A law firm representing a trio of independent tax preparers has filed a strongly worded response to the Internal Revenue Service’s motion for a stay on a judge’s ruling that invalidated the IRS’s testing and continuing education requirements for tax preparers.
In January, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., ruled that the IRS lacked the statutory authority to impose its Registered Tax Return Preparer regime after the tax preparers filed suit challenging the requirements (see Court Rules IRS Doesn’t Have the Authority to Regulate Tax Preparers). The three independent tax preparers—Sabina Loving of Chicago, John Gambino of Hoboken, N.J., and Elmer Kilian of Eagle, Wis.—were represented by the Institute for Justice, a libertarian law firm in Arlington, Va.
The IRS then announced its intention to appeal the ruling in the case, known as Loving v. IRS, and asked the judge, James E. Boasberg, to suspend his original ruling, arguing that it would disrupt tax season (see IRS to Appeal Ruling Barring Licensing of Tax Preparers).
Boasberg denied the IRS’s request, but clarified the ruling on February 1, enabling the IRS to re-open its Preparer Tax Identification Number, or PTIN, online registration system for tax preparers. The judge also clarified that tax preparers could take competency tests and continuing education courses on a voluntary basis, but they would not be required to do so while his injunction remained in place (see Court Modifies Ruling Invalidating Tax Preparer Regulations).
Last month, the IRS filed notices of appeal in both the district court and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals announcing its intention to appeal the earlier rulings, and then filed a Motion for Stay Pending Appeal in the D.C. Circuit Court, similar to the motion for a stay that it filed in the district court that Judge Boasberg had denied on February 1.
The tax preparers filed a vigorous response Friday to the IRS’s motion for a stay pending appeal.
“The sky is (still) not falling,” said the brief. “Despite the sensationalist, everything-but-the-kitchen-sink claims of harm by Defendant-Appellants (“the IRS”), nothing justifies extraordinary relief in this case. Notably, the IRS fails to allege any imminent, irreparable harm. This tax season is unaffected because the IRS had already postponed its deadlines to the end of this year two weeks before the injunction issued.”
In the filing, the preparers praised the district court judge for exercising “sound discretion” in declining to grant the IRS a stay pending appeal, “an extraordinary remedy which is rarely granted, and for which this Circuit follows a strict standard for a showing of irreparable harm.”
Judge Boasberg had noted that “the Court is not requiring the IRS to dismantle its entire scheme,” and made clear that the IRS is not required to shut down any facilities or lay off any staff, and could continue to operate the Registered Tax Return Preparer program as a voluntary certification program. The court also clarified that the separate PTIN requirement, which the plaintiffs did not challenge, was unaffected by the injunction against the RTRP licensing scheme.
“If the IRS prevails on appeal, the worst-case scenario it alleges is that it would have to delay implementing the RTRP regulations by just one additional tax season,” said the brief. “Given that tax preparers have been unlicensed by the IRS for the 100-year history of the income tax, this is decidedly not imminent and irreparable harm.”
Dan Alban, lead attorney on the case at the Institute for Justice, pointed out that the IRS has failed to allege any imminent or irreparable harm. “They’re talking about a program which, even under a worst case scenario that they allege, would just be delayed by one year,” he said in an interview Friday. “They’ve already taken three or four years to roll out this program in the first place. There hadn’t previously been, for the last 100 years, licensing of tax preparers, so it just doesn’t seem like a plausible claim of irreparable harm. On top of that, there’s nothing really all that imminent. They’re not suggesting they would immediately put the regulations back in place in order to do something this tax season. They, in fact, already suspended the continuing education requirements on January 3, two weeks before the judge ruled in this case, so there were no RTRP regulations actively in effect when the judge ruled. The primary claim of harm they’ve come up with is, in 2014 they will have to delay implementation of the program. But when you file a motion for a stay, it’s a motion for extraordinary relief. They’re saying, ‘There’s a clear and present danger we’re going to suffer immediate and irreparable harm,’ and they simply don’t meet that standard.”
Alban pointed out that the standard of review for the appeals court would be high, and the IRS would have a big hurdle to overcome. “The appellate court doesn’t just start afresh,” he said. “It looks at what the district court has already done. In this case, it reviews a grant or a denial of a motion for a stay on what’s called ‘abuse of discretion.’ The trial court has to have acted pretty badly, has to have really abused the authority a judge has to exercise discretion, in order for the appeals court to overturn them. The standard here is pretty high. The IRS doesn’t really allege any abuse of discretion. They argue that the judge was wrong, but the standard isn’t ‘can you find some way to disagree with the judge?’ The standard is ‘did the district court judge abuse his discretion and fail to act in an equitable manner?’ The opinion he issued on February 1 was a very balanced and measured opinion. It offered a compromise to the IRS, letting them know the PTIN regulations weren’t affected, that they could continue operating the RTRP program on a voluntary basis. They didn’t have to lay anyone off. They didn’t have to close any facilities. That’s pretty much the opposite of abuse of discretion. That’s a very measured approach to things. We don’t think the IRS made a case that the district court judge abused his discretion because he didn’t.”
37 Comments
As a direct result of Circular 230 nonsense, I HAD a lucrative and ethical practice. That was before I upset a few IRS and TIGTA people by using my rights and informing them of my clients' rights. Now, as I have suffered irreparable damages to the tune of about $1,000,000 (One Million Dollars) lost revenue BY BEING TARGETED BY BOTH, when is this going to end? Does anybody think this group or any new group of politically appointed people are capable of even completing a tax return, let alone handle something complex? I do not and think that 230 should be trashed along with the existing code and regs and we start over with real reforms so citizens can live in peace, not fear. Any of you guys ever had the IRS visit your wife at home knowing you were at your office just to scare them? I have, and then some. But I digress, I should feel blessed to have a Government kind enough to take or try to take my friends and family members lives financially just because they do not like me or my abilities. Enough, sorry for the rant.
Posted by: BRES | May 22, 2013 11:42 AM
Report this Comment
P.S.: sorry for the double post, I had to refresh and I guess it resent it.
Posted by: Angie123 | March 28, 2013 12:18 PM
Report this Comment
OK, I had an appointment to take the test, which was subsequently canceled after all this. I didn't like that I had to take it, because in California we already do ALL the requirements, including testing and continuing education on a yearly basis. But I sucked it up and registered. I figured, oh well, I took a more than likely MUCH harder test for California and passed with the highest score, how hard could this really be anyway. Didn't like having to do it, but now I like even less having my test canceled and no refund.
Subsequently, after registering for the test, since I did not know exactly what this test would be like (there were so many stories, from horror stories to stories of easy as a piece of cake), AND I was BLASTED with e-mails from outside software companies with scare tactics of you better study for the test if you want to stay in business, I fell for it and purchased one of these 'educational' programs. (I honestly think these companies are the ones who won in this whole debaucle, I'm sure they made a lot of money selling their wares). Well, feeling confident I could probably walk in and pass this test, I started this 'study program' anyway, just to make sure. The questions, the bulk of them, took several minutes to read, analyze, and then you had to REMEMBER so many things (that let's be honest we don't all remember by heart!)...e.g., phaseout limitations, etc.) There's no possible way to remember these things, there are literally hundreds of numericals that NO ONE would remember, in particular in the minute+ timeslot allowed purportedly for each question and NO time to look it up on the online website. Why the IRS would not just give people a REAL BOOK to flip through (e.g., pubs) is beyond me. So I diligently read the questions, analyzed, computed, and tried to memorize many things. I KNOW THE LAW but I cannot POSSIBLY remember all those numbers! Admit it, everyone, you don't remember all of them either, yes, the computer does, but also if you need to check YOU LOOK IT UP!
sooooo, i FINALLY e-mailed this company (name unmentioned) and asked about these MASSES of questions that I literally worked on for WEEKS and I just could not finish a practice exam in the time allotted! The administrator finally told me, "Oh the questions on the IRS exam won't be like this, you'll have very little calculating to do at all."
My point? THAT is probably what got a lot of preparers up in arms. The EDUCATIONAL pushers, who pretty much scared the bejeebies outta them! I SERIOUSLY doubt, if the test was like they presented it, ANYONE would have had such an easy time with it. Many people were fooled into thinking it was going to be horrific.
I'll still take the stupid test at some point, I'm sure I'll pass, from what I'm hearing now from people who have actually taken it. I'm not one that 'relies on software', I do know the law, but I do sometimes have to look things up, in particular numerical limitations and so forth for each filing status for each tax situation. This course was LOADED with that stuff and it was RIDICULOUS to try to get an exam done within the IRS time allotment. NO WONDER some people were scared, I was, and I'm a qualified CTEC Registered preparer for 20 years now through the State of California and like I mentioned, I took and passed with nearly a perfect score...makes me MAD they tried to make the states who already regulate us do this again!
Posted by: Angie123 | March 28, 2013 12:11 PM
Report this Comment
I have been preparing taxes for over 35 years. I am not an accountant or an attorney. I don't oppose taking the test or ongoing education (which I currently do).
I do however object to Attorneys and Accountants not having to take the test because thy are attorneys or accountants.
I knnow many attorneys and accountants that do not know a 104ez from a 1040X.
Posted by: rUDYY1946 | March 15, 2013 5:05 PM
Report this Comment
I am an owner of two H & R Block franchises. H & R Block was requiring all their preparers to take the RTRP test prior to this court case. I am a CPA, EA and RTRP. I took the test just so I could use the designation. I have 20 preparers on staff. Three are Enrolled Agents. Thirteen took the test and passed in 2012. One was scheduled to take the test but was cancelled due to this court case. Three others had planned to take the test this coming summer. My employees have a minimum of 200 hours of training prior to preparing any tax returns for a client. They have been required to obtain at least 24 hours of CPE every year for many years. While I cannot speak for H & R Block corporation, every franchise owner I know is in favor of requiring licensing of tax professionals. The individuals commenting that H & R Block is not in favor of the RTRP and afraid of the test are spouting inaccurate information.
Posted by: DJD | March 13, 2013 3:13 AM
Report this Comment
All a decent, mindful judge needs to do is read these comments, as witness testimony to the requirement for registration; and read the news from all the people getting disbarred, fined and placed in jail for filing falls returns. Don't forget to ask the trusting saps who accept whatever numbers are placed on his return without using common sense.
Posted by: mitywarrior | March 12, 2013 2:42 PM
Report this Comment
I truely believe that the RTRP licensing is essential to anyone whose not an EA or CPA because, there is a lot of crooks out there who say they're tax preparers when they really don't know the tax law, they just get around with the help of the software and prepare fraudulent returns. Tax Professionals should be licensed, the less competition the better.
Posted by: fortunatemove | March 12, 2013 11:02 AM
Report this Comment
I have been preparing taxes for over 40 years. I took the RTRP test and passed it with no problems. A clients wife needed a job was offered to prepare taxes for liberty at Walmart for $8.00 per hour. All she had to do was listen to a 15 hr tape to get her ptin #. When she told them she did not know enough to do the job they told her the software would explain itself. She did not take the job. This is why I believe the RTRP is a good thing. It looks like I wasted my money but I am not sorry that I passed the test. I would like to have everyone who prepares taxes be required to take the test. If we weed out the ones with no knowledge it will give the real tax prepares more business.
Posted by: stan47 | March 12, 2013 8:50 AM
Report this Comment
This legal issue here is not the need for licensure, but the authority of the IRS to impose such a requirement without statutory authorization. Good or bad, it's up to Congress.
Posted by: Skipper50 | March 12, 2013 6:59 AM
Report this Comment
I no long care one way or the other. I took the test in December (very easy a child could do it) passed and have the certificate. Since I already do at least 20 hours of continuing ed each year it was not a problem to get the required amount. I agree with some of the posters that the people who most appose this reg. are probably incompetent anyway, though if they are gone then I would lose some of my income as there would not be as many returns out there to fix each year.
Posted by: lennn99 | March 11, 2013 11:37 PM
Report this Comment
I wonder how these 3 tax preparers are able to afford the case...I myself would like to donate to the "class" case. I could never afford this challenge with the IRS with either money or time.
I myself would like to donate to the "class action" case to help with the costs if it would be useful. The RTRP is a joke since I'm in Oregon which has the most restictions in becoming a preparer...such as 80 hour course, pass a exam to prepare under someone, 30 hours continuing education per year and then sit and pass another exam after 2 years under someone else.
I would just like to "help" the group who said the IRS was wrong and won to offset expenses. Let me know if a fund has been set up.
Posted by: westactg@aol.com | March 11, 2013 11:00 PM
Report this Comment
Tax laws are becoming increasingly more complicated and I understand the need to license preparers for the protection of taxpayers who don't have a clue what goes into the final determination of their tax obligation. All the court is saying in this ruling is that the IRS must have authority to establish the parameters for the licensing. Congress can and should do that and it will all be settled. Why waste the money fighting this ruling when it can be resolved by a simple act to convey the authority? I don't think they are wrong to exclude preparers who work for large firms like H&R because they can implement safeguards and ultimately bear the responsibility for the actions of their preparers. And just because someone is unregistered and unlicensed it does not make them unqualified. They have been operating legally under the current law so who are you to judge them as unqualified. If the law requires them to be licensed and they continue to operate without a license then that will be another matter for the IRS to charge them and the court to decide.
Posted by: denverdoni | March 11, 2013 10:11 PM
Report this Comment
The trio group should pursue to the NYS becauce the state is also conducting investigation to tttttt payer to avoid paying the EIC to lgitimate claimants.
I believe that they have the right to do so, but they exceeding the juridiction after the claimants submitted all the information requested, they still dinieng it.
Therefore I still concerning about and even moore ater the judge decision in the disrict of columbia in regard to the tax preparer requested exam.
Posted by: bolivaralmonte1 | March 11, 2013 5:05 PM
Report this Comment
Most professional business are licensed (stockbrokers, real estate agents,hairdressers etc.) so why are current prepares opposed to the idea of being licensed? Whether it make them better or not, it SUGGESTS to the public that you are competent and knowledgeable and you are true to your profession. Why do three preparers (who obviously are not EA's or CPA's) constitute the feelings of all preparers to which I take offense to. The IRS has given us more than adequate time to satisfy such requirements. I have been preparing taxes for over 25 years and I think I'm pretty knowledgeable however I took the EA course and exams to satisfy the IRS requirements and passed all three exams the first time. In taking the courses, I actually learned some things I did not know or understanded accurately. Shame on preparers who are afraid to let the public know they are not proficient. Shame on them for believing it's good for other professions to be licensed but not theirs!!
Posted by: TaylorRain | March 11, 2013 4:34 PM
Report this Comment
The only complaint I have with this RTRP idea as that it does not require all the preparers at HRB or Liberty to get registered. They can still hire anybody off the street to do the work and as long as one person in the office if registered, he/she can sign the returns. If I as a one man office need to register, then all at HRB who are doing the prep should have to register too. This would shut them down though and they have the $$ to lobby and get around this. Make it the same for everyone in the business and I will accept it as fair.
Posted by: skdoorn12 | March 11, 2013 3:30 PM
Report this Comment
Ask yourselves this: if PTIN fees were invested in a 60 second and 30 second commercial unveiled during the Super Bowl, it would put 90 percent of the abusers out of business. It could be simple: a guy dressed like a carpetbagger slides a 1040 over to the taxpayer and tells them to sign it. Taxpayer asks, "Don't you have to sign it when you prepare it?" Carpetbagger responds, "Only if you want a smaller refund." Red lights flash and a buzzer drones as the narrator says, "If you sign a return you don't prepare, you pay the penalties and interest for breaking the law! Be sure your preparer is a registered tax preparer so you avoid problems like these. Visit (tax preparer registry website) today!"
I guarantee you would see a huge drop in preparer abuses.
Posted by: governor | March 11, 2013 3:16 PM
Report this Comment
State legislatures cannot legislate federal compliance programs. Be careful what you ask for when you suggest states pass their own regulations. Preparers often file state returns in multiple states, so one could be looking at monstrous annual fees if that idea finds legs. A simple federal registration and compliance program is the best solution to providing basic taxpayer protections from abusers.
Posted by: governor | March 11, 2013 3:08 PM
Report this Comment
I don't think the program as structured would ever touch the crooks, the crooked tax preparers. So these tax preparers challenging the IRS's authority may be doing us all a favor. I go to a lot of IRS-sanctioned training and find it lacking in may ways. It seems good at the time, but 6 monhts or a year later, it's not good.
Posted by: QualityCounts | March 11, 2013 3:04 PM
Report this Comment
Many of you are not reading the article correctly - these 3 people challenged the IRS (which is a gutsy move in itself) - but the challenge was - does the IRS have the right after a 100 year practice of not regulating tax preparers to that extent - to do so now. Since they lost the suit - can they prove harm - no; disruptions - no; can the test prove honesty & capabilities -no.
jaaziel - said its a matter of choices. EA can if they choose to take a test still present themselves as an EA - so why is there after 100 years such an urgency to do this to preparers. If you have a PTIN # the IRS can track you through that, besides even if you take the test - it doesn't mean you are competent and will continue to be - it just means you can take & pass a test. I prepare taxes - if I don't have to take the test I won't. I've been doing it for 30 years. Giving the IRS - 161 dollars to find out if I can pass a test is ridiculous. Having a tax client go through an audit with flying colors based on my tax return is priceless. People that come to me get a good return for an inexpensive price and I think that's what the crux is. I prepare returns for small coporations sent to me by a CPA - the client can ill afford their prices, but can afford mine. I have in my family 2 tax attorneys that I can always fall back on.
I'll continue to take classes & file my PTN# - right now I have to go finish a trust return. I'm glad those 3 took the IRS - I wish I had know I would have been the 4th.
Posted by: katzzmeow | March 11, 2013 2:54 PM
Report this Comment
I can now see clearly why the AICPA is a failed organization. With 16 previous comments you ALL seem oblivious to the fact that this is another move to eliminate your ability to advocate for your client. Preparer penalties and preparer registration only serves to convert the profession into a collection arm of the IRS. One of you even commented that lawyers should sign up. Fat chance - lawyers understand that they are paid specifically because they can advocate on behalf of their clients. Your quest for cheap trade protection will ultimately hurt your practices. Treas Sec Geithner should have made this clear to you by invoking "the Turbo Tax Defense" in his confirmation hearing. That was blatant tax evasion, if he had used a paid preparer - but since he used TurboTax he was able to claim that the program was confusing. In the current environment why would anyone choose to use a paid preparer who is required to rat them out?
Posted by: dstag | March 11, 2013 2:18 PM
Report this Comment
I agree... why are unregistered preparers so defensive? CPA, EA, and Lawyers had to do some form of testing to get their licensing. I am in Cali and even the state knows that it needs to monitor preparers.
This is good for business and for our clients. The IRS will be able to track everones hours and we will all be on the same playing field. It will no longer be about price, but service.
Posted by: LynetteR | March 11, 2013 2:12 PM
Report this Comment
I live in a state that already has tax licensing requirements in place. I'm a strong believer in the right of each state to legislate issues not specifically recognized in the Constitution as being a federal area of concern. If you're a tax professional who lives in a state that does not require licensing then you should work toward changing the laws in that state. Our federal government already has too much power as it is.
BTW, licensing and continuing education requirements don't guarantee anything. I see a lot of unscrupulous and/or ill-informed CPA's out there.
Posted by: calcwoman | March 11, 2013 2:04 PM
Report this Comment
I think the IRS should push the legislatures to handle this. I believe laws are put in place, not because the society as a whole is bad. Rather, it is to punish the bad elements amongst us, and to discourage anyone who may contemplate doing a bad thing. Without a doubt, there are very good unenrolled tax preparers. How about the other group that are not ethical and/or qualified? There is no safety net for the public. The public needs to know that there is at least a means in place that could eventually "catch" the unethical elements.
Posted by: ACOEA85018 | March 11, 2013 1:47 PM
Report this Comment
Most professional business are licensed (stockbrokers, real estate agents, etc.) so why are current preparers opposed to the idea of being licensed? Whether it make them better or not, it SUGGESTS to the public that you are competent and knowledgeable about what you do, and you are true to your profession. Why do three preparer's (who obviously are not EAs or CPAs) constitute the feelings of all preparer's. I take offense to that. Why would Institute for Justice not survey preparers before endeavoring this litigation? The IRS has given us more than adequate time to satisfy such requirements. I have been preparing taxes for over 25 years and I think I'm pretty knowledgeable however I took the exam the first time and failed. In taking the courses, I actually learned some things I did not know or understanded accurately. Shame on preparers who are afraid to let the public know they are proficient. Shame on them for believing it's good for other professions but not theirs. Wjhat a waste of money.
Posted by: kthompson2013 | March 11, 2013 1:33 PM
Report this Comment
I do not have any issues with the RTRP exam, or registration. There is a great need to eliminate the riff raff and those preparers who fraudulently prepare returns.
What I have a problem with is the due diligence for the EIC! If the IRS is not going to accept what we can collect as proof of residency and find ways to fine us for not complying with Circular 230 regulations, than what are we supposed to do? Hire people to do home visits to assure these children live where the taxpayers say they live. Plus who are we to say how much money can a family live on, I know some very frugal people! This is the part of the new system that is way out of line.
Posted by: herbsterstaxsvc | March 11, 2013 1:31 PM
Report this Comment
I believe that if everyone has to pass a competency test, "everyone" ought to inlcude Tax attorneys, CPA's and EA's. Just because you have your license doesn't mean you're good at tax prep. On the other hand, even without the RTRP you might be a very good tax preparer. It's a matter of talent and inclination. I am what we in California call a CTEC, which means I take 20 hours of continuing education every year for the privlege of preparing California returns. I appreciate the lawsuit because the IRS effort appears elitest. I appreciate the ruling because I have worked for several CPA's who had me do all their heavy lifting, tax-wise. I know as much as they do about tax prep (oftentimes more) yet I'm the one who needs "regulating" but not them. Nutty IRS attempt. Many thanks to Ms Loving and her team.
Posted by: leeannrichards | March 11, 2013 1:09 PM
Report this Comment
I am a tax preparer for over 50 years with an increditable history and success for accepted and completed returns. I think after this amount of time I should e exempt from having to take ANY testing based on my history and years of service to our customers and government. There are laws and regulations that IRS has never heard of, yet they take no test, why should we!
Posted by: BOWLINGHO1 | March 11, 2013 1:06 PM
Report this Comment
I justed got a new referral tax clients and the prior "CPA" was the PAID tax preparer and he did not sign the return and put "self-prepared" on tax return using what appears to be a non-professional version of Turbo Tax.
Posted by: DENNISLM | March 11, 2013 1:01 PM
Report this Comment
It not that unenrolled preparers are afraid to take an exam, it about choses.
I have been preparing taxes for over 20 years. I have had my PTIN for years. I maintain annual membership with professional tax organizations, I travel to IRS Forum annually, and maintan my CEs.
However, I don't agree with The IRS imposing regulation on unenrolled preparers when they don't have "the authority to do so." The last I heard the bill was in legislation and they were deciding. So when IRS did the changes, I thought legislation had passed it. Now, I'm reading, that legislation did not. So IRS do not have the authority to do what they were doing. That's why actions were taken.
Taking the EA Exam is voluntary, so taking the RTRP should be voluntary also. The IRS does not have the authority to make choses for unenrolled preparer and expect them to jump. My thanks goes out to Loving and the others who decided to stand up to the IRS unfair demands.
Posted by: jaaziel | March 11, 2013 12:51 PM
Report this Comment
I don't think that any of the supports of the RTRP concept think it will mean the people are more qualified. What it does do is make them registered in a way that can easily be documented. Further it puts them under the rules found in Circular 230, which is a good thing. There are good unlicensed tax preparers and there are bad ones. The good ones should not find it such a burden to take the exam and become licensed. Enrolled agents have paid fees for years to be enrolled agents, licensed tax prepares allowed to practice befoe the I.R.S. It is time the rest of the tax preparation industry was put under Circular 230, even if it costs them a little time and money. If they are not making enough in their practice to take continuing education and pay the license fee they probably should not be in business. We are trying to make this a professional service provided to taxpayers.
Posted by: rabbit851 | March 11, 2013 12:46 PM
Report this Comment
Unfortunately this will not stop the preparers out there that already skirt the system. I know of one who prepares returns & marks them all 'self-prepared'. How are they going to get rid of those types?
Posted by: zbg | March 11, 2013 12:33 PM
Report this Comment
I have been doing taxes for over 30 years and had a PTIN long before it was required and take CPE courses every year to keep abreast of changes in tax laws. Passing a test is no indication that you are qualified to prepare tax returns. I believe it is just a means to limit the number of persons preparing taxes and is backed by the big tax corporations to try to eliminate their competition.
Posted by: vmr42vmr | March 11, 2013 11:41 AM
Report this Comment
All unregistered, unlicensed tax preparers. TAKE THE TEST, RTRP (when IRS win in court) or Take the EA test. i have six grade education and I passed the test, RTRP. Do it for you clients. Or are you a tax loan shark! DO THE RIGHT THING, TAKE THE TEST. GO AWAY LOVING!!!
Posted by: hitsero3 | March 11, 2013 10:49 AM
Report this Comment
Why waste taxpayer time and money on appeals you can't win? Introduce reasonable legislation and move on!
Posted by: governor | March 11, 2013 10:22 AM
Report this Comment
We have too many so-called preparers who cannot pass this simple exam. The real issue - incompetent street-corner preparers simply don't want to lose their lucrative "tax-loan shark" business.
Posted by: ThirtyYearTaxPro | March 11, 2013 10:01 AM
Report this Comment
I can't for the life of me figure out what "these unregistered, unlicensed (probably unqualified) tax preparers scared of?" Maybe, it is only the REQUIREMENT by the IRS! If I remember correctly the EA exam is still voluntary! So far.
Posted by: IndiePrep331 | March 11, 2013 9:43 AM
Report this Comment
What are these unregistered, unlicensed (probably unqualified) tax preparers scared of? Just take the Enrolled Agent Exam and be done with it. It doesn't even require any college or a degree!
Posted by: taxpro1 | March 11, 2013 8:34 AM
Report this Comment
Add Your Comments...
Already Registered?
If you have already registered to Accounting Today, please use the form below to login. When completed you will immeditely be directed to post a comment.
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment.