Daily Press

Do not trust IRS Direct File

- By David B. McGarry David B. McGarry is a policy analyst at the Taxpayers Protection Alliance. He wrote this for InsideSour­ces.com.

Tax Day looms, and the taxman cometh. It is a certainty, as Ben Franklin said. This year, the Internal Revenue Service has launched a pilot program dubbed “Direct File” through which Americans can opt to have the IRS prepare their taxes for free (well, except for the billions of taxpayer dollars used to create the program).

The IRS wants to eliminate Americans’ reliance on private-sector tax-preparatio­n services. Despite its recent trendiness in certain circles, Direct File has little potential for good — and much for bad. In addition to the pilot program’s dubious legality, there are many fiscal and prudential reasons not to trust the IRS with this new responsibi­lity.

Adding a federally operated competitor to a market does not equate to providing or promoting competitio­n. Nobody would consider creating a federal grocery store, a federal airline or a federal movie studio as a pro-market or pro-competitiv­e policy. State-run enterprise­s enjoy the profoundly anti-competitiv­e advantage of bearing the imprimatur of the state, and they are not subject to the ordinary competitiv­e pressures to which private businesses must remain sensitive and respond.

Neither does a Direct File system seem likely to provide a valuable service to taxpayers. The proposed system’s very conceit clangs against the American legal and political tradition, in which adversaria­l actors’ opposition to one another is an indispensa­ble guardian of liberty and good governance. This combative friction — the defense lawyer against the prosecutio­n, Congress against the presidency, the states against the federal government — ensures (in theory, at least) that no one faction or institutio­n has a smooth route to self-interested injustice.

The IRS proposes to excise such friction. The agency wants to file the citizen’s taxes, collect that money, and double back to conduct audits — without any mediating institutio­n to gainsay potential (nay, likely) abuse. Low-income and minority taxpayers — whom IRS auditors target disproport­ionately and whom the IRS would likely market Direct File most energetica­lly — have perhaps the most significan­t interest in retaining private intermedia­ries such as TurboTax or TaxSlayer.

The IRS estimates Direct File to cost $64 million to $249 million annually, which seems wildly low. In 2021, researcher­s at Govini analyzed Direct File’s likely price tag against the experience of Healthcare.gov, concluding that the former’s costs would dwarf the latter’s. Govini reported the Obamacare website cost taxpayers $20.2 billion through October 2021. An audit by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administra­tion (TIGTA) could not confirm the IRS’s cost assumption­s — nor could the agency meaningful­ly defend them. Besides such fiscal qualms, the IRS is an agency ill-suited to ameliorate the private-sector harms that proponents of Direct File have identified.

The IRS has failed routinely to prevent data breaches, including a 2022 incident in which the agency briefly published the personal data of 120,000 taxpayers. According to a 2022 Government Accountabi­lity Office report, from 2012 to 2021, “the IRS completed 1,694 investigat­ions into the willful unauthoriz­ed access of tax data by employees.” The agency substantia­ted 462 cases as “violations” and left 380 cases unresolved.

Some say private tax preppers have targeted minority communitie­s. But the IRS cracks down on such population­s with gusto, auditing counties in predominan­tly Black and rural regions of the Deep South most frequently. “Audit rates are also very high in the largely Hispanic communitie­s in south Texas, the counties with Native American reservatio­ns in South Dakota, and the poor, White counties in Kentucky’s Appalachia region,” MarketWatc­h reported in 2019. The IRS is the ultimate economic bully. Its audits are notoriousl­y ferocious and burdensome, and it has, at times, deployed its vast powers for unethical and politicize­d ends. What’s more, the agency’s customer-service capacity has proven painfully dismal, erecting further obstacles for would-be law-abiding taxpayers. Offering Direct File at scale would substantia­lly increase the demand for customer and technical support, a demand the IRS could not likely meet.

The proper remedy to any issues with private tax preparatio­n companies is to address discrete problems where they exist. Instead, advocates of Direct File propose to centralize still more power in one of Washington’s least responsibl­e agencies, injecting a fully socialized competitor into the market and mucking up the basic principles of American governance.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States