Overview
Title
An Act To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to conform to the intent of the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, as set forth in the joint explanatory statement of the committee of conference accompanying Conference Report 105–599, that the National Taxpayer Advocate be able to hire and consult counsel as appropriate.
ELI5 AI
H. R. 997 is about letting a special helper for taxpayers hire their own lawyer to get better advice. This is so the helper can do their job well and always be ready to support people with their taxes.
Summary AI
H. R. 997 is a bill designed to enhance the role of the National Taxpayer Advocate. It allows the Advocate to appoint legal counsel who can report directly to them. This change aims to ensure the Advocate can effectively perform their duties by having direct support from legal professionals. The amendments are effective as though they were part of the 1998 IRS Restructuring and Reform Act.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
Overview of the Bill
H.R. 997, titled the "National Taxpayer Advocate Enhancement Act of 2025," is proposed legislation aimed at amending the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The revisions intend to reflect the intentions of the Internal Revenue Service Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998. Specifically, the bill focuses on giving the National Taxpayer Advocate authority to appoint legal counsel who would report directly to them. This move is designed to enhance the capabilities of the Office of the Taxpayer Advocate by allowing access to specialized legal advice and expertise.
Significant Issues
One of the main concerns with this legislation is that it centralizes the authority to appoint counsel within the Office of the Taxpayer Advocate. This change might lead to worries about the lack of oversight and checks and balances in the hiring process. Without a framework for accountability, there's a possibility of bias or favoritism in selecting legal advisers.
Another point of discussion is the complexity of the bill's language. Its legal jargon and intricate legislative references can make it challenging for individuals without a legal background to grasp its precise implications. This complexity can undermine transparency and obstruct public understanding.
Moreover, the necessity and impact of this legislative amendment are not immediately apparent from the text. The lack of clarity might contribute to skepticism about the bill's potential effectiveness or relevance. Stakeholders may question whether this change significantly enhances the functioning of the Taxpayer Advocate's Office.
Potential Public Impact
Generally, the broad impact on the public might be relatively muted. The bill pertains to internal processes within the Office of the Taxpayer Advocate rather than direct taxpayer interactions. However, by potentially improving the quality of advocacy and advice within this office, the bill could indirectly affect taxpayers through more robust representation and policy recommendations made by the Advocate's Office.
Stakeholder Impact
Positive Aspects
For the Office of the Taxpayer Advocate, this amendment could provide substantial benefits. By having the authority to hire legal counsel directly, the Advocate can ensure they have the necessary legal expertise to effectively navigate complex tax issues and advocate for taxpayers' needs. This capability might enhance the office's effectiveness and responsiveness.
Negative Aspects
Conversely, stakeholders concerned with governmental accountability might view this centralization of power with apprehension. The absence of explicit criteria for appointing legal counsel might lead to perceptions or occurrences of favoritism, diminishing trust in the Advocate's Office. Additionally, if the process of appointing counsel appears opaque or biased, it could diminish confidence in the office's impartiality and fairness.
In summary, while this bill aims to streamline and bolster the efficiency of the National Taxpayer Advocate's Office, it raises important questions about accountability, transparency, and the broader significance of the amendments. Balancing these aspects would be crucial for enhancing both functionality and trust in this pivotal office.
Issues
The amendment in Section 2 allows the National Taxpayer Advocate to appoint counsel, which may centralize power without further oversight. This could lead to concerns about lack of checks and balances in the selection of counsel, potentially affecting the neutrality of the Office of the Taxpayer Advocate.
The language used in Section 2 is described as complex and difficult to understand by those not familiar with legal or legislative jargon. This could create barriers to public understanding and transparency about the changes and their implications.
The amendment as stated in Section 2 does not specify criteria for appointing counsel, which may raise concerns about favoritism or bias in the selection process, although this is noted as a standard practice in some contexts.
The necessity or impacts of the changes introduced in Section 2 are not immediately clear, potentially causing confusion or skepticism regarding the effectiveness or purpose of the amendment among stakeholders or the public.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the bill specifies that the official short title of the legislation is the “National Taxpayer Advocate Enhancement Act of 2025.”
2. Authority of Taxpayer Advocate to appoint counsel Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The proposed changes to the Internal Revenue Code allow the Taxpayer Advocate to hire lawyers who will directly report to them. It also updates previous language to reflect this change and states that the amendments will be applied as if they were enacted in 1998.