June 20, 2003, 9:00 AM - Noon & 1:00 PM - 5:00 PM EDT &
June 21, 2003, 8:00 AM to Noon EDT

Sofitel Philadelphia Hotel
Lyon Conference Room
120 S. 17th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103

Participants (Committee Members)

• Mary Balmer, Chairperson
• Anthony DiMartino
• C. Morgan Edwards
• Jerry Gensiejewski Jr.
• Calvin Johnson
• Robert Maziarz
• Manning H. Mosley III
• Patrick McCombie
• David L. Meyer, Vice-Chairperson
• Theodore Perros
• Lou Romito, Designated Federal Official (DFO)
• Leonard Steinberg
• Robert Taylor
• Faith Vinikoor

Staff Members

• Inez E. De Jesus, Program Analyst/Recorder
• Nancy L. Ferree, Program Manager

Members Not Present

• Richard Bobb
• Karen Kerrigan
• George Pruchniewski
• Doreen Scott

Guests

• Area Taxpayer Advocate, Virgie M. Noel
• SB/SE, Territory Manager, TEC, Brian M. Finn (June 20, 2003)
• Senior Program Analyst, National Office, Martha Curry
• Local Taxpayer Advocate- Delaware, Harriet M. Williams-Jackson (June 20, 2003)
• Local Taxpayer Advocate-Philadelphia, Terry L. Mapp (June 20, 2003)
• Subject Matter Expert: "IRS Telephones" Acting Accounts Management Field Director Nancy J. Aiello (June 20, 2003)
• Subject Matter Expert: "IRS Telephones" Mary Jane McCabe (June 20, 2003)
• Subject Matter Expert: Form 1041, "US Income Tax Return for Estates & Trusts": Esquire John Darazsdi (June 20, 2003)
• Public Participant, Barbara Steinberg (June 20, 2003)
• Public Participant, Raffaella M. Monaco

MORNING SESSION (June 20, 2003)

Ice Breaker
Prior to the commencement of the meeting, panel members, staff, and guests mingled and engaged in conversation.

Welcome/Announcements/Roll Call
Meeting began timely, and in order to accommodate the Subject Matter Experts' travel schedules, Chair Balmer rearranged the order of the agenda respectfully.

Roll call was taken and quorum was met. (quorum = 10; 14 members present)

The guests and staff were given the opportunity to introduce themselves briefly. During the course of the meeting Area Taxpayer Advocate Ms. Noel gave a brief presentation to the committee and introduced the Local Taxpayer Advocates, Ms. Mapp and Ms. Williams-Jackson, from Philadelphia and Delaware.

A special welcome was given to Panel Member Calvin Johnson who recently returned from military duty.

Before the Subject Matter Expert(s) on the IRS Telephone System addressed the panel, Panel Member Faith Vinikoor provided the committee with a brief update (Issue #70, "1040 Toll-Free Number"); she shared that the TAP Area 3 Committee is also addressing the same issue. This continues to be an issue that has not been resolved. It is definitely a nationwide issue that affects many individuals.

In addition, Ms. Vinikoor reminded everyone that the former Citizen Advocacy Panel (CAP) had addressed this matter as it appears in the 2002 National Taxpayer Advocate Report to Congress, pages 124-130. Suggestions received for improvements to the telephone system that have been brought to the attention of this committee are as follows:

1. Survey option- caller should have the option to press a button and provide feedback on service received at the end of the call. (IRS currently conducts random surveys.)
2. Option of not listening to music while waiting for an assistor.
3. Continual complaints about rudeness from IRS employees.
4. IRS telephone numbers to be posted on the website. (The practitioner that submitted this suggestion has not responded back to requests for additional information).
5. Complaints about Taxpayer Advocate Service local telephone listings being automated and no live person available to answer.

Panel Member Leonard Steinberg mentioned that during the Joint Committee's face-to-face meeting in D.C., May 2 & 3, 2003, it was discussed that IRS should be able to provide additional information to the caller instead of music. Either provide other telephone numbers or educate the public in large while they wait. The types of information that can be provided while the caller is waiting for assistance is an idea for the committee to consider.

Subject Matter Expert (s)- IRS Telephone System Nancy J. Aiello and MaryJane McCabe are both IRS employees from the Philadelphia Service Center, Accounts Management Division. Ms. Aiello was the lead presenter and Ms. McCabe provided additional information upon request.

Ms. Aiello addressed the 15 questions that had been provided to her prior to the meeting, and they are as follows:

Question #1: "Quality of technical advice"
In the Accounts Unit, 88.11% rate, "Not where we would want to be but records show improvements each year." For accuracy, current rate is 82.5%. The goal is to be in the high 90% range. As a whole, the Service is making strides; the Service acknowledges that improvements are needed with technology and continual training of the employees. Emphasis is placed on the accuracy of the answers given. All employees use the same Internal Revenue Manual (IRM).

For the record, Panel Member Steinberg reminded everyone that by law oral advice and information provided by the IRS cannot be relied upon.

Question #2: "Are IRS phone numbers available on the website"?
"Yes, they are, but you need to go to the search tool in order to access information." There is a link to access information of the local office and their hours of operation. The Taxpayer Advocate Service and Taxpayer Assistance Centers are available also in the Blue Book telephone directory within the White Pages.

Panel member C. Morgan Edwards shared how the "Notice Issue Committee" is working on ensuring that the telephone number on the Notices sent to the taxpayer is the correct number to get the taxpayer to the right assistor. Ms. Aiello shared that she is aware that the Service is currently working on the issue of the employee being able to pull up the exact notice that was sent to the taxpayer (The Notice Viewing Project). Currently, employees have codes to go by in order to interpret which notice was sent to the caller.

Question #3: "Why are automated responses used instead of a live person?"
The automated system is set up to address the general (frequently asked) less complicated questions since there are a limited number of resources, and specialists handle the more difficult questions.

Question #4: "Are there any feedback surveys on the quality of the call at the end of the call?"
Currently, there are random surveys conducted by a vendor; out of 1,124 surveys, 49% of the taxpayers participated. The survey takes approximately 10 minutes to complete. The questions are related to the professionalism and, courtesy of the assistor. Also, were there any problems with the system, were you transferred frequently?

Panel member Taylor asked if the caller knows (while answering questions to the survey) whether he is speaking to an IRS employee or a vendor (as informed during the presentation).

Question #5: "Please discuss RRA 98, Section 3709 requirements on the publishing of IRS telephone numbers, and IRS' plan on compliance. Who in the IRS is responsible for the publishing of addresses and phone numbers in local phone directories?"
Ms. Aiello was not aware of the response to this, but did state that the Taxpayer Advocate Service telephone listing is published in the White Pages as well as the Taxpayer Assistance Centers.

The complaint that was brought to the attention of this panel referred to the automated system in general and of the inability to reach a live person.

RRA 98, Section 3709, "The telephone numbers should be those which will be answered by Service personnel during working hours who can assist taxpayers. Therefore, the assistance line, which will be listed, will continue to be the toll-free lines. Providing appointment line numbers will help taxpayers who wish to schedule or change an appointment with the tax auditor, revenue agent, or revenue officer assigned to their case."

Question #6: "Is there a standard training for Toll-free assistors and if so, what does it entail?"
"Yes, there is a standard 8 weeks training class followed by working with an assigned coach for approximately 4 weeks." Ms. Aiello went on to explain that all work is reviewed and employee remains under close supervision until their quality rate is acceptable and employee is set free to work independently. This whole process can take approximately 6-12 months.

A question arose on whether due to new tax laws are employees being trained on these, and the response was "yes" employees are currently being trained on new tax laws. There is a separate telephone number staffed by employees that have been recently trained (Tax Law Specialists).

Another question that arose from the panel was the pay grade of these employees; the response was GS- 8 and GS- 9 (mid-level pay structure).

Another question from the committee was whether there is a training video for the telephone employees and the response was "no" not in the Philadelphia call site.

Question #7: "Why is the wait time so long (access and service/improvement to call handling)?"
There seems to be a tendency of volume of calls coming in when there are not sufficient assistors available due to time zones, lunchtime, or break time. Currently the level of service is 83.92%. (The goal is to be at an 85% to 90% rate).

The standard hours of operation for the general toll free number = 7:30 am to 11:00 pm local time, for 5 days a week, and 2 weekends during the filing season. (Some Saturdays)

Question #8: " Why is the automated service menu system so complicated/technical?" (too many menus/options) Can this be simplified? How is it determined which topics are offered?"
Ms. Aiello stated that since December 2002, specialized toll free numbers have been issued in order to provide better service. She asked if anyone had personal experience on using these. Most practitioners responded.

Question # 9: "Why are telephone calls placed in one area of the country answered in another geographic area?"
There are currently 23 sites plus Puerto Rico. The resources at all 23 sites are used to cover the time zones, increasing the opportunity to answer more calls. Assistors all have the same tools of information.

A question arose: "Is there a best time to call" issuance in place. This may be an idea for IRS to consider.

Question #10: "Is there a long-term plan for improvements to the toll free service?"
Yes, there were a lot of changes made during December 2002; there are more direct telephone numbers for the public, more specialization. Also, improvement is part of the Strategic Planning/Operation Plan and it all depends on the budget and demands.

Question #11: "Why can you not speak to the same assistor that helped you previously?"
Not possible, due to technology and a list of all employees is not available. The information available is the same for all. The telephone assistors all have a Customer Service Guide (Technical Probe and Response Guide for Assistors).

Question arose if there is a specific complaint telephone number and the Inspector General Office, and the Office of the Director of Practice were referenced for both complaints of employees or for communicating positive experiences with employees.

The strategies for improvements have already begun for next year. The goals for improvements are built in performance plans.

Question #12: "How many calls come in daily to the 1040 number?"
Approximately 227,000 calls a day - just on the "1040" toll free line only.

Question #13: "How many calls, or what percentage of calls are disconnects?"
Approximately 3%.

Question #14: "Are there any standards established for how long the phone rings before the assistor answers? (2 rings, 3 rings?")
Ms. Aiello did not believe there was; she did go on to explain that calls go into the "queue"- a waiting pattern.

Question #15: "Does the IRS have standards/goals/ "efficiency standards" at the call sites?"
Yes, goals for accuracy and number of services provided by number of employees exist. There is no system in place that employees must answer "x" amount of calls. Managers do watch out for "red flags". For example, if there is a pattern that an assistor stays on the line for a long period of time, this is addressed immediately; it may be that the caller is a Practitioner with many client issues on one call. Managers randomly listen and monitor conversations. As a rule, on a monthly basis, 2 employees are monitored/ 2 calls per month. The average manager may have 15-16 employees. After each call there is a "wrap up time" for the assistor to do his/her after call work before proceeding to the next call.

At the end of the presentation, committee thanked the subject matter experts for information shared and praised the IRS "for doing a good job."

The committee agreed by consensus on the following possible Improvements to the IRS Telephone system recommendations:

1. Create a specific telephone number for the public to either compliment or complain about an IRS employee. (Panel member Perros)
2. Website: Make available an IRS Telephone Directory with a link and ensure that the search tool is easier and also easier to update information. (Panel member Steinberg)
3. For incoming calls that are placed on hold, the IRS should adopt a program such that periodically a recorded voice message informs the caller the approximate waiting time before connection with an agent occurs.

Subject Matter Expert- Form 1041, "US Income Tax Return for Estates & Trusts"

Background Information Re: Issue #1309-Form 1041-
Taxpayer from the State of Virginia addressed the Area 2 committee by suggesting that "a good example be placed in the instructions for the Form 1041".

Attorney John Darazsdi from the Scranton, Pennsylvania IRS Estate Tax office addressed the panel on this issue.

Mr. Darazsdi presented the panel with a rough draft Form 1041 EZ (Attachment #1) and suggested ideas to make is simple for the average taxpayer to complete.

Highlights from Mr. Darazsdi's presentation:

1. Acknowledgment of the complexity of this form, perhaps the examples on page 25 of Publication #559 can be included in the instructions booklet for the Form 1041.
2. Suggestion of a checklist of documents needed, and glossary of terms in plain language.
3. Need to clarify the process of income taxed at the estate level versus income passed to the beneficiary by using the Schedule K-1 (Form 1040). Better clarification of income.
4. The creation of a Form 1041-EZ (draft prepared by Mr. Darazsdi) to be submitted to the IRS for consideration for implementation.
5. Provide a section in the instructions with the "most commonly asked questions".
6. Add clearer examples on the instructions and related publications.
7. When referencing page numbers on one publication, currently it is not clear which publication it is referring to which causes confusion.
8. There seems to be a need to separate complex trust from simple trust.

Related Publication #559, "Survivors, Executors, and Administrators" (Attachment #2) was distributed to all in attendance.

Committee expressed an interest in Mr. Darazsdi's suggestions and would like to continue to pursue this issue and work on preparing a recommendation for improvements to the Form 1041 and its instructions and related publications to the IRS. A sub-committee was formed, composed of Patrick Mc Combie as the Chair, and panel members DiMartino, Meyer, and Mosley III.

Analyst De Jesus shared with the committee that another subject matter expert, Chuck Frank, Tax Law Specialist, Form 1041 and its instructions, from the National Office had intended to attend this meeting but couldn't due to other commitments, but he expressed a desire to meet with the panel via teleconference means in the near future.

The committee also expressed an interest in continuing to also work with Mr. Darazsdi as they pursue this issue.

At the end of the presentation, the committee expressed their gratitude to Mr. Darazsdi.

Action item for Analyst De Jesus:
Invite and add to the agenda Chuck Frank to the July 1, 2003 Teleconference Meeting.

Joint Committee News
Chair Balmer shared the following information with the panel:

1. The Joint Committee will be holding a second face-to-face meeting in DC in September 2003 for all the TAP Chairs to attend.
2. The TAP Annual Meeting (for all TAP members) has been scheduled for October 2-4, 2003. (October 1st would be a travel day) Additional information will be forthcoming.
3. The "Subcommittees" Active Issue Matrix (distributed in color) (Attachment #5) outlines the issues being worked by the area and issue committees to ensure that there are no duplication of efforts and where there may be duplications, the chairs are to get together to discuss whether a joint effort is applicable or to resolve which of the committees will take the lead on the specific issue. The Chair also shared that she has questions regarding this matrix she will be elevating to the Joint Committee in order to get clarification on the definitions of the color codes and will keep the panel informed. The Chair believes there should be a key at the end with the definitions.
4. Each committee is expected to elevate at least 2 issues, and assist with the writing of the Annual Report. Once the issue is elevated to the Joint Committee, this information may be included in the annual report. Panel discussed the procedure they would like to implement when elevating a recommendation. Consensus reached was that Sue Sottile and Mike Chesman (Wage & Investment and Small Business/Self-Employed) TAP Liaisons need to be included with copies to the TAP Director on all elevated recommendations. Based on the TAP Charter, the panel also agreed that the Secretary of the Treasury, Commissioner of the IRS, and the National Taxpayer Advocate need to be informed as well as the Senate Finance Committees and House and Means Committee.
   
   A question arose from Panel Member Perros on whether the Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee is the only one that receives a copy or does each member receive their own copies. The committee decided that if the committee chair feels it is appropriate he/she would make copies and distribute them to the committee members.
5. The Joint Committee recently considered changing the name of the program from Taxpayer Advocacy Panel to the Treasury Advisory Panel, but it will remain as is for now. The Joint Committee Chair expressed that this may be discussed again if the members that wanted the change continue to have problems with the current name.
6. Chair is required to conduct a survey on whether members feel they need a special class during the Annual Business Meeting due to their lack of experience or knowledge of the IRS. During the Joint Committee meeting, this issue was discussed. Area 2 did not express an interest or need for this.

Area Taxpayer Advocate shared that what makes the panel so unique is its diversity of talents and representation from all walks of life.

Designated Federal Official Romito referenced "Welcome to the IRS" material that he will share with the committee. (Action Item for DFO Romito)

AFTERNOON SESSION

Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS) (Issue # 467)
Guest Brian M. Finn, Territory Manager, TEC, Taxpayer Education & Communication Unit, specialization with EFILE and EFTPS, was welcomed and he shared that he is more into marketing this product and getting folks to use it instead of paper. He also informed the panel that the EFTPS is a Treasury Program and not an IRS Program.

Panel Member Bob Taylor (Attachment #3) Issue: EFTPS Telephone Prompts are Misleading- the question was the result of a TAP Webinar hosted by Chair Mary Balmer regarding the Electronic Funds Transfer Program System. The taxpayer indicated that the phone prompts might be misleading when a fiscal year business attempts to make a payment. On numerous occasions the taxpayer's payment was applied towards the incorrect year.

Recommendations Mr. Taylor is proposing on behalf of the EFTPS Subcommittee are as follows:

1. Clarify what is meant by tax year (fiscal vs. calendar year) and tax period at the time the taxpayer is prompted to enter this information, and
2. Modify the EFTPS Direct Payment Worksheet- Short Form.

Action item for Analyst De Jesus:

1. Find out the originator and analyst and inquire why the Short Form changed.
2. Find out how the liaison works between the Treasury and the IRS.
3. Document the process.

Proposal: EFTPS Recommendation
Panel Member Bob Taylor will continue to work on this issue with Dick Bobb upon his return from vacation. (Need to cite the legislative code) The panel discussed which format they should be using when elevating a recommendation.

Some suggested that the committee use the same format used by the GAO (Government Accounting Office). (e.g. Why do this study? What is being recommended? Results in Brief, Background, Executive Summary)

The recommendation should have a code reference number for tracking purposes.

An analysis of the problem, with an example cited should be used.

The committee decided to establish a "review process"- review of sub-committees. Panel members Theodore Perros and Jerry Gensiejewski Jr., agreed to work on this.

Regarding the telephone system- "What are we going to do?" Focus on quality of call. Technical assistance in the area where there is a problem (Mosley III)

Get chairs for subcommittees to work on recommendations.

Recommendations being considered by the committee are as follows:

1. Publish IRS telephone numbers on the website - on page #8 of the National Taxpayer Advocate FY 2002 Report to Congress, this is mentioned under the "most serious problems encountered by taxpayers." It concludes: "Currently, the entire web page has been temporarily withdrawn from the site." After extensive discussion, the committee decided not to pursue this since it was already included in a previous report.
2. Inform the public of how long they will have to wait, giving them the option to call back later if they wish.
3. Provide the public with the opportunity to submit or fill out a survey at end of the call. (Obtain feedback on customer service provided)

Action Item for Program Analyst De Jesus:
Research Systemic Advocacy (SAMS) system to see what has been completed that is mentioned in the most current Report to Congress, specifically those issues with a due date. Provide the committee with a list of the issues already worked on. See where we are.

Panel member Faith Vinikoor will follow up on a survey that Area 3 is currently working on and share with the committee.

By consensus the committee agreed in the establishment of subcommittees as follows: (the chair of the specific subcommittee will prepare recommendation that will be elevated to the Joint Committee)

Improvements to the Telephone System- Anthony Di Martino (Faith Vinikoor will share information she currently has with him)

Form 1041- Patrick Mc Combie (Chair)
        Anthony Dimartino
        David Meyer
        Manning H. Mosley III

A Review Process Subcommittee- Theodore Perros (Chair)
        Jerry Gensiejewski Jr.

Public Participation
None (for the record, a local citizen expressed an interest in attending, but decided instead to mail his issue to the panel-cross-reference Issue # 1984, "Estimated Tax Penalty" Issue)

TAP Speak
Consensus from the committee: continue to send emails as well as posting messages on TAP Speak.

Closing Assessment
During the course of the meeting, based on an issue brought up by C. Morgan Edwards, all members were advised to "get to know their local advocates and media specialists".

All agreed that it has been a "good meeting".

AFTERNOON SESSION

Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS) (Issue # 467)
Guest Brian M. Finn, Territory Manager, TEC, Taxpayer Education & Communication Unit, specialization with EFILE and EFTPS, was welcomed and he shared that he is more into marketing this product and getting folks to use it instead of paper. He also informed the panel that the EFTPS is a Treasury Program and not an IRS Program.

Panel Member Bob Taylor (Attachment # 3) Issue: EFTPS Telephone Prompts are Misleading- the question was the result of a TAP Webinar hosted by Chair Mary Balmer regarding the Electronic Funds Transfer Program System. The taxpayer indicated that the phone prompts might be misleading when a fiscal year business attempts to make a payment. On numerous occasions the taxpayer's payment was applied towards the incorrect year.

Recommendations Mr. Taylor is proposing on behalf of the EFTPS Subcommittee are as follows:

1. Clarify what is meant by tax year (fiscal vs. calendar year) and tax period at the time the taxpayer is prompted to enter this information, and
2. Modify the EFTPS Direct Payment Worksheet- Short Form.

Action item for Analyst De Jesus:

1. Find out the originator and analyst and inquire why the Short Form changed.
2. Find out how the liaison works between the Treasury and the IRS.
3. Document the process.

Proposal: EFTPS Recommendation
Panel Member Bob Taylor will continue to work on this issue with Dick Bobb upon his return from vacation. (Need to cite the legislative code) The panel discussed which format they should be using when elevating a recommendation.

Some suggested that the committee use the same format used by the GAO (Government Accounting Office). (e.g. Why do this study? What is being recommended? Results in Brief, Background, Executive Summary)

The recommendation should have a code reference number for tracking purposes.

An analysis of the problem, with an example cited should be used.

The committee decided to establish a "review process"- review of sub-committees. Panel members Theodore Perros and Jerry Gensiejewski Jr., agreed to work on this.

Regarding the telephone system- "What are we going to do?" Focus on quality of call. Technical assistance in the area where there is a problem (Mosley III)

Get chairs for subcommittees to work on recommendations.

Recommendations being considered by the committee are as follows:

1. Publish IRS telephone numbers on the website - on page #8 of the National Taxpayer Advocate FY 2002 Report to Congress, this is mentioned under the "most serious problems encountered by taxpayers." It concludes: "Currently, the entire web page has been temporarily withdrawn from the site." After extensive discussion, the committee decided not to pursue this since it was already included in a previous report.
2. Inform the public of how long they will have to wait, giving them the option to call back later if they wish.
3. Provide the public with the opportunity to submit or fill out a survey at end of the call. (Obtain feedback on customer service provided)

Action Item for Program Analyst De Jesus: Research Systemic Advocacy (SAMS) system to see what has been completed that is mentioned in the most current Report to Congress, specifically those issues with a due date. Provide the committee with a list of the issues already worked on. See where we are.

Panel member Faith Vinikoor will follow up on a survey that Area 3 is currently working on and share with the committee.

By consensus the committee agreed in the establishment of subcommittees as follows: (the chair of the specific subcommittee will prepare recommendation that will be elevated to the Joint Committee)

Improvements to the Telephone System- Anthony Di Martino (Faith Vinikoor will share information she currently has with him)

Form 1041- Patrick Mc Combie (Chair)
           Anthony Dimartino
           David Meyer
           Manning H. Mosley III

A Review Process Subcommittee- Theodore Perros (Chair)
           Jerry Gensiejewski Jr.

Public Participation
None (for the record, a local citizen expressed an interest in attending, but decided instead to mail his issue to the panel-cross-reference Issue # 1984, "Estimated Tax Penalty" Issue)

TAP Speak
Consensus from the committee: continue to send emails as well as posting messages on TAP Speak.

Closing Assessment
During the course of the meeting, based on an issue brought up by C. Morgan Edwards, all members were advised to "get to know their local advocates and media specialists".

All agreed that it has been a "good meeting".

June 21, 2003 MORNING SESSION

Roll Call
Roll call was taken and quorum was met; (quorum = 10; 14 members present)

Survey of Time Commitments
Chair began meeting with "time commitments" and all agreed that currently there were no problems but if it does become a problem, they would let the Chairperson know.

Review Updated Operating Procedures Analyst De Jesus gave a brief overview of the highlighted changes and consensus was reached to accept.

Position Paper on Legislative Issues
The committee acknowledged National Taxpayer Advocate, Nina E. Olson's letter dated May 1, 2003, and will not be working legislative issues; although there were a few members who strongly feel that they would like to pursue these issues but understand that they can do so individually, and not as a panel member.

For the record the following 19 legislative issues were closed on June 21, 2003 by consensus of the committee: (The panel had been waiting for the final decision on whether the TAP would be handling legislative issues and these had been placed in the "parking lot" until now)

Area Taxpayer Advocate Virgie Noel reminded the panel members that they can access Systemic Advocacy System (a.k.a. SAMS) by visiting: http://advocate.no.irs.gov/systemic advocacy

Action item for Analyst: Research SAMS in order to see if the issues being brought to the committee's attention are being captured as systemic trends.

Chair requested from Analyst to add a column on the Area 2 Issues Spreadsheet indicating if the individual who brought the issue to the attention of the panel wants to be kept informed of status of the issue by "yes" or "no" respectively. Also, analyst is to provide feedback to those who have requested feedback.

New Issues

***1865 Subcommittee: Mosley III (Chair) and Jerry Gensiejewski Jr.- to prepare recommendation that the IRS allow the Power of Attorney to be filed electronically and that a confirmation be sent to the tax preparer.

The committee agreed that the following pending issues would be discussed during future meetings:

Public Participation
None

IRS Forms Report
(Attachment # 4) Pages 5 & 22, from the GAO Report # 03-486- "Tax Administration- IRS Should Reassess the Level of Resources for Testing Forms and Instructions."

Panel Member Leonard Steinberg made a presentation to the committee suggesting that a new TAP committee be established; "A Standard Issue Committee" to deal with forms only. The committee can start by just reviewing the Form 1040 and its instructions. Mr. Steinberg stated that the forms reviewed should be "issue related" only.

The committee decided to first see how the Recommendation regarding the Form 1041 goes before considering this concept. (Parking lot)

Recommend Improvements to IRS Telephone System
Panel Member Di Martino will proceed with preparing this recommendation on behalf of the committee.

"Where Do We Go From Here?"- Goals/Objectives
Committee agreed to continue to work issues and elevate recommendations as discussed and prioritized during the last 2 days.

Closing Assessment
Panel Member Faith Vinikoor who also serves on the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) Issue Committee, reminded everyone that she would appreciate further feedback on a previous request regarding the review of Form 8867, "Paid Preparer's Earned Income Credit Checklist".

Panel Member Perros closed the meeting with words of wisdom for all.

*The next scheduled meeting will be held by teleconference on Tuesday, July 1, 2003, at 3:00 PM EDT (90 minutes)- Dial-in number and participant's code remain the same.

P.S.
*The meeting scheduled for July 1, 2003 has since been cancelled, and the next teleconference meeting is scheduled for August 5, 2003.