May 1, 2003

The SBSE Reducing Taxpayer Burden Issue Committee met via teleconference on Tuesday, May 1, 2003.

Members in Attendance:

• James Abraham, P.E., Gahanna, OH
• Charlotte Cassady, Talbotton, GA
• David Meyer, Voorhees, NJ
• Judi Nicholas, DFO
• Theodore Perros, Washington, D.C.
• Nancy Quarles, Southfield, MI
• Leonard Steinberg, Chair, West Windsor, NJ
• Frank Woods, Emory, TX
• Steve Wood, Little Rock, AR

Other Attendees:

• Margie Kinney, Program Owner
• Mary Peterson-O'Brien, TAP Analyst

Attachments

• Agenda
• March Meeting Minutes

Roll Call
Mary O'Brien took a roll call and informed Leonard that not enough members were present for a quorum. It was decided to hold any agenda topics that required a full quorum until the next meeting.

Review of Agenda
Leonard reviewed the agenda. Agenda will be followed as amended.

Updates from Program Owner
Margie gave an update of progress made on a multi-agency task force that she has been working on. The focus of this task force is on the Small Business Paper Relief Act. The mission is to consolidate reporting for both Federal and State tax returns. Two avenues to help achieve consolidated reporting are:

• Access of business lists
• Interactive software.

The work done by this committee could be beneficial for this task force.

Subcommittee Reports
Leonard discussed the progress of the Fed/State Subcommittee. The subcommittee is still working on areas if focus. They plan to meet before the next committee meeting to have a working plan of next steps.

Steve discussed the progress of the Reporting Subcommittee. They have prepared two oral surveys on the burden for business payroll reporting. Each member has committed to doing 10 interviews. Currently half of the interviews have been completed.

Neither the chair or vice chair of the Deposit subcommittee was available for this teleconference; therefore, their report was not given.

Issue Committee Business
Leonard asked for panel members input on three subjects so that he could represent the committees viewpoints at the next joint committee meeting.

Time Commitments for Panel Members:
Leonard shared the concern of the time issue for panel members that have been raised at the joint committee. It appears that some members find it really hard to be involved in both an issue committee and an area committee. One idea that was brought up was to allow panel members to serve on either an issue committee or an area committee. He asked attending panel members their thoughts.

• Theodore - the time is more than he thought; however, he feels that being a member of both committees is beneficial.

• Charlotte likes to be involved in both the issue committee and the area committee. Her only problem is during tax season.

• David feels that the time is more than he thought but it is still good to serve on both committees. He thinks there is a lack of direction and would like to see some effort spent on developing this.

• Jim feels that he spends more time with the local IRS office and is frustrated on what he is doing.

• Steve feels that the time commitment for the two committees is fine

• Nancy thinks the time commitment is tough but it is smoothing out and wants to continue with both committees.

• Frank likes both committees but understands how other members feel burdened.

• Leonard commented that the tax season has been a bad time and it has been hard to commit to this volunteer effort. He also feels that it is a bit too optimistic on both the learning curve and our ability to get things done in a reasonable time commitment.

Leonard will consider all the comments and chare this committee's thoughts with the joint committee.

Margie asked to address the time factor. She recognizes that the time factor is difficult. She wasn't expecting immediate results rather that this would be a process where the panel spent some time and research to make thoughtful recommendations. Margie wanted to express that the results so far are what she expected and that she thinks the committee is making good progress.

Learning Curve:
Leonard asked the members to share their thoughts concerning how to overcome the time it takes to learn the subject to fully participate in making recommendations.

• Leonard feels that the learning curve was hard and that sometimes you may not get a resolution in two years panel term.

• Judi asked if it makes sense to come in armed with ideas on how to attend on this issue for now and share thoughts what would be beneficial for the future.

Suggestions:

• Spend some time at the TAP orientation going over the IRS language, research tools as well as who does the research, etc. for both the issue and area committees.
• Not having consensus as a decision making process.
• Have a class on the tax law concerning an issue during the orientation.
• There is frustration that opinions are being formed without any policy. Basic guidance should be put in writing so people don't waste time at the area committee developing an issue. Does not want to have issues dropped.
• Wants to have the JOC give a firm answer of guidance on legislative issues. (Judi stated that a memorandum from Nina Olson as to guidance on legislative issues would be shared soon).
• Wants to see a separate document that discusses legislative issues from the NTA report to congress. Jim thinks that it is not lobbying to discuss legislative issues.
• Have alternates ready to step on board if a committee needs a replacement.
• The 2 year term limits for members should be reevaluated.
• Institute staggered terms. (Judi informed the committee that the intent was to have staggered terms and that the decision would be made jointly by the treasury, commissioner, and the National Taxpayer Advocate) Theodore stated that he wants to work legislative issues. Legislative issues should be listed in the TAP annual report. Jim thinks that it is not lobbying to discuss legislative issues.

Mid Year Assessment:
Leonard informed all that each committee has been asked to produce a mid year assessment for the joint committee. He asked for general input. Leonard would like to have guidance on the format and content before wasting too much time at this teleconference.

The question was raised as to what happens to the report after it is written. Judi stated that the three people it goes to are: the White House Liaison, National Taxpayer Advocate, and the Internal Revenue Service Commissioner.

Public Input and Next steps
Leonard asked for public input. No comments from the public. Leonard adjourned the meeting. Next meeting will be held on June 5th.