Individual Opposes PTIN User Fee, Use of Third-Party Processor
Individual Opposes PTIN User Fee, Use of Third-Party Processor
- Code Sections
- Subject Area/Tax Topics
- Jurisdictions
- Tax Analysts Document Number2020-19468
- Tax Analysts Electronic Citation2020 TNTF 99-28
Submitter Information
Submitter Name: Anonymous Anonymous
Docket ID: IRS-2020-0005
Document Type: Public Submission
Document Subtype: Public Comment
Status: Posted
Received Date: May 15, 2020
Comment
I wish to respond to the PTIN user fee. I think the PTIN is good for preparers to have on a tax return. However, I do not like to pay a fee for this. There are still untrained and non law abiding preparers who get away with no PTIN by just putting self prepared on returns they prepare and they do get paid, so paying a fee to have a PTIN isn't solving anything with these types of preparers.
I really do not like the idea of a 3rd party processor. They have given you an excessive bid and you need to ask for a lower rate. Also with all the scams that preparers are subject to, why give our contact info out to another group of people. Maybe the IRS could develop a way to renew PTIN within their own e-services account system or even on the IRS site with PTIN section. No 3rd party processor is needed.
I have taken CPE for over 35 years to stay current with tax issues. I have had a PTIN for over 20 years. I do not think the PTIN fee has made any difference in how I handle my tax office other than cost me money for the years. And it surely hasn't done anything to stop bad preparers.
Last year, I took the EA test and passed it. I was tired of all the hassles of the AFSP and RTRP issues. The PTIN fees are almost as bad as those other regulating or non regulating ideas.
Further more during this COVID-19 pandemic, asking for PTIN fees now is rather crazy.
- Code Sections
- Subject Area/Tax Topics
- Jurisdictions
- Tax Analysts Document Number2020-19468
- Tax Analysts Electronic Citation2020 TNTF 99-28