June 25, 2003
Noon-ET

Participants (Panel Members):

• Phil Bryant
• Nancy L. Ferree (Designated Federal Official)
• Anthony DiMartino
• Charles (Skip) Eshelman
• Curtis Feese
• Robin Gausebeck
• Glenn Hall
• William (Dick) Murphy
• Thomas Seuntjens
• Eileen Shuman
• Virginia Symonds
• R. Jeana Warren

Staff Members:

• Sallie Chavez (Recorder)

Not Present:

• Ivan Cotman
• C. Morgan Edwards
• David Robinson
• George Sullivan

Guests/Program Owner:

• James (Jim) A. Cesarano, Program Analyst, Wage & Investment, Single Point of Contact
• Constance Partin, Daily Tax Report

Welcome and Announcements/Roll Call
Committee chair Phil Bryant welcomed everyone to the conference call. He asked Constance Partin to tell the Committee about herself. She works for the Daily Tax Report out of the Bureau of National Affairs. Committees chair stated he was glad she could attend.

Program Analyst/Recorder Sallie Chavez took the roll call and quorum of 11 was met.

Review/Approve Minutes of May 28, 2003
The minutes were accepted by consensus.

Old Business

Discussion of "Revised" CP-2000 Notice
Committee chair Phil Bryant asked Program Owner Jim Cesarano to review the information that was sent. Program Owner Jim Cesarano stated the CP-2000 Notice is sent out by the Underreporter Unit and is used to match income documents against an individuals tax return. This notice has always caused big problems because it contains lots of information. It has been an ongoing effort to revise the notice. The Dynamic Project Team (DPT) done last year did not do well in testing and went to a contactor for rewrite. What was sent to the committee is the latest revised version. Right now the IRS is in the "receiving comments" part of the review of the notice. They would like to have any recommendation/suggestions that you might have.

Committee chair Phil Bryant stated that his initial response was that it was a lot of information. He asked who would be receiving this notice? Program Owner Jim Cesarano said that anyone who files a Form 1040 could receive this form. Chair stated that if he received this notice he would immediately contact his prepare. He asked if the Frequently Asked Questions were really needed or were they just to help cut down on telephone calls to the IRS? Program Owner stated that not all of these questions would be relevant to everyone. Committee member Eileen Shuman said that the question dealing with bankruptcy could be seen as an option. Chair stated the first question he would like answered would be "why am I receiving this document?"

Committee member Tony DiMartino stated that the first five (5) pages of the two (2) documents are the same. What does the Program Owner want the committee to review? Program Owner replied that some of the information is required. The last couple of pages are specific explanations. They talk directly to the taxpayer. You can suggest changes in the presentation and what to do with the figures.

Committee member Robin Gausebeck commented that she feels the Frequently Asked Questions should be more general. The notice itself has a good format and reads very well. Committee member Glenn Hall agrees with this comment. He also would like to see the interest computed to date input on the notice to show the individual exactly what they will owe as of a specific date. Program Owner stated that this is done on other notices and should not be a problem on this one. Committee member Tony DiMartino agreed that the notice is very clear but also thinks that individuals receiving it will contact a practitioner.

Committee Chair Phil Bryant asked Program Owner if focus groups were used to test notices. Program Owner Jim Cesarano stated that the IRS looks at how a notice is used. It's more like a marketing plan than a focus group. Using a focus group would be tainted by people's view of IRS.

Chair asked if this notice would ever be used to advise a taxpayer of a refund. Program owner stated that would be rare to see that as the Underreporter Unit uses this notice where the individual has neglected to include an item of income. This would rarely trigger a refund.

Committee member Eileen Shuman asked when this notice is issued. Is it issued two (2) years after the return is filed or shortly after? Program Owner did not have an answer. He will check on it. He thinks this is done shortly after filing but definitely not during processing.

Committee member Dick Murphy stated he liked the shading and the bolding. He said it is sectioned well. He agrees that the first question that should be listed in the Frequently Asked Questions is "Why am I receiving this document?"

Committee member Virginia Symonds asked if the information is shared with any other agency. Program Owner Jim Cesarano stated that the IRS has very strict disclosure laws. We can't share information. Committee member Tony DiMartino stated that there was an agreement between the federal and state governments. Program Owner agreed but that is being renegotiated. Committee member Virginia Symonds added she feels some individuals may think, "How is this information going to be used against me?" Program Owner said that maybe they should think about adding a statement that says that the information cannot be shared.

Program Owner Jim Cesarano stated that what the committee might want to do is to rewrite the Frequently Asked Questions and add the couple of items that were mentioned before. He suggests having an individual coordinate the individual recommendations and forwarding that to the Program Owner. Committee chair asked TAP Manager/DFO Nancy Ferree to put a package together. The chair and the DFO will work together on a response.

Committee chair Phil Bryant thanked Program Owner Jim Cesarano for the good job he did in putting this to the committee.

Program Owner Jim Cesarano indicated that the Notice Process Improvement Initiative Team (NIIPTS) he was conducted by going ahead. It is scheduled for two (2) weeks in August and then during a three (3) month period there will be two (2) additional weeks in each month. They will be reviewing notices, letters and correspondence that can be eliminated. He should have another draft charter by the end of this week. He would like to have all the requirements from the externally stakeholders by the end of July. He would like general or specifics requirements. Only some of the notices are available on line.

Program Owner does not know if the NIIPTS will meet by teleconference or an actual meeting. He would really like to have this committee participate as external stakeholders. He think one (1) or (2) members would be appropriate. Committee Chair Phil Bryant asked TAP Manager/DFO Nancy Ferree if there was money for this type of activity. She stated the funds could be requested.

Program Owner Jim Cesarano asked if there were any committee members who would be interested in participating in the Dynamic Project Team (DPT). He thinks there will be a DPT set up in the near future for the CP-71. The requirements would be to commit to at least a two (2) week team meeting. There may be a break between the meetings with conference call. There also could be additional conference call. Interested individuals would have to have a flexible schedule.

Committee member Virginia Symonds asked where the meetings would be held. Program Owner stated they were not at the stage where the actual site was set. Committee member Eileen Shuman asked what time of the year would they would be held. Again Program Owner stated that the actual meeting was not set yet. Committee member asked what kind of time commitment would need to be made. Program Owner stated that not all the work is done during the initial two (2) weeks. It could drag on for years as is with the CP-2000. Committee member Tony DiMartino stated that there may be interest but the committee would need the logistics before they could commit to a team. Program Owner stated that until the charter is done most of the information is unknown. Some DPTs are small in scope and some are very large. He stated that the Single Point of Contact (SPOC) wanted to give the committee the opportunity to participate.

Committee chair Phil Bryant stated that it appears there is interest. He thanked Program Owner Jim Cesarano for what he's done.

Operating Procedures
TAP Program Analyst Sallie Chavez reviewed the changes suggested by the Joint Committee. Committee member Robin Gausebeck wanted clarification of #2 as the Joint Committee was advised that committee members were not to speak directly with Program Owners. Committee member Tom Seuntjens stated that Jim Cesarano was our Program Owner and since we are an issue committee and have Program Owners, we can speak to them directly. TAP Manager/DFO Nancy Ferree agreed with this.

Committee chair Phil Bryant asked for any comments. There were none. The Revised Operating Procedures were accepted by consensus.

NEW BUSINESS
Committee member Eileen Shuman stated that Area 1 forwarded a recommendation that has to do with notices and she would like to know how she can get it to the committee. Committee chair suggested she work with the TAP Program Analyst Sallie Chavez. She also has a question about the last meeting. There was a discussion about Systemic Advocacy. She missed out on that discussion and would like some information on it. TAP Manager/DFO Nancy Ferree stated it was a system to record recommendation and that the TAP would be a part of it.

Committee chair Phil Bryant clarified for the committee that they should review the CP-2000 and forward any comments/suggestions to TAP Manager/DFO Nancy Ferree by July 9, 2003 so that she can prepare a report for Program Owner Jim Cesarano.

Committee chair Phil Bryant thinks the committee is making progress and having a direct impact. He thanked everyone for his or her time.

Next meeting date: Wednesday, July 22, 2003, Noon EDT. Dial-in number and pass code remain the same.

Meeting adjourned.