Steele v. United States
Decision Date | 01 June 2017 |
Docket Number | Case No: 14–cv–1523–RCL |
Citation | 260 F.Supp.3d 52 |
Parties | Adam STEELE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia |
Allen Buckley, Pro Hac Vice, Law Offices of Allen Buckley, Atlanta, GA, Christopher S. Rizek, Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered, Elizabeth S. Smith, Nathan David Finch, Motley Rice, LLC, Deepak Gupta, Gupta Wessler PLLC, Washington, DC, William H. Narwold, Pro Hac Vice, Hartford, CT, Meghan S.B. Oliver, Pro Hac VIce, Motley Rice, LLC, Mt. Pleasant, SC, for Plaintiffs.
Christopher James Williamson, Vassiliki Eliza Economides, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant.
Plaintiffs bring this class action against the United States to challenge regulations promulgated by the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service requiring tax return preparers to obtain and pay fees for preparer tax identification numbers (PTINs). Both parties have moved for partial summary judgment on the first issue raised in plaintiffs' lawsuit: whether Treasury and the IRS have the authority to require that all tax return preparers obtain and pay for a PTIN.1 For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that although the IRS has the authority to require the use of PTINs, it does not have the authority to charge fees for issuing PTINs. The Court will grant in part and deny in part both parties' summary judgment motions.
This case revolves around a group of 2010–2011 regulations promulgated by the Treasury Department and the IRS regarding tax return preparers. As explained fully below, the regulations imposed certain requirements for becoming a tax return preparer, including obtaining a specific PTIN and paying a user fee for obtaining such PTIN. Plaintiffs argue that the government lacks legal authority to require PTINs and PTIN fees, and alternatively, that the fee imposed is excessive and impermissible. They seek a declaratory judgment that Treasury and the IRS lack legal authority to charge these fees or that the fees charged are excessive, and for the return or refund of all fees previously collected or for the return and refund of the excessive fees. In 2016, this Court certified the proposed class of "all individuals and entities who have paid an initial and/or renewal fee for a PTIN, excluding Allen Buckley, Allen Buckley LLC, and Christopher Rizek." See Steele v. United States, 159 F.Supp.3d 73, 88 (D.D.C. 2016) ; Steele v. United States, 200 F.Supp.3d 217, 227 (D.D.C. 2016).
Each year, every American is required to submit a tax return to the IRS. Given the complexity of the tax code, it is unsurprising that many people hire others—tax return preparers—to prepare their returns for them. Some tax return preparers have credentials, such as CPAs and attorneys, but others are known as uncredentialed tax return preparers. Before 2010, anyone could file a tax return on behalf of someone else, credentialed or not. In 2010, however, the IRS, attempting to regulate both credentialed and uncredentialed tax return preparers, promulgated new regulations. The regulations established a new "registered tax return preparer" designation, requiring individuals other than attorneys and CPAs to: "(1) [p]ass a one-time competency exam, (2) pass a suitability check, and (3) obtain a PTIN (and pay the amount provided in the PTIN User Fee regulations)." Regulations Governing Practice Before the Internal Revenue Service, 76 Fed. Reg. 32286, 32287 (June 11, 2011) ; 26 C.F.R. § 301.7701–15 (defining "tax return preparer"); 31 C.F.R. § 10.4(c) ( ); 31 C.F.R. § 10.3(f) ( ); 31 C.F.R. § 10.5(b) ( ); 26 C.F.R. § 1.6109–2(d) (). The regulations also imposed renewal and continuing education requirements. Regulations Governing Practice Before the Internal Revenue Service, 76 Fed. Reg. at 32287 ; 31 C.F.R. § 10.6. As statutory authority for these regulations, the IRS relied on a provision of the U.S. Code which states that the Secretary of the Treasury may "(1) regulate the practice of representatives of persons before the Department of the Treasury; and (2) before admitting a representative to practice, require that the representative demonstrate—(A) good character; (B) good reputation; (C) necessary qualifications to enable the representative to provide to persons valuable service; and (D) competency to advise and assist persons in presenting their cases." 31 U.S.C. § 330(a).
Regulations Governing Practice Before the Internal Revenue Service, 76 Fed. Reg. at 32294. Thus, "[t]he primary benefit anticipated from these regulations is that they will improve the accuracy, completeness, and timeliness of tax returns prepared by tax return preparers." Id. The IRS later specifically identified two overarching objectives of the new regulations: Furnishing Identifying Number of Tax Return Preparer, 75 Fed. Reg. 60309, 60310 (Sept. 30, 2010).
A statutory provision—in effect prior to the new regulations—requires that "[a]ny return or claim for refund prepared by a tax return preparer shall bear such identifying number for securing proper identification of such preparer, his employer, or both, as may be prescribed." 26 U.S.C. § 6109(a)(4). The statute explains that an individual's social security number "shall, except as shall otherwise be specified under regulations of the Secretary, be used as the identifying number." Id. § 6109(d). The regulations, however, required, for the first time, that "tax return preparers must obtain and exclusively use the [PTIN] in forms, instructions, or other guidance, rather than a social security number (SSN), as the identifying number to be included with the tax return preparer's signature on a tax return or claim for refund." Furnishing Identifying Number of Tax Return Preparer, 75 Fed. Reg. at 60309 ; 26 C.F.R. § 1.6109–2(d). As justification for the requirement that preparers must obtain and use a PTIN, the IRS repeatedly cited to the need to identify individuals involved in preparing a tax return for others so as to aid their ability to oversee such individuals "and to administer requirements intended to ensure that tax return preparers are competent, trained, and conform to rules of practice." Furnishing Identifying Number of Tax Return Preparer, 75 Fed. Reg. at 60310, 60313. The IRS further explained the need for the exclusive use of PTINs, as opposed to both PTINs and social security numbers, arguing that "[m]andating a single type of identifying number for all tax return preparers and assigning a prescribed identifying number to registered tax return preparers is critical to effective oversight." Id. at 60313. Specifically, "[e]stablishing a single, prescribed identifying number for tax return preparers will enable the IRS to accurately identify tax return preparers, match preparers with the tax returns and claims for refund they prepare, and better administer the tax laws with respect to tax return preparers and their clients." Id. at 60314. The IRS also briefly mentioned that the regulations requiring the use of a PTINs would "help maintain the confidentiality of SSNs." Id. at 60309.
The regulations also imposed a user fee requirement for obtaining a PTIN. See User Fees Relating to Enrollment and Preparer Tax Identification Numbers, 75 Fed. Reg. 60316 (Sept. 30, 2010) ; 26 C.F.R. § 300.13. As authority for requiring these fees, the IRS relied on the Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 ("IOAA"). See User Fees Relating to Enrollment and Preparer Tax Identification Numbers, 75 Fed. Reg. at 60317. The IOAA provides that agencies "may prescribe regulations establishing the charge for a service or thing of value provided by the agency." 31 U.S.C. § 9701(b). The IRS stated that a PTIN is a "service or thing of value" because without a PTIN "a tax return preparer could not receive compensation for preparing all or substantially all of a federal tax return or claim for refund," and "[b]ecause only attorneys, certified public accountants, enrolled agents, and registered tax return preparers are eligible to obtain a PTIN, only a subset of the general public is entitled to a PTIN and the special benefit of receiving compensation for the preparation of a return that it confers." User Fees Relating...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Montrois v. United States, 17-5204
...the PTIN fee charged by the IRS on the ground that the fee violates the Independent Offices Appropriations Act. Steele v. United States , 260 F.Supp.3d 52 (D.D.C. 2017).The court reasoned in part that, for an assessment to qualify as a fee under that Act as opposed to an unauthorized genera......
-
Steele v. United States
...this Court and the Circuit have set out the statutory and regulatory background of this case extensively in prior opinions. See Steele I, 260 F.Supp.3d at 56-58; Montrois, 916 F.3d at 1058-60; Steele v. States if Steele IIP), No. 14-cv-1523-RCL, 2020 WL 7123100, at *1-2 (D.D.C. Dec. 4, 2020......
-
Steele v. United States
...legally require the exclusive use of PTINs (as opposed to social security numbers) under 26 U.S.C. § 6109(d).3 Steele v. United States, 260 F. Supp. 3d 52, 62-63 (D.D.C. 2017). The Court then held that the IOAA does not authorize the IRS to charge a fee for issuing PTINs. Id. at 63-67. Acco......
-
A monthly roundup of recent important tax developments affecting practitioners.
...in 2017 that the Service was not authorized to charge a fee for PTINs and issued an injunction to bar it from doing so (see Steele, 260 F. Supp. 3d 52 (D.D.C. A valid PTIN must be obtained by anyone who prepares or assists in preparing a federal tax return for compensation. The PTIN system ......
-
A monthly roundup of recent important tax developments affecting practitioners.
...held in 2017 that the IRS was not authorized to charge a fee for PTINs and issued an injunction to bar it from doing so (see Steele, 260 F. Supp. 3d 52 A valid PTIN must be obtained by anyone who prepares or substantially helps prepare a federal tax return or claim for refund for compensati......