An advocacy group is representing a trio of tax preparers who plan to file suit against the Internal Revenue Service on Tuesday claiming the IRS’s new regulations could force them out of the tax prep business or cause them to raise their fees substantially.
The Institute for Justice is challenging the IRS’s new registered tax return preparer licensing scheme on behalf of the three preparers. The plaintiffs are not seeking any monetary damages, but they want an injunction against enforcement of the regulations. While the lawsuit is not a class-action suit, it could have a wide impact beyond just the three preparers.
“If the court rules in our favor, it would affect all registered tax preparers nationwide who are subject to the registered tax return preparer requirements,” said Dan Alban, an attorney at the Arlington, Va.-based Institute for Justice. “The IRS estimates 350,000 tax preparers would be subject to the competency exam and other requirements. It’s not a class action, but it is a federal lawsuit that would affect the rights of tax preparers nationwide, as well as their clients. There’s something like 80 million or so taxpayers who use a tax return preparer who are affected by these regulations. Many of them would have to find a new tax preparer or pay substantially higher costs to get their tax returns prepared.”
One of the plaintiffs is Elmer Kilian, a sole practitioner in Eagle, Wis. A Korean War veteran whose 80th birthday is this week, he has been preparing tax returns for his clients for about 30 years by hand and even has an old-fashioned wooden shingle hanging outside his office advertising his services. For most of his 100 or so clients, he charges only about $30 to $40, and he has a few business clients with more complicated returns for whom he charges $75. Killian estimates he would probably need to double or triple his prices if he had to pay the new IRS fees and buy a new computer for electronic filing.
“It would basically end up putting out of business all preparers who are self-employed, who are just a single entity,” he said. “I’m a non-computer person and by the time I finished up coming up to code as they want with e-filing and all, buying all the equipment and everything, it would be a financial hardship on myself in that respect. It would cost at least $2,000 for the first year of investments, and after that it just keeps on going. There is no definite figure from IRS as to what and where the classes would be on tax preparation. For the first year, the registration alone would be $115, and then it would require at least two days of going to school every year to accomplish 15 hours of classroom training, as they refer to it. It would end up where everybody would have to raise their fees to the taxpayer. I’m referring to myself basically, but I believe it would go the same way with everybody else. They would have to increase their fees by at least double.”
John Gambino, a Certified Financial Planner who prepares about 40 tax returns for some of his financial planning clients at his business, Inner Circle Platinum Advisory, based in Hoboken, N.J., is another plaintiff who objects to the new requirements. But he emphasized that tax prep is only an extension of his financial planning business.
“I’m not a big tax preparation kind of factory,” said Gambino. “It’s something I offer my clients. A lot of my clients have their own accountants, which is perfectly fine. It’s not my core business. That being said, it’s a useful service I provide to my clients who request it because they get everything—a one-stop shop essentially. When I first heard about this licensing requirement, the IRS said it’s to protect the public. I don’t buy it. The public doesn’t need protection. If somebody wants to go to an attorney or a CPA right now, they’re free to do so. No one is stopping them.”
Gambino is not opposed to the IRS’s registration requirement. “I’m all for transparency and having people be monitored,” said Gambino. “I have no problem with getting a Preparer Tax ID Number. I had to get fingerprinted to e-file people’s returns. I think it’s all about incentives. If you have incentives where people are getting their fee based on the size of refunds, that could lead to a problem. If you want to disclose with a tax preparer ID number if someone has a high rate of audits, by all means do that. I think that will basically ensure enforcement. If you can go on the Web and put in somebody’s ID number without the name and see if their clients get audited at a very high rate, that would be very bad for business, and that would basically ensure that someone is not trying to cheat the IRS.”
However, he is opposed to the exemptions for attorneys and CPAs. “There are tons of attorneys out there who don’t do taxes,” said Gambino. “I have numerous clients who are attorneys who know nothing about taxes. To say that they can go out there and start preparing people’s taxes and I can’t, when I have been doing it for eight years, that’s not necessarily [fair]. If the IRS wants to make sure everyone’s tested, test everyone. Have no exclusions. The CPAs and attorneys say they already do continuing education, but they don’t have to do continuing education on taxes. They can do it on auditing, or an attorney can do it on their area of expertise. I’m a Certified Financial Planner, and I do 30 hours of continuing education myself, but it doesn’t have to be on tax prep.”
The third plaintiff is Sabina Loving, an accountant who has worked for banks and financial services companies for the past 10 years. She opened her own part-time tax prep business, Loving Tax Service, about three years ago to service an impoverished area of Chicago.
“She would have to raise her prices, but she also wants to expand her business by hiring other people she would supervise as tax preparers,” said Alban. “But she’s not an attorney or a CPA or an enrolled agent, so she doesn’t fall under the exemption for attorneys, CPAs and enrolled agents at law firms and CPA firms.”
An IRS spokesman said the IRS does not comment on potential or pending litigation. However, the IRS has in the past argued that the tax preparer regulations are necessary to protect taxpayers from incompetent tax preparers or unscrupulous ones who falsify information to get larger refunds or who even steal refund money from their clients.
Alban contends the IRS is exceeding its authority with many of the new requirements. “They don’t actually have the congressional authority to do this,” he said. “They’re acting under a statute that was passed in 1884 before the IRS existed in its modern form and before the modern income tax. The statute that they’re acting under was actually passed in order to deal with some strange issues at the time dealing with military pensioners who had claims against the Department of the Treasury and the Department of the Interior for lost horses and for unpaid pensions, and it was designed to regulate people who were representing people in hearings when they filed these claims. It’s very similar to an attorney representing someone. Now the IRS is giving a very broad definition to the word ‘practice’ to similarly include preparing and filing a tax return as opposed to actually advocating for someone in some sort of courtroom proceeding or conference with the IRS. So they just don’t have the authority to do it.”
Alban also argues that the IRS hasn’t demonstrated that the new regulations would improve the quality of tax return preparation. “They haven’t shown that there is a substantial problem that is unaddressed by the current laws,” he said. “There are already a number of federal laws on the books that impose civil and criminal penalties ranging up to $100,000 per violation and up to three years in prison for tax fraud, but also regulating things like unauthorized disclosure of a taxpayer’s information. There are already a number of statutes on the books that the IRS can enforce.”
33 Comments
Well, it looks like the plantiff's won the first round...what is really strange to me is the fact they we are to be regulated...blah, blah, blah...but the IRS lets any Joe off the street go into their website and file their own taxes without any experience at all!!!!!!! Go figure!
Posted by: ransgirl | January 22, 2013 9:27 AM
Report this Comment
Do we need to have education yes...as a former IRS examiner I do see the need for education. However I do not need to see folks being run out of business merely because 'their clients' repeat THEIR CLIENTS many of them older DO NOT WANT TO FILE ELECTRONIC RETURNS. A lot of them grew up old school and have seen times when 'electricity' doesn't work. What if your practice has more then 11 such individuals; according to the regulations you must make these tax payers sign all types of forms attesting to NOT e-filing and then tell them you CANNOT have anything more to do with the return. They must mail it. Next you will be telling me that the DEPT of TREASURY HAS OUTLAWED PAPER MONEY AND WE MUST HAVE ALL our transactions on DEBIT CARDS OR CREDIT CARDS. Again.. what is the backup plan for when a Hurricane,NATURAL DISASTER OR THE ELECTRIC GRID GOES DOWN. Do we then become so addicted to the electronic way or no way...I think the IRS is painting itself into a corner.
Posted by: DDTS | December 13, 2012 4:19 PM
Report this Comment
THERE NEEDS TO BE CREDITIALS...BUT AS USUAL ....GOVERNMENT IS NOT PREPARED TO HANDLE IT EFFECTIVELY......AN OPEN BOOK TEST? EXPERIMENTAL QUESTIONS ON THE TEST?...AND A FREE PASS FOR SOME WHO MAY HAVE LIMITED TAX EXPOSURE....YEAH...YEAH...A GOVERNMENT PROGRAM FOR SURE! I PASSED THE TEST AND I THINK IT IS A FARCE......
Posted by: BIG JIM | September 2, 2012 7:18 PM
Report this Comment
This is the IRS going way too far! I wholeheartedly disagreee with the annual "renewal fee". It is ludicrous to charge us an additional fee for a number that never changes. Isn't the EFIN enough when we are required to electronically file returns?
Furthermore, someone mentioned that the test is open book. That's not what I've read, otherwise I'll just take my JK Lasser book with me! I've had over 8 years of professional experience working under a public accountant and doing taxes and now two full years of doing them on my own. I've gone through the H&R block course, but it didn't offer much more than I already knew through experience. And if I want to be sure to pass the test the first time I have to pay for prep courses!
The price of the education for CE points is well over $2000 including travel and hotel. I hope this case is appealed and wins.
Posted by: aldrenus | June 12, 2012 1:24 PM
Report this Comment
I am a paralegal and prepare fiduciary returns and business information returns, as well as final 1040's for our probate clients. So, I am NOT a tax preparing business and this really hit our business too. We've been preparing these taxes since 1978, and have kept up to date in tax preparation as well as our legal estate business, taking costly seminars annually in both arenas. But putting this additional burden on our business just about puts us out of business. The returns we file are pretty specialized and most often fail the efiling requirement for various reasons, causing us to pay for the efiling, and then having to prepare and file paper returns anyway. We have both had PTIN's from when they were first issued, as well as CAF numbers. We do returns for many of the attorneys we work for and have had to redo returns prepared by CPA's for the final 1040's as well as 1041's due to their lack of understanding these special issues. While I am wholely in favor of regulation, I too believe they should be equally applied. CPA's and Attorneys, unless they practice tax law or do tax prep have no clue as to what they're doing, and without extensive continuing education in the tax arena should NOT be preparing taxes, much less be exempted from the regulation the rest of us are now faced with. The only ones I'd exempt are the EA's who are specialized in tax work and their continuing education is directly related to tax. I'll be interested in watching this case as it plays out, but I fear it is without merit. I'd also like to see a panel meting out justice if needed, and not one lonely IRS agent without recourse.
Posted by: NotZenEnough | April 4, 2012 8:43 PM
Report this Comment
I see this one hit a nerve Michael. I have never seen so many comments. Your readers might also be interested in this discussion on Isaac Brock related to the IRS actions. Google "IRS lacks authority to impose tax on tax by regulating tax preparers - Lawsuit alleges"
Posted by: Just Me | March 15, 2012 2:24 PM
Report this Comment
If the regulations just weeded out the three plaintiffs in the lawsuit, it would perform a valuable service. What a pathetic group of "professionals."
And, jszesq, implying that EAs are not competent reveals a stunning level of ignorance.
Posted by: cversich | March 15, 2012 12:28 PM
Report this Comment
I have been a sole practioner for 12 years. Worked for a sole practioner CPA for another 26. I am 100% for education. I am 100% for regulating our industry.
The problem I see is that I am preparing amended returns for taxpayers because preparers with PTINs and ERO's are still lying cheating and stealing. My question which it may be too soon to tell is "are these requirements really weeding out the bad guys?"
All attorneys that prepare returns (other than tax attorneys) should be made to test. Makes sense.
The other problem I have is where is the education at the IRS? Why can you call three times and get three different "RIGHT" answers. And no one individual should be able to single out a preparer as having issues. It should not be a sole decision or a little person with alot of control can do alot of damage.
Posted by: Lenore | March 15, 2012 6:22 AM
Report this Comment
GIve me a break..this suit should be thrown out of court for being absolutely baseless.....the core group recognized under Circular 230...Attorneys and CPAs and grudgingly EA's thought they are not subject to the same level of regulations as the former two real professions have at least demonstrated a level of competence. As a CPA I had to complete a graduate degree to qualify for what I do.....the rule should mandate eFile for a single return prepared for a fee. If you don't know how to use a computer...better you are forced out and wind up bagging groceries. It is difficult enough to explain to a taxpayer what the differences in skill required to become a CPA as distinguished to get a job at H&R Block is....let alone articulate what we do in dealing with IRS Collection, Appeals,etc.....if you needed brain surgery would price be the driving factor in selecting a surgeon? ??
Posted by: jszesq@abizinabox.com | March 15, 2012 1:11 AM
Report this Comment
There is a better way to solve the problem people. We all should be subject to the same rules period there are no perfect Tax Professioinals.. Period CPA.
Posted by: JDAVIS | March 14, 2012 2:54 PM
Report this Comment
Well if the IRS wanted to track my quality of my tax return all they have to do is sort my return by the "EFIN" number. Electronic Filing Number. The PTIN number is being issued to force us to sign the contract of ethics. They need to tell the truth. !!! Without the PTIN number there is no contract and the new requirements cannot be enforced.
The IRS System is a failure as now the crooks can cheat the system by going directly to the IRS web page or of these free web sites to prepare their client returns..
It the system !!!!!!!!!
Posted by: JDAVIS | March 14, 2012 2:49 PM
Report this Comment
I have had a PTIN since 2002. That said, the mere fact that now I have to pay for something that was free.......!!! I have taken the test and paid the $116 to do so, drove 90 miles to the closest location, had to remove the chain from my glasses, remove my watch, turn my pockets inside out, scanned with a metal detector and what did I get....just a congratulations that I scored in the passing area. No score or what I missed.
That part I do not like. I want to know what I was week in so that I could research and study!
I think the fees to the little guy like myself are unfair, taking a test, well I was nervous and the letter even states that just becuase you passed, dose not mean that you are actually qualified. What was the point of the test then?
Posted by: srmc | March 13, 2012 9:12 PM
Report this Comment
I have had a PTIN since 2002. That said, the mere fact that now I have to pay for something that was free.......!!! I have taken the test and paid the $116 to do so, drove 90 miles to the closest location, had to remove the chain from my glasses, remove my watch, turn my pockets inside out, scanned with a metal detector and what did I get....just a congratulations that I scored in the passing area. No score or what I missed.
That part I do not like. I want to know what I was week in so that I could research and study!
I think the fees to the little guy like myself are unfair, taking a test, well I was nervous and the letter even states that just becuase you passed, dose not mean that you are actually qualified. What was the point of the test then?
Posted by: srmc | March 13, 2012 9:12 PM
Report this Comment
I a tax preparer in Michigan for some 8 years now. I have been audited 2 for 2007 and 2009. The first audit costed me 4200.00 it was for the EIC. The auditor looked for informaation that I believe should be consider personal information from the tax preparer, like where is the father to the children, and why I had'nt enter his where abouts in the notes. The second audit said she had 71 returns to review but since I smoked in my home where I previously prepared taxes she would find me for all 71, whiched costed me 7100.00 in 2010. I feel as though I have complied with the due deligence and that is not one of the questions, so why do we the little people have to suffer. I am all for the test, but the IRS behaver, far as we the tax preparer doing there job. A cient has custody of her 4 yr niece they said I am to have a copy of the court papers in my file. No! I am to inform my client if they are audited these would be papers they would want. I don't get paid for doing there job. I feel as though we are being violated with what they are doing it is unjust and unfair. Lets fight back.
Posted by: lachelle1225 | March 13, 2012 4:34 PM
Report this Comment
I hear the arguements but I don't agree this is not just about competence, it's about control.
With these PTIN's IRS has much greater and more arbitrary control over the tax community, if your card is double charged and you pull the fee IRS revokes your PTIN and YOU CAN'T PREPARE TAXES FOR A MONTH! No appeal, no hearing, no rights at all.
These tests are a new way IRS could selectively elliminate preparers they want gone. Think about it IRS knows what returns you prepare what you deal with they could just custome make a test on areas you don't deal with.
I'm glad they are fighting it.
Posted by: Tax_Man2.0 | March 13, 2012 1:09 PM
Report this Comment
The registration is simply windowing dressing to get the dog groomers to register. The tests don't prove much either. What is needed is peer review. That will weed out those incompetent preparers that are not already weeded out by the IRS sanctions....
Posted by: topbeancounter | March 13, 2012 11:54 AM
Report this Comment
And the arguments go on and on and on and always have. There will be no pleasing everyone in this because everyone will have their own opinions as to what should or should not be done, just like I do.
At moment we have to live by what the IRS says we have to do in the near forseeable future, in order to prepare taxes for a living.
Maybe the lawsuit will change things, we don't know but my gut tells me that no matter what the outcome of the lawsuit, paid tax preparers i'm afraid are going to have to go through constant new rules and regs every so often just to make a living, because it won't belong before those who want to cheat will find a way around these new tax prep rules and then the IRS will have to put more in place and so on and so on and so on....
Posted by: taxking | March 13, 2012 11:27 AM
Report this Comment
It doesn't protect anyone. Regulations are already in place to protect the public and more regulations are not the answer. All it will do is drive a lot of folks out of business and drive the price up higher for those of us who stay in.
Posted by: EA/CPA | March 13, 2012 9:32 AM
Report this Comment
Tax preparation can be a complex process and demands due process by professional preparers. As with any profession serving the public, those who participate should be held to professional standards. To suggest there need not be standards is naive at best and self-serving in many cases. Testing and demanding continuing education standards is one of the best moves made by IRS in quite awhile. It will protect the public from those who injure them financially every year with shoddy work. I say, "bravo" to the regulations.
Posted by: bsimmonscpa | March 13, 2012 9:21 AM
Report this Comment
I feel badly for the gentleman from Eagle, WI, but adapting to change is a key competency for anyone preparing taxes; especially in an environment where the code changes yearly. Steadfastly refusing to accept change and to accept professional oversight does not make one a better tax preparer. I am an enrolled agent and I am proud of the knowledge and the level of competence I bring to the table in serving my clients. Honestly, my feeling is that the people who are complaining about having to pass a simple competency exam shouldn't be professionally preparing taxes in the first place. If you cannot pass an open book (!!!) exam on basic tax theory then you have no business filing anyone's tax return, let alone charging for the service. It's as simple as that. Incompetent preparers shame our entire profession. No one is making it a requirement to pass the EA exams, just to prove that you can flip the pages of a Pub 17, for crying out loud.
Posted by: trixiespishak | March 13, 2012 9:13 AM
Report this Comment
I see both sides of the argument. My concern with the IRS Regs is "yes" it will/should make it more costly for tax preparation by 'licensed' folks... and it should. There are a couple of better reasons, logical/rational, that exam competency is needed: I taught Tax Preparers for a national chain (as seen on TV) and I have prepared thousands of high income 1040s, business and trust tax returns which included hundreds of IRS and other Tax Authorities inquiries and attempts to purloin the Taxpayer's refund and/or step over the legal bounds to grap Taxpayer dollars... I've had to cajole Attorneys and CPAs who the client hired to review/prepare the tax returns.... the IRS is wrong 99% of the time... and I don't recall when I/we lost an agruement with the clients Attorney/CPA... indeed, a memorable case, one bank who handled the trust told me to follow the attorney's ruling, but I kept after that attorney and after four or five rounds of jousting, this attorney aquiesses with "he whiffed on that one."
Testing and credentialing is needed... However, the IRS needs to be more friendly and allow Tax Prep Folks to so their thing... and run the business as a business. Taking away the 'debt indicator' stole a nice piece of the Tax Prep Business... The IRS and FDIC, now, have limited the Tax Prep Fees that can be authorized through Bank Products. Indeed, the IRS continues to put onerous and often ridiculous paperwork on the efile... privicy baloney and more paperwork to sign, and they cajole Taxpayers to claim the EITC as 25% who are eligible for the credit don't take it... and then the IRS puts ownerous rules, which puts the burden and the IRS's job onto the Tax Prep Firm which should be helping the Taxpayer "make their taxes less taxing." That is our firm's motto.
Most Taxpayers overpay on their taxreturn; as they do not understand the 60,000 pages of Federal Tax Regs let alone State, School District, Local, RITA, Sales, CAT, Sub-S, C-Corp, Schedule C, D nor most of A.... and all the rest of the schmooze.
Posted by: JFKEQUAL | March 13, 2012 9:08 AM
Report this Comment
Passing an exam does not ensure they will be done correctly. Anyone that thinks more government involvement will solve the problem is sadly mistaken. One just needs to look at the many cases of CPA and EA incompentance and fraud. I for one do not need the government looking out for me. I am able to determine who can prepare my taxes, cut my hair, watch my children, where I will eat, cut my grass, fix my electronics, fix my car. That being said I have passed the CPA exams, I am an EA and a CFE. As a matter of fact I have passed the EA exams twice, once by paper and once by computer. I have taken a total of 15 exams without one failing grade and the only thing that may prove is I'm a good test taker. Let me be clear, I am not saying we don't need government at all but on this issue move on federal government.
Posted by: EA/CPA | March 13, 2012 9:06 AM
Report this Comment
I believe that the RTP requirements are necessary to ensure that the tax profession is represented by trained tax preparers. The new requirements are not rigorous enough and The RTP regulations do not go far enough. The requirements should be CPA, Attorney and Enrolled Agents period-end of discussion. It is "kitchen table" and tax franchise tax preparers that are ruining the tax industry.
Posted by: garyh | March 13, 2012 9:05 AM
Report this Comment
I believe that the RTP requirements are necessary to ensure that the tax profession is represented by trained tax preparers. The new requirements are not rigorous enough and The RTP regulations do not go far enough. The requirements should be CPA, Attorney and Enrolled Agents period-end of discussion. It is "kitchen table" and tax franchise tax preparers that are ruining the tax industry.
Posted by: garyh | March 13, 2012 9:05 AM
Report this Comment
Unregistered tax preparers answer to no one. Many won't even sign the returns they prepare or report the income they make. I spend a good amount of time fixing returns and solving the huge problems untrained and unqualified tax preparers, many with a PTIN, have created for their clients. Registering tax preparers, requiring testing and a few hours of CPE will do a lot of good. If unqualified people can't continue to work because they won't or cant meet the standards, that is for the better of society.
Posted by: cromancpa | March 13, 2012 9:02 AM
Report this Comment
My situation is very similar to those in the lawsuit. I prepare a limited amount of tax returns each year at affordable prices. I have been preparing taxes returns for 20 years without any problems with the IRS. My tax prepartion base is repeat and word of mouth clients. Most have been using my services for five or more years. I have quite a few clients that I have been preparing tax returns for 20 years. I don't advertise tax preparation. I had the Preparer Tax ID long before it was required. It is unfortunate for people like me that don't break the rules and never try to do a tax return that is much more involved then I know I can handle. Not to mention my client base. I have a CPA and the IRS a phone call away if I have questions. I think it's fair to say my clients don't need to be protected from me.
Posted by: sandilynb | March 13, 2012 8:22 AM
Report this Comment
Mr. Killan is one of the old timers who has prepared tax returns by hand for most of his life and will not change. He is not subject to the e-file mandate because he does not use computer software. Furthermore, I do not understand how he makes a living with a 100 clients charging $ 30 - $ 75. The cost of living must be very low in Eagle, WI. He does not understand that there are a lot of scrupulous tax preparers who commit fraud for their clients by adding nonexistent deductions. This is why the IRS came up with this program. There is no true justification for fighting this and it is a frivolous lawsuit.
As far as Mr. Gambino is concerned, there are lawyers who do not prepare tax returns, but there are some who do. The ones who do are required to take continuing education courses each year like CPAS have to do. Tax preparers like Mr. Killan do not have this requirement. He is comparing apples with oranges.
Posted by: Vincent C | March 13, 2012 8:13 AM
Report this Comment
Any sort of regulation seems to fly in the face of liberty. However, being proven competent in the preparation of taxes is one I am in favor. As an enrolled agent, I had to prove my competency by taking a very comprehensive test. I studied for months on end and am all the better for it. When a client asks me a question, I know the answer or can find it quickly. Many people have their taxes prepared by "tax professionals" who may be nothing more than a computer operator. Software, no matter how good is no substitute for knowledge and experience. As for the elderly gentleman who manually files returns, I feel his aggravation. However, he is costing us the taxpayers many more additional dollars for people at the IRS to input the tax returns into the system. Then there is room for errors that rarely happen with efiled returns. And yes I do agree the exemption for CPA's and attorneys should require a minimum of taxation updates. I had a client whose returns had been prepared by a CPA which were totally in error costing the taxpayer $1,000's. I was able to recover some of the money which had not gone past the limitation statute.
Posted by: mikewEA | March 13, 2012 8:00 AM
Report this Comment
While I agree with PTIN registration, I also think that preparers, including CPA's and attorney's who do not actually prepare tax returns should be required to take the exam - just because you have a CPA behind your name or are an attorney does not mean you know how to prepare a tax return. I also beleive that financial planners should also have to take this test - I have personal experience of working with a financial planner who did not know how to properly prepare his own schedule C - he now refers his clients to me.
Posted by: BarbaraGheen | March 13, 2012 7:46 AM
Report this Comment
THIS LAWSUIT IS FOR THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND OF THE PEOPLE.
Posted by: ellygumera | March 13, 2012 7:43 AM
Report this Comment
This lawsuit rather makes me sick. Are these people actual tax preparers or just preparer wanna bees?
Posted by: edmilotcpa | March 13, 2012 7:34 AM
Report this Comment
As a CPA, I've spent a lot of time amending taxes for people who had them prepared by an untrained prepared or by a lawyer. There are few areas more important to the consumer than getting their taxes done right. Anyone who cannot pass the competency test proves that they should not be preparing taxes. Could the fees be a little less? Sure. Should there be a competency test? If you want your taxes done right there should be. This is a very welcome move by consumers and professionals. If someone is supervised by a CPA, maybe there can be some flexibility. But the guy out there on his own flipping burgers by day and preparing taxes by night should be vetted before he handles anyone's taxes.
Posted by: wdylanp | March 13, 2012 7:04 AM
Report this Comment
I know of an attorney admitted to Tax Court that doesn't know what the "Kiddie Tax" is. I don't agree with attorneys preparing taxes without appropriate CPE specific to tax preparation.
I truly appreciate organizations such as the Intsitute for Justice who look out for the liberty that is being threatened. thank you!
Posted by: Taxpreparer | March 12, 2012 10:47 PM
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.