Connect with us

Accounting

House passes bills on IRS penalties and Tax Court

Published

8 months ago

on

The House of Representatives approved two pieces of legislation this week to ensure Internal Revenue Service agents aren’t levying fines and penalties on taxpayers without supervisory approval, and to strengthen taxpayer rights in judicial proceedings before the U.S. Tax Court.

The first bill, known as the Fair and Accountable IRS Reviews (FAIR) Act (H.R. 5346), introduced by Rep. Glenn Grothman, R-Wisconsin, would clarify that supervisory approval of a penalty would be considered to be timely only if the person who proposed the penalty obtained approval in writing prior to any written communication to a taxpayer with respect to the penalty. 

Currently, an IRS agent’s immediate supervisor provides a signature of approval for the initial determination of a tax penalty. However, an IRS rule under the Biden administration weakened taxpayer protections by allowing IRS agents to shop around for sympathetic supervisors, enabling IRS agents to get approval to apply tax penalties on taxpayers from virtually any other employee. Under the bill, written approval of the penalty must be provided by the immediate supervisor of the person proposing the penalty or another higher supervisory person that the Treasury Secretary may identify. The bill defines the immediate supervisor as the person to whom the individual making the determination reports. 

“For decades, federal laws required that before the IRS can impose penalties on a taxpayer, an agent must first receive written approval from that agent’s immediate supervisor,” said Grothman during the debate Monday. “Congress put this safeguard in place to ensure that penalties are imposed fairly, consistently and with appropriate oversight.”

Grothman continued: “A supervisor’s signature helps prevent the use of penalties as a pressure tactic and creates a transparent record that benefits both taxpayers and the government in collection and appeals proceedings. In recent years, unfortunately, a regulatory interpretation complicated the intent of this longstanding statute. Instead of adhering to the clear requirement that an agent’s immediate supervisor must approve a penalty at the time of the initial determination, supervisory appeal could be obtained at any point in the process and the term ‘immediate supervisor’ was broadened beyond Congress’ original intent. As a result, an agent could propose a penalty without prior review and later seek approval from a wide range of individuals, weakening the transparency and accountability that the law was designed to ensure. The Fair and Accountable IRS Reviews Act restores clarity. It reaffirms that an IRS agent’s actual immediate supervisor must provide written approval at the initial determination of a penalty, ensuring proper oversight from the start. This simple clarification strengthens the taxpayer protections and promotes a consistent and reliable penalty process.”

He thanked House Ways and Means Committee chairman Jason Smith, R-Missouri, for getting it passed on a bipartisan basis from the committee before it was passed by the House.

“American taxpayers should not be at the mercy of rogue IRS agents who are handing out fines without reasonable due process,” said Smith during the debate. “At the very least, agents ought to have actual prior approval before issuing a penalty and should not be allowed to go around looking for a sympathetic employee to grant them that approval.”

The bill has been endorsed by groups such as Americans for Tax Reform, the National Federation of Independent Business, the National Taxpayers Union, the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council and the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.

Tax Court Improvement Act

The other bill passed by the House, the Tax Court Improvement Act (H.R. 5349), authorizes the Tax Court to sign subpoenas to produce books, papers, documents, electronically stored information or tangible items for purposes of discovery or evidence, prior to a hearing. The bill would also ensure Tax Court judges are held to the same standards for disqualification as other federal judges. The bill would also clarify that the Tax Court has jurisdiction to extend a taxpayer’s deadline where timely filing was impossible or impractical. The bill has been endorsed by the National Taxpayers Union, the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council and the Taxpayers Protection Alliance.

“This bill strengthens taxpayer rights during judicial proceedings before the U.S. Tax Court,” said Smith during the floor debate Monday. “The court will be able to more expeditiously resolve cases as the legislation enhances the efficiency of its judicial review to the benefit of the taxpayer. This will increase the court’s productivity, and Tax Court judges will also be held to the same disqualification standards as other judges. Finally, the court will now have the ability to extend taxpayer deadlines where timely filing is impractical. The U.S. Tax Court is the only venue where taxpayers can dispute a tax estimate without first paying that tax. Taxpayers must stand on equal footing when going toe-to-toe with the IRS. Without the guarantee of rights, taxpayers are put in a situation where the IRS is essentially saying: Heads, I win. Tails, you lose.”

The bipartisan bill was introduced by Reps. Terri Sewell, D-Alabama, and Nathaniel Moran, R-Texas. 

“The Tax Court has a very important impact on everyday Americans,” said Sewell. “It provides individuals and businesses with an opportunity to be heard in court to challenge the Internal Revenue Service before paying a disputed tax. Our committee is always looking for ways to make the Tax Court more efficient and fairer for the taxpayer, and that is why we are here today.  The Tax Court Improvement Act will strengthen Tax Court procedures and practices by making four commonsense reforms. The act will accelerate the collection of documents, expand the types of cases assigned to special trial judges, hold Tax Court judges to the same recusal standards as other federal judges, and allow the deadline for petitions to be extended in certain circumstances.”

She predicted the improvements to the Tax Court in the bill would have a tangible impact on thousands of taxpayers, and would raise $6 million over the next 10 years.

“For too long, the Tax Court has operated under preexisting rules that do not mirror many of the well-established procedures for other courts and rules that are antiquated in their application,” said Moran. “In short, changes need to be made so that the Tax Court process works better for the people that it serves. When a system is slow or confusing, the burden falls on taxpayers, often at moments when they are already under stress. This bill provides practical updates that help the court do its job more effectively, and it helps taxpayers find resolution more easily and quickly.”

Both bills have been sent to the Senate Finance Committee for further action.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Accounting

Global ESG Reporting Standards and Double Materiality Compliance

Published

5 days ago

on

August 9, 2026

By

Corporate accounting departments face expanding reporting expectations as international sustainability disclosure standards achieve regulatory enforcement across major global jurisdictions. Chief Accounting Officers (CAOs) and corporate controllers are establishing rigorous internal accounting controls to treat Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics with the same data precision, auditability, and governance as traditional financial statements.

Regulatory Harmonization Under Global Sustainability Frameworks
The implementation of standardized sustainability reporting frameworks—notably rules established by international sustainability accounting boards—has created unified expectations for public and large private enterprises. Corporations must report standardized metrics covering greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1, 2, and material Scope 3), energy utilization, workforce demographics, and supply chain governance.

In Europe and other participating international jurisdictions, double materiality principles are mandatory. Under double materiality, organizations must report both how external sustainability risks impact corporate financial performance, and how internal corporate operations affect surrounding environmental and social structures.

Integrating Sustainability Metrics into Core ERP Systems
To provide auditable non-financial data, enterprise organizations are integrating specialized carbon accounting and ESG management platforms directly into core ERP systems. Automated data collectors capture energy utility invoices, logistics fuel consumption metrics, and vendor compliance records in real time.

Establishing automated, traceable data pipelines ensures that non-financial reporting is supported by clear audit trails. This structured approach allows external financial auditors to provide reasonable assurance on sustainability disclosures during annual corporate reporting cycles.

Financial Impacts and Capital Market Disclosure
Accurate ESG reporting directly influences corporate cost of capital and institutional credit ratings. Commercial lenders and institutional asset managers systematically incorporate sustainability metrics into risk pricing models. Companies that demonstrate transparent, verifiable progress in operational energy efficiency and climate risk mitigation benefit from expanded access to green bond markets and lower debt pricing.

Action Steps for Accounting Leadership
1. Implement Double Materiality Frameworks: Conduct comprehensive assessments to identify material financial and operational sustainability metrics.
2. Build Auditable Non-Financial Data Pipelines: Automate ESG data collection within core accounting software to ensure data integrity.
3. Align Sustainability with Annual Financial Filings: Prepare non-financial disclosures concurrently with financial statements to satisfy regulatory audit expectations.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Modernizing Internal Controls: Machine Learning and Continuous Monitoring in Auditing

Published

1 week ago

on

August 5, 2026

By

Internal audit departments and corporate risk managers are modernizing internal control frameworks by shifting from periodic sampling techniques to continuous monitoring and machine learning analytics. As operational data volumes increase across enterprise organizations, automated control testing ensures financial integrity, prevents corporate fraud, and streamlines annual audit engagements.

The Limitation of Periodic Audit Sampling
Historically, internal and external auditors evaluated internal controls by reviewing random samples of financial transactions—often analyzing less than five percent of total ledger entries. In complex enterprise environments, periodic sampling methods carry inherent risks of overlooking localized financial misstatements, unauthorized disbursements, or operational control breakdowns.

In 2026, progressive internal audit functions are utilizing automated continuous monitoring platforms that evaluate one hundred percent of financial transactions in real time. Continuous control auditing systems continuously monitor general ledger entries, procurement approvals, and expense reimbursements across all operating subsidiaries.

AI-Powered Fraud Detection and Anomaly Identification
Machine learning models trained on historical corporate financial data excel at identifying subtle transactional anomalies that indicate potential fraud or operational error. Automated systems instantly flag duplicate invoice payments, unapproved vendor creation, unusual journal entry timing, and unauthorized override of authority thresholds.

When an anomaly is detected, the automated auditing platform generates an instant risk alert, allowing internal audit teams to investigate root causes immediately. Early detection prevents minor operational errors from escalating into material weaknesses in financial reporting.

Streamlining External Audit Preparation
Continuous internal control monitoring delivers significant benefits during annual external financial audits. External audit firms can review continuous audit logs and automated control testing documentation, reducing the time required for manual field testing.

This integrated approach lowers overall audit compliance fees, reduces administrative burdens on corporate accounting staff, and provides senior management and audit committees with real-time visibility into the organization’s overall risk profile.

Core Implementation Guidelines
1. Transition to 100% Data Testing: Replace legacy sampling methods with automated continuous audit monitoring systems.
2. Deploy Anomaly Detection Algorithms: Implement machine learning models to identify unauthorized transactions and operational control overrides.
3. Align Internal and External Audit Workflows: Coordinate continuous control testing protocols with external auditors to optimize annual compliance cycles.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Automated Tax Compliance and Global Regulatory Harmonization in 2026

Published

1 week ago

on

August 5, 2026

By

Corporate tax accounting departments are navigating an era of unprecedented regulatory complexity as global tax harmonization frameworks take full effect alongside real-time digital tax reporting mandates. Tax directors and accounting teams are adopting cloud-based tax compliance automation tools to manage multi-jurisdictional tax liabilities and satisfy stringent reporting rules across international jurisdictions.

Implementation of Global Minimum Tax Provisions
The implementation of international tax reform agreements—notably the Pillar Two global minimum tax framework—has reshaped multinational corporate tax planning. Multinational enterprises with consolidated revenues exceeding established thresholds must ensure an effective tax rate of at least 15% across every jurisdiction in which they operate.

Accounting teams are implementing specialized tax calculation modules integrated directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms. These automated tools calculate effective tax rates per country, identify top-up tax liabilities, and generate standardized compliance documentation required by national tax authorities.

Real-Time Digital Invoicing and E-Reporting Mandates
Tax authorities across Europe, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific have enacted mandatory electronic invoicing (e-invoicing) and continuous transaction controls (CTC). Under these systems, corporate transaction data must be submitted electronically to government portals in real time at the point of sale or invoice issuance.

This shift toward continuous digital tax reporting eliminates traditional annual tax audits in favor of ongoing automated compliance monitoring. Accounting departments are upgrading invoicing software to ensure seamless XML data formatting, digital signature authentication, and real-time validation against tax authority databases.

Automation and Data Analytics in Corporate Tax Strategy
To keep pace with dynamic tax legislation, tax departments are transitioning from reactive compliance teams to proactive strategic advisors. Machine learning algorithms analyze corporate transactional data to identify tax credits, research and development (R&D) incentives, and cross-border transfer pricing adjustments.

By automating routine tax return filings and calculations, corporate tax directors can focus on long-term capital structuring, evaluating the tax implications of corporate mergers, and optimizing international supply chain networks.

Strategic Priorities for Tax Executives
1. ERP System Upgrades: Ensure enterprise software is capable of generating real-time, granular tax data required for global minimum tax compliance.
2. E-Invoicing Integration: Implement scalable e-invoicing platforms to satisfy regional continuous transaction control regulations.
3. Strategic Tax Analytics: Utilize predictive tax modeling tools to evaluate structural changes in corporate operations and cross-border trade.

Continue Reading

Trending