Connect with us

Accounting

IRS reported call wait times far shorter than taxpayer experienced

Published

on

Millions of taxpayers are unable to get through to live help through the Internal Revenue Service’s toll-free phone lines, even when the IRS claims its average wait times are only about three minutes, according to a new report.

The report, from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, assessed the IRS’s efforts to improve toll-free telephone access and reduce taxpayers’ wait times when calling for assistance. TIGTA noted that every year, millions of taxpayers seek assistance from the IRS via its toll-free and international telephone lines. The IRS offers services such as answering federal tax questions, ordering tax forms, providing taxpayers with pre-recorded messages related to various tax topics, information on the status of their refunds, and information about a letter or notice they received. However, millions of taxpayers are still unable to obtain assistance from the IRS on the telephone due to various reasons such as technical difficulties, busy telephone lines, etc. 

TIGTA noted that the IRS tracks and widely reports two customer service performance measures related to its telephone lines: level of service and average wait times. According to the IRS, the LOS measures the ability for a taxpayer to reach a telephone assistor when requested. For the 2024 Filing Season, the IRS reported an LOS of 88 percent and wait times averaging 3 minutes. However, the reported LOS and average wait times only included calls made to 33 Accounts Management telephone lines during the filing season. These AM lines handled approximately two-thirds of all calls answered by IRS assistors. 

The IRS separately tracks an Enterprise LOS, which is a broader measure of the taxpayer experience because it includes 27 telephone lines from other IRS business units in addition to the 33 AM telephone lines. These 27 phone lines handled approximately one-third of all calls answered by IRS telephone assistors. 

In addition, the IRS doesn’t widely report an enterprise-wide wait time, as the reported average wait time computation includes only the 33 AM telephone lines. According to IRS data, the average wait times for the other phone lines were far longer than three minutes, averaging 17 to 19 minutes during the 2024 filing season. 

The Taxpayer Bill of Rights gives taxpayers the right to be informed, which includes the right to know what they need to do to comply with tax laws, TIGTA noted. “Taxpayers also have the right to quality service, which includes the right to receive prompt assistance, and to receive clear and easily understandable communications from the IRS,” said the report. “If a taxpayer sets their expectations for interacting with the IRS based on the reported average wait times and level of service (LOS), when their experience is different, they may grow frustrated and hang up leaving their issue unresolved. Because of high demand for service during the filing season, the IRS temporarily reassigns employees from other job responsibilities to answer calls. This helps improve the average reported wait time and LOS during the filing season. However, similar telephone service measures for the entire fiscal year are not widely reported and varied considerably.” 

For example, the AM LOS ranged from a low of 48% in June 2024 to a high of 92% in January 2024. Similarly, the Enterprise LOS ranged from a low of 45% in June 2024 to a high of 77% in February 2024. 

The IRS is currently developing a new measure that will track the percentage of calls in which the telephone assistor resolves a taxpayer’s issue during the first contact. 

TIGTA recommended the IRS should widely report to the public: (1) both the Enterprise LOS and AM LOS throughout the entire fiscal year; and (2) the average wait times throughout the entire fiscal year for all telephone lines that provide live assistance to taxpayers. The IRS disagreed with both recommendations, stating that the LOS metric does not provide information to determine taxpayer experience when calling, and including wait times for telephone lines outside the main helpline would be confusing to the public. TIGTA, for its part, maintained that whether a taxpayer can reach an assistor is part of the taxpayer experience and providing average wait times across all telephone lines for the entire fiscal year demonstrates transparency.

“We operate one of the world’s busiest call centers,” Kenneth Corbin, chief of the IRS’s Taxpayer Services Division, wrote in response to the report. “In fiscal year 2024, we handled nearly 50 million calls. We manage these demands within a fixed budget while adapting to a range of factors such as time of year, call volume, staffing, tax law changes, weather events and system outages. We continually allocate available resources between answering calls and processing other critical work, such as paper returns. Despite these challenges, the IRS consistently meets or exceeds the Treasury Secretary’s service goals.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Accounting

Global ESG Reporting Standards and Double Materiality Compliance

Published

on

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

on

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

on

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