FROM A TAX PERSPECTIVE...: The most interesting part about whether the new Congress and president follow through on more payments is what it means for the IRS, which is expected to open up its new filing season in about a couple weeks. The IRS and private tax prep outfits like TurboTax and H&R Block did just fix one big snafu in getting people their $600 payments, as Pro Tax's Aaron Lorenzo noted on Friday. The government originally had sent the money to temporary bank accounts linked to the professional preparers, but the IRS and the companies were able to clear up the issue within a couple days. And the speed with which the IRS and the companies solved that problem also suggests that both the private and public sector are getting even more efficient at handling the direct payments, after a similar problem developed during last year's first round of rebates. Earlier in the week, the IRS had noted that, by law, payments sent to the wrong account had to be returned to the agency, and that people who didn't receive their money by Friday's deadline for rebates to be issued should claim them on their upcoming tax return. So in essence, it looks like the two sides decided to press through and get the payments in the right accounts before the deadline, according to congressional aides monitoring the situation. REGULATION TIME: Another question for the incoming administration — how much can it fit in that first 100 days or so? For instance, it's not clear how much interest the Biden administration will have in using the Congressional Review Act to sweep away Trump-era regulations. Among other things, the CRA allows for Congress to basically scrap a rule within 60 legislative days of it being sent to lawmakers. That sets up something of a scramble for the Biden team if it wants to take advantage of that law. (Republicans used it to strike down rules 16 times during the Trump years — 14 times between February and May of 2017.) But here's another thing to keep in mind: Is the CRA a good tool to use specifically against tax rules? George Callas, who was top tax counsel to then-House Speaker Paul Ryan, says no, arguing that targeting tax rules runs counter to the spirit in which Republicans enacted the CRA — to offer a tool against rules that looked too much like legislation. "The vast majority of tax regulations are interpretative, not legislative. They don't just impose new burdens that otherwise wouldn't exist," said Callas, now at Steptoe and Johnson. Another reason taxes are different, he added: People have to file their taxes every year, so there's more of a need for certainty — which can't really happen with a CRA process that wipes away a regulation without a replacement. And without those rules, Callas said, "taxpayers and the IRS are all over the place and no one is sure how to comply with the law." The opposite view: Brian Galle, a Georgetown law professor who has written about how Biden can use the regulatory process to go on offense on taxes, countered that any extra ambiguity from using the CRA on taxes shouldn't be too much of a concern. To be sure, taxpayers who had already taken actions because of the existing rule would have reason to be peeved, Galle said, and the CRA process doesn't come with the transition rules that usually come with big pieces of legislation. But still: "Taxpayers would have to plan just as they do when there is any new legislation lacking interpretive guidance," Galle said. "I imagine Treasury would, as it often does in cases of new legislation, issue interim guidance, potentially identifying some safe harbors, while it worked on replacement regs." Also worth noting: Tax Notes' Andrew Velarde and Jonathan Curry noted that Biden will be freezing rules in the pipeline when he takes office, but there are some interesting wrinkles there, too, when it comes to taxes. |
No comments:
Post a Comment