Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to expand the definition of a “return” for preparer-penalty purposes to include administrative adjustment requests, partnership tracking reports, and other documents. It seeks to apply preparer penalties to altered or improperly handled returns.
Progressives stress consumer protection and enforcement funding needs
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that extends preparer-penalty coverage to additional types of documents and makes limited technical corrections.
The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code to expand the definition of a “return” for preparer-penalty purposes to include administrative adjustment requests, partnership tracking reports, and other documents.
It seeks to apply preparer penalties to altered or improperly handled returns.
It also restricts expansions of the assessment limitation period for victims of preparer fraud (text in the bill is incomplete), and makes a technical subsection redesignation in section 7508A related to disaster deadline extensions.
Narrow, low-cost technical corrections have reasonable prospects if adopted as part of a larger tax/technical package; standalone enactment is less likely.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that extends preparer-penalty coverage to additional types of documents and makes limited technical corrections. The bill specifies the statutory provisions to be changed and effective dates, but one provision is unclearly drafted and the text omits fiscal, transitional, and accountability details.
Progressives stress consumer protection and enforcement funding needs
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives stress consumer protection and enforcement funding needs
Likely supportive overall because the bill increases accountability for tax preparers and aims to protect filers from ghost preparers who alter returns.
Would want assurances that protections extend to low-income filers and that the IRS enforces penalties fairly.
May raise concerns about whether the limitation-period change reduces remedies for victims if text narrows protections inadvertently.
Generally favorable but cautious.
The bill targets fraud by preparers and clarifies penalty scope, which helps compliance, but the limitation-period change and implementation details need clarification.
Would seek fiscal and operational analysis before full endorsement.
Somewhat supportive of holding dishonest preparers accountable and protecting taxpayers from unexpected liabilities.
May oppose expansions that increase regulatory burdens on preparers or create new federal enforcement costs.
Will favor limiting taxpayer exposure when the taxpayer lacked intent.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, low-cost technical corrections have reasonable prospects if adopted as part of a larger tax/technical package; standalone enactment is less likely.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives stress consumer protection and enforcement funding needs
Narrow, low-cost technical corrections have reasonable prospects if adopted as part of a larger tax/technical package; standalone enactment…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive amendment to the Internal Revenue Code that extends preparer-penalty coverage to additional types of documents and makes limited technical co…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.