I sense a collective sigh of relief this tax season.
After the chaos of recent years at the IRS, there was less drama for taxpayers filing their 2023 returns.
The agency has largely worked through its massive backlog of tax returns and increased the odds of someone answering the phone on the customer service line. It’s also gotten a significant boost in funding.
“Despair has turned to cautious optimism,” National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins wrote this year in her report to Congress.
With IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel marking his first anniversary as head of the agency,we sat down for a chat about Direct File, audits and an agency in recovery.
Werfel is the 50th IRS commissioner and seems passionate about improving an agency that, before his appointment, was a hot mess.
Here are some of the issues I discussed with Werfel. (Some answers have been edited for brevity and clarity.)
Background: The discretionary budget for fiscal 2024 is $12.3 billion. For fiscal 2025, it’s also $12.3 billion, including “an additional $104.3 billion in mandatory funding for fiscal years 2026 through 2034 to allow the agency to continue strengthening its taxpayer services, technology and enforcement after other funds have been exhausted,” the IRS said.
It’s hard for Americans to understand how the IRS can’t manage with a budget in the billions. Why do you think the agency needs more money?
It’s definitely not enough money. The analogy I always use is like the train system. How much money does it take to run the train system so that all the trains are kept up to date, so that they work, they’re fixed, they’re on schedule, they’re paying employees, and doing safety checks?
The bigger the train system, the more money you need, the more people you need, the more trains you need, and the more repairs you need.
Our budget is essentially the same as it’s been since around 2011, 2012 and 2013. The same base budget. Think about how different the tax system is today versus [how] it was back then.
Racial disparity in audits of Black taxpayers
Background: Black taxpayers are three to five times as likely to be audited as other taxpayers, according to a report released last year by researchers from Stanford University, the University of Michigan, the University of Chicago and the Treasury Department. Researchers found the cause wasn’t overt racism, but rather computer algorithms the IRS uses to spot-check for fraud on returns claiming the Earned Income Tax Credit, which is designed to help individuals and families whose incomes fall below certain thresholds.
Thereport came out just as Werfel was preparing for his confirmation. In May 2023, shortly after starting the job, he submitted a letter to the Senate Finance Committee stating that “our initial findings support the conclusion that taxpayers may be audited at higher rates than would be expected given their share of the population.”
What’s the update in ensuring Black taxpayers aren’t being audited more than the average taxpayer?
When I saw that study, I almost felt like a sense of desperation. I wanted to get there to fix it. One of the first things we had to do was acknowledge [the problem]. This study is legitimate. The IRS has a significant problem with its approach to audits . . . where these audits are having a disparate impact on Black taxpayers.
But acknowledgment wasn’t nearly enough. The first order of business was to dramatically reduce the number of audits. Second is to change the underlying math or algorithm that leads to the case selections. We identified the critical changes to the algorithm that will eliminate the disparity. But now we have to test it. Now it’s a monitoring process.
The goal is to issue a report before the end of the calendar year. [The report] is going to basically say that we’ve taken specific interventions to address the disparity.
Background: The Inflation Reduction Act provided funding for a pilot program that allows taxpayers to directly file their returns with the agency. The pilot is only available to thosewith simple tax situations in 12 states: Arizona, California, Florida, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Washington and Wyoming.
So far, about 60,000 taxpayers have used Direct File. And since its debut in January, taxpayers have claimed more than $30 million in refunds, saving millions in estimated filing fees, according to the IRS.
Are you happy with how Direct File is doing?
I’m very happy with where Direct File is. The product is working, and we are getting positive feedback on it.
Taxpayers are reporting to us that it is easy and that it is reliable. If there is a handoff with the state with income taxes, the handoff is going well. Our state partner solutions are working effectively.
We’ll make a decision, later in the spring, around the future of Direct File and consulting with [Treasury] Secretary [Janet L.] Yellen. If we get to a point of going forward, we would certainly want to expand the number of states.
Homer Simpson and the IRS
Background: The IRS collects about $4.7 trillion in gross revenue and generates about 96 percent of the funding that supports the federal government’s operations.
In a speech at American University earlier this year, Werfel joked, “Why does Homer Simpson not like us?”
He was referring to the iconic character on “The Simpsons” who, during a trip to D.C., booed the IRS.
What do you hope to do with this agency in the time that you are here?
Our goal is not popularity. The goal is to do our jobs most effectively, because we play such a critical role.
I use the analogy of the NFL referee. The referees are going to get booed if they get the call right. They are going to get booed if they get the call wrong.
[At the IRS], we’re going to do instant replay and minimize the number of times we get the call wrong.But we are still going to get booed, and that’s just part of the job.
We have to recognize that it’s in the brochure that the tax collector is not a jobthat is popular. But I want the American people to see us as having a North Star of trying to get better and better at our job so that the game is as fair as possible.
The Trump administration paused its plan to garnish Social Security benefits for those who have defaulted on their student loans — but says borrowers’ paychecks are still at risk.
“Wage garnishment will begin later this summer,” Ellen Keast, a U.S. Department of Education spokesperson, told CNBC.
Since the Covid pandemic began in March 2020,collection activity on federal student loans had mostly been on hold. The Biden administration focused on extending relief measures to struggling borrowers in the wake of the public health crisis and helping them to get current.
The Trump administration’s move to resume collection efforts and garnish wages of those behind on their student loans is a sharp turn away from that strategy. Officials have said that taxpayers shouldn’t be on the hook when people don’t repay their education debt.
“Borrowers should pay back the debts they take on,” said U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon in a video posted on X on April 22.
Here’s what borrowers need to know about the Education Department’s current collection plans.
Social Security benefits are safe, for now
Keast said on Monday that the administration was delaying its plan to offset Social Security benefits for borrowers with a defaulted student loan.
Some older borrowers who were bracing for a reduced benefit check as early as Tuesday.
The Education Department previously said Social Security benefits could be garnished starting in June. Depending on details like their birth date and when they began receiving benefits, a recipient’s monthly Social Security check may arrive June 3, 11, 18 or 25 this year, according to the Social Security Administration.
More than 450,000 federal student loan borrowers age 62 and older are in default on their federal student loans and likely to be receiving Social Security benefits, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
“The Trump Administration is committed to protecting Social Security recipients who oftentimes rely on a fixed income,” said Keast.
Wages are still at risk
The Education Dept. says defaulted student loan borrowers could see their wages garnished later this summer.
The agency can garnish up to 15% of your disposable, or after-tax, pay, said higher education expert Mark Kantrowitz. By law, you must be left with at least 30 times the federal minimum hourly wage ($7.25) a week, which is $217.50, Kantrowitz said.
Borrowers in default will receive a 30-day notice before their wages are garnished, a spokesperson for the Education Department previously told CNBC.
During that period, you should have the option to have a hearing before an administrative law judge, Kantrowitz said. The Education Department notice is supposed to include information on how you request that, he said.
Your wages may be protected if you’ve recently been unemployed, or if you’ve recently filed for bankruptcy, Kantrowitz said.
Borrowers can also challenge the wage garnishment if it will result in financial hardship, he added.
The U.S. Department of Education is seen on March 20, 2025 in Washington, DC. U.S. President Donald Trump is preparing to sign an executive order to abolish the Department of Education.
Win Mcnamee | Getty Images News | Getty Images
The U.S. Department of Education is pausing its plan to garnish people’s Social Security benefits if they have defaulted on their student loans, a spokesperson for the agency tells CNBC.
“The Trump Administration is committed to protecting Social Security recipients who oftentimes rely on a fixed income,” said Ellen Keast, an Education Department spokesperson.
The development is an abrupt change in policy by the administration.
The Trump administration announced on April 21 that it would resume collection activity on the country’s $1.6 trillion student loan portfolio. For nearly half a decade, the government did not go after those who’d fallen behind as part of Covid-era policies.
The federal government has extraordinary collection powers on its student loans and it can seize borrowers’ tax refunds, paychecks and Social Security retirement and disability benefits. Social Security recipients can see their checks reduced by up to 15% to pay back their defaulted student loan.
More than 450,000 federal student loan borrowers age 62 and older are in default on their federal student loans and likely to be receiving Social Security benefits, according to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
This is breaking news. Please refresh for updates.
The massive package of tax cuts House Republicans passed in May is expected to increase the U.S. debt by trillions of dollars — a sum that threatens to torpedo the legislation as the Senate starts to consider it this week.
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimates the bill, as written, would add about $3.1 trillion to the national debt over a decade with interest, to a total $53 trillion. The Penn Wharton Budget Model estimates a higher tally: $3.8 trillion, including interest and economic effects.
Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky was one of two Republicans to vote against the House measure, calling it a “debt bomb ticking” and noting that it “dramatically increases deficits in the near term.”
“Congress can do funny math — fantasy math — if it wants,” Massie said on the House floor on May 22. “But bond investors don’t.”
A handful of Republican Senators have also voiced concern about the bill’s potential addition to the U.S. debt load and other aspects of the legislation.
“The math doesn’t really add up,” Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, said Sunday on CBS.
The legislation comes as interest payments on U.S. debt have surpassed national spending on defense and represent the second-largest outlay behind Social Security. Federal debt as a percentage of gross domestic product, a measure of U.S. economic output, is already at an all-time high.
The notion of rising national debt may seem unimportant for the average person, but it can have a significant impact on household finances, economists said.
“I don’t think most consumers think about it at all,” said Tim Quinlan, senior economist at Wells Fargo Economics. “They think, ‘It doesn’t really impact me.’ But I think the truth is, it absolutely does.”
Consumer loans would be ‘a lot more’ expensive
A much higher U.S. debt burden would likely cause consumers to “pay a lot more” to finance homes, cars and other common purchases, said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s.
“That’s the key link back to us as consumers, businesspeople and investors: The prospect that all this borrowing, the rising debt load, mean higher interest rates,” he said.
The House legislation cuts taxes for households by about $4 trillion, most of which accrue for the wealthy. The bill offsets some of those tax cuts by slashing spending for safety-net programs like Medicaid and food assistance for lower earners.
Some Republicans and White House officials argue President Trump’s tariff policies would offset a big chunk of the tax cuts.
But economists say tariffs are an unreliable revenue generator — because a future president can undo them, and courts may take them off the books.
How rising debt impacts Treasury yields
U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) speaks to the media after the House narrowly passed a bill forwarding President Donald Trump’s agenda at the U.S. Capitol on May 22, 2025.
Kevin Dietsch | Getty Images News | Getty Images
Ultimately, higher interest rates for consumers ties to perceptions of U.S. debt loads and their effect on U.S. Treasury bonds.
Common forms of consumer borrowing like mortgages and auto loans are priced based on yields for U.S. Treasury bonds, particularly the 10-year Treasury.
Yields (i.e., interest rates) for long-term Treasury bonds are largely dictated by market forces. They rise and fall based on supply and demand from investors.
The U.S. relies on Treasury bonds to fund its operations. The government must borrow, since it doesn’t take in enough annual tax revenue to pay its bills, what’s known as an annual “budget deficit.” It pays back Treasury investors with interest.
If the Republican bill — called the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” — were to raise the U.S. debt and deficit by trillions of dollars, it would likely spook investors and Treasury demand may fall, economists said.
Investors would likely demand a higher interest rate to compensate for the additional risk that the U.S. government may not pay its debt obligations in a timely way down the road, economists said.
Interest rates priced to the 10-year Treasury “also have to go up because of the higher risk being taken,” said Philip Chao, chief investment officer and certified financial planner at Experiential Wealth based in Cabin John, Maryland.
Moody’s cut the U.S.’ sovereign credit rating in May, citing the increasing burden of the federal budget deficit and signaling a bigger credit risk for investors. Bond yields spiked on the news.
How debt may impact consumer borrowing
Zandi cited a general rule of thumb to illustrate what a higher debt burden could mean for consumers: The 10-year Treasury yield rises about 0.02 percentage points for each 1-point increase in the debt-to-GDP ratio, he said.
For example, if the ratio were to rise from 100% (roughly where it is now) to 130%, the 10-year Treasury yield would increase about 0.6 percentage points, Zandi said. That would push the yield to more than 5% relative to current levels of around 4.5%, he said.
“It’s a big deal,” Zandi said.
A fixed 30-year mortgage would rise from almost 7% to roughly 7.6%, all else equal — likely putting homeownership further “out of reach,” especially for many potential first-time buyers, he said.
The debt-to-GDP ratio would swell from about 101% at the end of 2025 to an estimated 148% through 2034 under the as-written House legislation, said Kent Smetters, an economist and faculty director for the Penn Wharton Budget Model.
Bond investors get hit, too
It’s not just consumer borrowers: Certain investors would also stand to lose, experts said.
When Treasury yields rise, prices fall for current bondholders. Their current Treasury bonds become less valuable, weighing on investment portfolios.
“If the market interest rate has gone up, your bond has depreciated,” Chao said. “Your net worth has gone down.”
The market for long-term Treasury bonds has been more volatile amid investor jitters, leading some experts to recommend shorter-term bonds.
On the flip side, those buying new bonds may be happy because they can earn a higher rate, he said.
‘Pouring gasoline on the fire’
The cost of consumer financing has already roughly doubled in recent years, said Quinlan of Wells Fargo.
The average 10-year Treasury yield was about 2.1% from 2012 to 2022; it has been about 4.1% from 2023 to the present, he said.
Of course, the U.S. debt burden is just one of many things that influence Treasury investors and yields, Quinlan said. For example, Treasury investors sent yields sharply higher as they rushed for the exits after Trump announced a spate of country-specific tariffs in April, as they questioned the safe-haven status of U.S. assets.
“But it’s not going out on too much of a limb to suggest financial markets the last couple years have grown increasingly concerned about debt levels,” Quinlan said.
Absent action, the U.S. debt burden would still rise, economists said. The debt-to-GDP ratio would swell to 138% even if Republicans don’t pass any legislation, Smetters said.
But the House legislation would be “pouring gasoline on the fire,” said Chao.
“It’s adding to the problems we already have,” Chao said. “And this is why the bond market is not happy with it,” he added.