditors,
the IRS has hired an outside contractor to anonymously visit its TACs and ask
two tax law questions per visit. The
contractor visits began in October 2001.
The IRS provided the contractor with four questions to choose from on
the following topics:
·
Earned Income Tax Credit (EIC).
·
Dependents.
·
Education Credits.
·
Social Security Benefits.
Our auditors performing anonymous visits to the TACs also
ask two questions during each visit, one of which was a question provided by
the IRS to its contractor. The
remaining question asked was selected from those we developed which relate to
22 tax law topics that are within the scope of topics that TAC employees should
have been trained to answer. The TIGTA
questions were designed to cover a wide range of tax law topics in order to
provide an overall assessment on whether taxpayers are receiving correct
answers to questions that an individual taxpayer might ask when he or she
visits a TAC. In May 2002, we changed
the scope of the questions or added additional scenarios that were more
applicable to the types of questions taxpayers ask after the filing season.
This report is the third in a series of bi-monthly reports
that we will issue on the results of our visits to the TACs. The review was conducted in the IRS’
Customer Assistance, Relationships, and Education office in the W&I
Division in May and June 2002. Our
auditors anonymously visited 39 TACs in 6 states (see Appendix IV for specific
states visited).
This review was conducted in accordance with the President’s
Council on Integrity and Efficiency’s Quality
Standards for Inspections. Detailed information on our objective, scope,
and methodology is presented in Appendix I.
Major contributors to the report are listed in Appendix II.
IRS employees did not always provide correct answers to the
tax law questions asked by our auditors.
The results for the 156 tax law questions were as follows:
·
Eighty-eight (56 percent) of the 156 questions were
answered correctly. In 25 of the 88
questions, the IRS employee provided a correct answer without asking all of the
required questions outlined in the tax law instructions and publications. This also included 15 questions where the
IRS employee provided the correct answer but gave the taxpayer the wrong
reason. For example, the IRS employee
stated that a daughter could not be claimed as a dependent because she did not
meet the residency test of staying in the home for the entire year. The correct answer for the scenario our
auditors were presenting was that the daughter could not be claimed as a
dependent because she earned more than the maximum amount allowed in income and
was not a full-time student. The residency
test in this scenario was not a factor in determining if the daughter qualified
as a dependent.
·
Thirty-six (23 percent) of the 156 questions were
answered incorrectly. For example, an
IRS employee stated that the auditor could claim the EIC because he met the
income and age tests. The correct
answer was the auditor could not claim the EIC because his filing status was
married filing separate.
·
Thirty-two (21 percent) of the 156 questions resulted
in the IRS employee referring the auditor to a publication and generally
advising the auditor to do his or her own research to find the answer to the
question. For example:
The tables below provide a complete breakdown of the
accuracy of questions answered for the universe as well as the individual IRS
and TIGTA accuracy rates.
|
|
|
Correct
but Incomplete |
Incorrect |
Ref. to Pub. |
Service Denied |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Responses |
63 |
25 |
36 |
32 |
0 |
|
Percentages |
40% |
16% |
23% |
21% |
--- |
Source: Anonymous visits
performed by TIGTA auditors.
|
|
|
Correct
but Incomplete |
|
Ref. to Pub. |
Service Denied |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Responses |
39 |
13 |
12 |
13 |
0 |
|
Percentages |
51% |
17% |
16% |
17% |
--- |
Source: Anonymous visits
performed by TIGTA auditors.
|
|
|
Correct
but Incomplete |
|
Ref. to Pub. |
Service Denied |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Responses |
24 |
12 |
24 |
19 |
0 |
|
Percentages |
30% |
15% |
30% |
24% |
--- |
Source: Anonymous visits
performed by TIGTA auditors.
During our visits, we assessed the adequacy of
accommodations in the TACs, including items such as space and privacy. We also determined if the correct office
hours were posted in the TACs.
We determined that taxpayer privacy was not always
protected. In 21 (57 percent) of 37
TACs visited, the floor plan did not allow for taxpayer privacy. If several taxpayers were in line waiting
for service, the next person in line could easily overhear the conversation
between the IRS employee and the taxpayer being served. For example:
·
A taxpayer’s Social Security Number (SSN) was
overheard. A TIGTA auditor overheard an
IRS employee leave a telephone message with another IRS office. The message included the taxpayer’s SSN,
telephone number, and a description of the tax issue.
·
A taxpayer’s SSN was seen when the IRS employee placed
a slip of paper with the SSN down on the desk.
The auditor was able to write down the SSN.
Also, 17 (44 percent) of 39 TACs did not have office hours
posted on the IRS website. In one (3
percent) of the 39 TACs visited, posted office hours were not the same as the
office hours shown on the IRS’ website.
The table below shows a breakdown of our TAC site accommodation
results.
|
|
Occurrences |
Percentages |
|---|---|---|
|
TAC Site Address Correct |
38 |
97% |
|
TAC Site Office Hours Correct |
21 |
95% |
|
TAC Site Clean |
39 |
100% |
|
TAC Site Organized |
33 |
85% |
|
TAC
Site Space Adequate |
16 |
43% |
|
TAC
Site With Security |
23 |
59% |
Source: Anonymous visits
performed by TIGTA auditors.
During
our visits to the TACs, we assessed whether IRS employees were professional and
courteous. We also assessed the
wait-time for service and the cleanliness of the TAC. We had some positive experiences. For example:
·
The IRS employees assisting us were professional and
courteous in 71 (93 percent) of the 76 visits.
During three visits, auditors observed an IRS employee using an
interpreter to assist Spanish-speaking taxpayers.
·
The wait-time for service was 30 minutes or less in 62
(82 percent) of the 76 visits.
·
Thirty-nine (100 percent) of the TACs visited were
clean and 33 (85 percent) were organized.
|
|
Occurrences |
Percentages |
|---|---|---|
|
0
to 15 Minutes |
48 |
63% |
|
16
to 30 Minutes |
14 |
18% |
|
31
to 45 Minutes |
7 |
9% |
|
46
Minutes to 1 Hour |
5 |
7% |
|
Greater
Than 1 Hour |
2 |
3% |
Source: Anonymous visits
performed by TIGTA auditors.
|
|
Occurrences |
Percentages |
|---|---|---|
|
Employee
Name Given/Visible |
56 |
74% |
|
Employee
ID Number Given/Visible |
54 |
71% |
|
Employee
Name Not Provided When Requested |
0 |
--- |
|
Employee
Professional/Courteous |
71 |
93% |
Source: Anonymous visits
performed by TIGTA auditors.
Appendix I
Detailed Objective, Scope, and Methodology
The overall objective of the review was to determine if the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) provides accurate and timely responses to
taxpayers’ tax law questions. In
addition, we assessed whether IRS employees in the Taxpayer Assistance Centers
(TACs) were professional and courteous to our auditors who made anonymous
visits to the TACs. We also evaluated
the adequacy of the accommodations for issues such as space, privacy, and
cleanliness and determined if the correct office hours were posted in the TACs.
To achieve this objective, we performed the following tests:
I.
Determined if the IRS
provided quality service and accurate responses to tax law inquiries at the 39
TACs visited. We asked 156 tax law
questions that an individual taxpayer might ask. The 156 questions included 77 questions that are being used by
the IRS’ contractor. We developed the
remaining questions based on the training provided to Tax Resolution
Representatives (TRR) during the fall of 2001 and the scope of services for tax
law assistance prescribed in the Fiscal Year 2002 Field Assistance Operating
Procedures.
II.
Determined the quality of
service provided by the TRR.
III.
Determined if accommodations
in the TACs visited were suitable to provide quality customer service.
Appendix II
Major Contributors to This Report
Michael R. Phillips, Assistant Inspector General for Audit
(Wage and Investment Income Programs)
Kerry Kilpatrick, Director
Deborah Glover, Audit Manager
Russell
Martin, Audit Manager
Pamela DeSimone, Senior Auditor
Kathy Hughes, Senior Auditor
Frank Jones, Senior Auditor
Edith Lemire, Senior Auditor
John Piecuch, Senior Auditor
Lena Dietles, Auditor
Roberta Fuller, Auditor
Andrea Hayes, Auditor
Kathy Henderson, Auditor
Mary Keyes, Auditor
Grace Terranova, Auditor
Appendix III
Commissioner N:C
Deputy Commissioner N:DC
Director,
Customer Assistance, Relationships and Education W:CAR
Director,
Field Assistance W:CAR:FA
Director,
Strategy and Finance W:S
Chief Counsel CC
National Taxpayer Advocate
TA
Director, Legislative Affairs CL:LA
Director, Office of
Program Evaluation and Risk Analysis
N:ADC:R:O
Office of
Management Controls N:CFO:F:M
Audit
Liaisons:
Wage and Investment Division
Appendix IV
States Visited During May and June 2002
The map was removed due to its size. To see the map, please go to the Adobe PDF
version of the report on the TIGTA Public Web Page.
The six states visited include:
Arkansas, California, Hawaii, Nevada, New York, and North Carolina.
Appendix V
The response was removed due to its size. To see the complete response, please go to the Adobe PDF version of the report on the TIGTA Public Web Page.