Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

Chapter 2

Results of IRS' Nonfiler Strategy

Nonmeasurable Goals and
Lack of Cost Data
Hampered Assessment of
the Nonfiler Strategy

become nonfilers again. IRS matched computer files to determine whether
nonfilers brought into the system in fiscal year 1993 filed tax year 1993
returns in 1994. According to IRS, its match showed that 38 percent had not
filed by August 1995-16 months after tax year 1993 returns were due. IRS
had no data to show how this rate of recidivism compared with other
years and no specific rate-of-recidivism goal for the Nonfiler Strategy.
Thus, we had no basis for determining whether a rate of 38 percent was
acceptable.

Our review of a sample of cases closed by Examination also showed a large rate of recidivism. Of the 60 individuals involved in the sample cases closed in 1993, 29 (48 percent) did not file in 1994. Of those 29, 19 also had not filed in 1995 (as of May 1995), and 10 had extensions to file that had not yet expired. Similarly, of the 60 individuals involved in the sample cases closed in 1994, 31 (52 percent) had not filed in 1995 (as of May 1995); another 12 had extensions to file that had not expired.

IRS did not have measurable goals for most aspects of the Nonfiler Strategy nor comprehensive cost data against which to compare its results. Measurable program goals and reliable data on costs are important if management is to effectively assess its efforts and make informed decisions about future efforts.

Although IRS' basic objective in implementing the Strategy was to bring
nonfilers into the system and keep them there, it had no goals for such
things as the number of nonfilers it expected to bring into compliance or
the percentage of nonfilers it expected to remain compliant in future
years. The only measurable goal associated with the Nonfiler Strategy was
one that called for reducing the number of TDI cases to 1.5 million cases by
the end of fiscal year 1994.

The absence of specific goals makes it difficult for IRS officials responsible for carrying out the Strategy to know exactly what was expected of them and to measure the Strategy's success. Some Examination personnel in the four district offices we visited said that their objective was to redirect a certain amount of staff years to the effort and that they believed the Strategy was successful because they did so. However, an input measure, such as staff years, is less likely to produce a desired outcome than an output or outcome measure, such as the number of nonfilers brought into compliance.

"The typical extension to file gives the person an additional 4 months—until August 15—to file.

Chapter 2

Results of IRS' Nonfiler Strategy

IRS did not track the overall cost of the Nonfiler Strategy. Some
cost-related data, such as the number of Examination and Collection staff
years spent on the Nonfiler Strategy, were available, but (1) data on other
costs, such as those incurred by other IRS functions like Taxpayer Service
and Public Affairs, were not available; and (2) those data that were
available were not compiled in a way that would provide management
with information on the Strategy's overall cost.

IRS officials explained that return on investment was not really an important consideration with respect to the Nonfiler Strategy and that IRS never intended to measure the success of the Strategy by cost. As noted earlier, however, one of the goals of the Strategy as described by the Commissioner in her October 1993 testimony was to "improve the way we direct our enforcement resources in working nonfiler cases... to achieve the highest return on our resource investment [underscoring added]." Comprehensive cost data are also important if management is to make informed decisions on the nature and extent of future nonfiler efforts.

[blocks in formation]

Chapter 2

Results of IRS' Nonfller Strategy

expanded on in memoranda dated December 11, 1995, and February 12, 1996.

IRS officials took strong exception to the "extremely negative tone" of our draft report. They said that the draft focused almost exclusively on criticisms of the Strategy without fully acknowledging its accomplishments and that, as a result, an uninformed reader would likely judge the Strategy to have been a failure when, in IRS' view, it was generally a success. In response to those comments, we revised chapter 2 of the report to give more prominence to the positive aspects of the Strategy and to recognize IRS' position on the Strategy's success. We reiterate, however, that although IRS is confident that the Strategy was a success, we could not reach the same conclusion given the statistical data available and the absence of other data.

IRS acknowledged that it had only one goal for which a specific target was set, the TDI goal, but pointed out that it did have several key performance indicators (such as the number of returns secured and the net dollars assessed) that were designed to show positive or negative trends in results. We agree that it is useful to track trends, but such an exercise is more meaningful if there are goals against which to compare those trends. For example, speaking hypothetically, a 5-percent increase in the number of returns secured might look good on its face but would not look as good if the goal were a 25-percent increase. IRS said that experience and statistical information obtained during the 2 years of the Strategy will permit better planning and goal-setting for any future endeavor.

As for cost data-IRS said that it never intended to measure the success of the Strategy by cost and that it is debatable whether all of the goals of the Strategy are amenable to accurate cost/benefit analysis. We are not suggesting that cost should be the sole measure of success, but we think it should be part of any overall assessment.

Our draft report also included a recommendation that IRS reconcile conflicting data on the results of the Strategy. However, as discussed in chapter 1, IRS subsequently told us that it had revised some data in the Commissioner's Nonfiler Report. Because those revisions resolved the data inconsistencies referenced in our draft, we dropped that proposed recommendation.

Chapter 3

Opportunities to Improve Future IRS
Nonfiler Efforts

IRS Takes a Long
Time to Make
Telephone Contact
With Nonfilers

Our review of the Nonfiler Strategy identified several areas where we
think opportunities exist for IRS to enhance future efforts directed at
nonfilers. Those areas include (1) the length of time that expires from the
time a return becomes delinquent until IRS first attempts to make
telephone contact with the nonfiler, (2) the use of higher graded staff to
work cases or do tasks that might be effectively done by lower graded
staff, and (3) the absence of special procedures for dealing with
recidivists-nonfilers who are brought into compliance and then become
nonfilers again.

IRS has taken some action in two of these areas. It shortened the time that elapses before a first notice is sent to persons who have been identified as potential nonfilers. However, IRS' procedures still call for sending several notices to a potential nonfiler before IRS attempts to make telephone contact. IRS also developed special procedures for dealing with recidivists. Those procedures call for, among other things, eliminating some notices but say nothing about revising the language of the remaining notices.

IRS officials have stated that the faster they can act to obtain nonfiled
returns and related taxes, the more likely that the action will be
successful. However, as described in chapter 1, IRS' process for identifying
and investigating nonfilers is a lengthy one.

To identify nonfilers, IRS computer-matches data on information returns with data on income tax returns. In the past, this match was usually not done until December-after IRS had finished processing information returns and those income tax returns that were filed late because of extensions. IRS staff must then review the results of the match to determine what action to take. Only after that review is the nonfiler sent a notice.

For example, individuals who did not file tax returns in 1993 would not have received a notice until a year later-April 1994. Subsequent notices would have been issued about 6 to 8 weeks later, with the last notice going out in late August 1994. If the case was still unresolved and met the criteria for referral to ACS, it would not have gone to an ACS site for telephone contact until October 1994-1-1/2 years after the return was due. Those cases unresolved by ACS and meeting certain criteria would then be assigned to a revenue officer who might attempt to visit the taxpayer. The whole process may take years, and, as noted earlier, IRS ends up dropping

23-595 97-22

Chapter 3

Opportunities to Improve Future IRS
Nonfiler Efforts

millions of nonfilers from its inventory-more than 5 million in
1994-whose returns have been in inventory for several years.

IRS has a project directed at reducing the time it takes to match data on information returns with data on income tax returns and thus shortening the time before the first notice is issued by several months. As a result of that project, according to an IRS National Office official responsible for managing the Nonfiler Strategy, IRS plans to move up first contact with certain nonfilers to the November after the tax return is due. More significant changes, according to IRS, depend on successful implementation of IRS' multibillion-dollar systems modernization effort, known as Tax Systems Modernization.

Besides shortening the time before issuance of the first notice, as it is now doing, IRS could further enhance the resolution of nonfiler cases by making more timely telephone contact with the nonfiler after issuance of the first notice. We took a similar position in a May 1993 report on IRS' methods for collecting delinquent taxes. In that report, we said the following:

"According to private and state collectors, early telephone contact is cost-effective and allows the collector to determine why payment has not been made, establish future payment schedules, and update information on the debtor's status. Collectors can also discuss with the debtor possible adverse actions that could be taken if payment is not received."

In the same report, we recommended, among other things, that IRS restructure its collection organization to support earlier telephone contact with delinquent taxpayers. Although that quote and recommendation relate to the collection of delinquent taxes, they would seem equally appropriate to the collection of delinquent returns (and any delinquent taxes associated with those returns).

In January 1995, IRS implemented an Early Intervention Project
nationwide. Although the project focuses on the collection of delinquent
taxes from persons and businesses that have filed returns, its goal
(shortening the notice process and contacting the taxpayer by telephone
sooner) is also relevant to delinquent returns. We were told that the
project was not extended to nonfilers because sufficient staff would not
have been available to handle the resulting workload.

Tax Administration: New Delinquent Tax Collection Methods for IRS (GAO/GGD-93-67, May 11, 1993).

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »