Connect with us

Accounting

Taxpayer Advocate spotlights IRS delays in ERC claims and ID theft assistance, but sees improvements in IRS

Published

on

National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins released her annual report to Congress Wednesday, highlighting improvements in taxpayer service by the Internal Revenue Service, but pointed to persistent delays in processing Employee Retention Credit claims and helping victims of identity theft.

“For the first time since I became the National Taxpayer Advocate in 2020, I can begin this report with good news: The taxpayer experience has noticeably improved,” Collins wrote. “In 2024, taxpayers and practitioners experienced better service, generally received timely refunds, and faced shorter wait times to reach customer service representatives…. After receiving multiyear funding, the IRS has [also] made major strides toward improving its taxpayer services and information technology (IT) systems.”

However, the IRS faces a budget cut of over $20 billion after Congress passed a continuing resolution to avoid a government shutdown last month repeating language from an earlier continuing resolution that cut the IRS’s budget by a similar amount in 2023. The incoming Trump administration and Republicans in Congress have also been pushing for budget cuts. Trump has named former Rep. Billy Long, R-Missouri, as the next IRS commissioner, even though the current IRS commissioner, Danny Werfel, is supposed to serve until November 2027. Long has advocated for businesses promoting the Employee Retention Credit, but the IRS has slowed down the processing of ERC claims amid rampant instance of fraud. 

In her report, Collins criticized the long wait times for legitimate claims. She noted that as of Oct. 26, 2024, the IRS faced a backlog of about 1.2 million ERC claims, with many claims pending for over a year. While the IRS has valid concerns about paying ineligible claims, the slow processing time is harming many eligible businesses that are relying on these funds to pay expenses, Collins noted. Other concerns include lack of transparency for businesses trying to track the status of their claims; confusing disallowance letters that have omitted critical information; the use of audit-like procedures for disallowed claims without standard taxpayer audit protections; and significant delays for businesses whose refund checks were stolen and have waited months or longer to receive replacement checks. After the National Taxpayer Advocate’s report went to press, Werfel announced in mid-December he expects that approximately 500,000 additional claims will be processed in 2025, but the details and timing of the refunds are still to be determined, Collins noted.

Identity theft victim assistance

The report also pointed to continuing delays in resolving identity theft cases. For cases closed by the IRS’s Identity Theft Victim Assistance unit in fiscal year 2024, the average time it took the IRS to resolve ID cases and issue refunds to the affected victims was nearly two years. The delays affected nearly half a million taxpayers and were even worse than the delays seen in FY 2023, when cases took almost 19 months to resolve. Collins called the delays “unconscionable” and recommended the IRS prioritize identity theft case resolution by keeping all IDTVA employees focused on these cases instead of reassigning them to other tasks during the filing season. She urged the IRS to reduce case resolution times to 90 days or less.

Taxpayer service and tech upgrades

Collins stressed the need for adequate funding to support critical taxpayer services and technology upgrades. She noted that the bulk of the nearly $80 billion in multiyear IRS funding provided by the Inflation Reduction Act was allocated for tax law enforcement and has been controversial. She also notes, however, that there has been bipartisan support for the smaller amounts allocated for taxpayer services and IT modernization. Stressing the importance of taxpayer services funding, she urged Congress, if it cuts IRA enforcement funding, not to make commensurate cuts to taxpayer services and IT. Congress should not, Collins urged, “inadvertently throw out the baby with the bathwater.”

The report pointed to a number of examples of improvements the IRS has made using its multiyear funding. Taxpayer services funding has enabled the IRS to hire more customer service representatives, allowing the agency to answer nearly 9 million more telephone calls than two years earlier and to cut in half the average time needed to process individual taxpayer correspondence from about seven months to about three and a half months. The IRS has also expanded in-person help at its Taxpayer Assistance Centers, adding evening and weekend service in many locations to accommodate taxpayers who are unable to visit during normal business hours.

Business Systems Modernization funding has enabled taxpayers to resolve issues without the involvement of an IRS employee. With these improvements, taxpayers can now get more information and transact more business with the IRS through their online accounts, use voicebots and chatbots to get answers to many of their questions, submit correspondence to the IRS electronically and communicate with the IRS through secure messaging in pending cases. The IRS now allows taxpayers to submit 30 of the most common taxpayer forms from mobile devices, helping the estimated 15% of Americans who rely solely on their smartphones for internet access.

Tax return processing delays

The report noted that continuing delays in IRS return processing are frustrating taxpayers and causing tax refund delays. The IRS receives more than 10 million paper-filed Forms 1040 each year and over 75 million paper-filed returns and forms. Until recently, IRS employees had to manually transcribe the data from those returns into IRS systems. While the IRS has made progress on automating return processing by scanning more than half of paper-filed returns and forms, it still has a long way to go to digitize all paper. E-filed returns are sometimes rejected, and nearly 18 million (about 12%) of e-filed Forms 1040 were rejected in the past year. The IRS generally rejects returns flagged by its fraud detection filters, but most rejected returns are valid, requiring taxpayers to jump through additional hoops to resubmit their returns electronically or submit their returns on paper. The report discusses the strain this puts on taxpayers, especially low-income taxpayers who are eligible for refundable Earned Income Tax Credit benefits. The Taxpayer Advocate Service recommends the IRS continue its efforts to automate tax processing including digitizing nearly all paper-filed returns by the 2026 filing season and enabling electronic processing of amended tax returns.

While taxpayer service has improved across the IRS’s three main channels — telephone, in-person and online — the report found significant service gaps remain. The IRS achieved an 88% “Level of Service” on its Accounts Management lines during the filing season, but this measure excludes calls directed to telephone lines that fall outside the “Accounts Management” umbrella (30% of all calls in FY 2024), calls where a taxpayer hangs up before being placed in a calling queue, and calls made outside the filing season. Overall, the level of service for all toll-free lines in FY 2024 was just 56%, with only 31% of callers reaching an assistor. Of the 6.2 million calls the IRS received from taxpayers whose returns had been stopped by the IRS’s identify theft filters and who were calling to authenticate their identities, the IRS answered only about 20%. This has left millions of taxpayers without the support they need. TAS recommends the IRS adopt more accurate service metrics and prioritize answering non-Accounts Management telephone lines that serve largely vulnerable taxpayer populations. Among these are the Installment Agreement/Balance Due, Taxpayer Protection Program, and Automated Collection System telephone lines.

Werfel response

IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel responded to the report. “The National Taxpayer Advocate’s report recognizes that the IRS has made historic progress over the last two years improving phone, online and in-person services by reducing wait times on toll-free lines, providing enhanced technology and adding new digital tools,” Werfel said in a statement. “These improvements reflect what a well-funded IRS can do to help taxpayers and tax professionals on many issues, including delivering tax refunds quickly to more than 100 million taxpayers.  It’s important to continue that momentum because we recognize the agency’s work isn’t done – not by a longshot. It’s vital that the IRS continue this progress to better serve taxpayers and the nation. The IRS has already made improvements in many of the areas outlined by the Taxpayer Advocate and will continue to do so in 2025. But as the Taxpayer Advocate noted, having sufficient resources is critical to the IRS since so many of our efforts require improving digital options and capabilities while having enough staff to process tax returns, manage correspondence and answer phone calls year-round.”

Employee recruitment challenges

The report pointed to continuing challenges in employee recruitment, hiring, training and retention at the IRS. It noted the IRS faces ongoing difficulties in hiring, training and maintaining employees. Job postings aren’t consistently targeted to reach the desired candidates. The IRS often takes several months to hire new employees, leading some candidates to accept other offers. New hires require a great deal of training before they can become productive employees, and experienced employees often need to be reassigned to train them. A Congressional Budget Office study published in 2024 found that federal employees with professional degrees earn almost 29% less than their non-federal counterparts, making it harder for the IRS to compete in the tight job market. The report recommended the IRS explore alternative recruitment platforms, review pay disparities and implement strategies to improve employee retention.

Minimum competency for preparers

The report also recommended Congress authorize the IRS to establish minimum competency standards for federal tax return preparers and revoke the identification numbers of sanctioned preparers. It noted the IRS receives over 160 million individual income tax returns each year, and most are prepared by paid tax return preparers. While some tax return preparers must meet licensing requirements (such as CPAs, attorneys and Enrolled Agents), most tax return preparers are not credentialed. Numerous studies have found that non-credentialed preparers prepare inaccurate returns disproportionately, causing some taxpayers to overpay their taxes and other taxpayers to underpay their taxes, which subjects them to penalties and interest charges. Non-credentialed preparers also drive much of the high improper payments rate attributable to wrongful EITC claims, the report noted. In FY 2023, 33.5% of EITC payments, amounting to $21.9 billion, were estimated to be improper, and among tax returns claiming the EITC prepared by paid tax return preparers, 96% of the total dollar amount of EITC audit adjustments was attributable to returns prepared by non-credentialed preparers.

The report noted that federal and state laws generally require lawyers, doctors, securities dealers, financial planners, actuaries, appraisers, contractors, motor vehicle operators, and barbers and beauticians to obtain licenses or certifications and, in most cases, to pass competency tests. The Obama, first Trump and Biden administrations have each recommended that Congress authorize the Treasury Department to establish minimum competency standards for federal tax return preparers. To protect taxpayers and the public, TAS likewise recommends Congress provide this authorization as well as authorization for the Treasury Department to revoke the Preparer Tax Identification Numbers of preparers who have been sanctioned for improper conduct.

The report called for expanding the U.S. Tax Court’s jurisdiction to hear refund cases. Under current law, taxpayers seeking to challenge an IRS tax-due adjustment can file a petition in the U.S. Tax Court, while taxpayers who have paid their tax and are seeking a refund must file suit in a U.S. district court or the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. Litigating a case in a U.S. district court or the Court of Federal Claims is generally more challenging, as the filing fees are relatively high, rules of civil procedure are complex, the judges generally do not have tax expertise and proceeding without a lawyer is difficult. By contrast, taxpayers litigating their cases in the Tax Court face a low $60 filing fee, may follow less formal procedural rules, are generally assured their positions will be fairly considered because of the tax expertise of the Tax Court’s judges, even if they do not present their arguments effectively, and can more easily represent themselves. For these reasons, the requirement that refund claims be litigated in a U.S. district court or the Court of Federal Claims effectively deprives many taxpayers of the right to judicial review of an IRS refund disallowance. In FY 2024, about 97% of all tax-related litigation was adjudicated in the Tax Court. TAS recommended Congress expand the jurisdiction of the Tax Court to give taxpayers the option to litigate all tax disputes, including refund claims, in that forum.

Other recommendations in the report included enabling the Low Income Taxpayer Clinic program to assist more taxpayers in controversies with the IRS. The LITC program assists low-income taxpayers and taxpayers who speak English as a second language. When the LITC program was established as part of the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998, the law limited annual grants to no more than $100,000 per clinic. The law also imposed a 100% “match” requirement, so a clinic cannot receive more in grant funds than it raises from other sources. The nature and scope of the LITC Program have evolved considerably since 1998, and those requirements are preventing the program from expanding assistance to a larger universe of eligible taxpayers. TAS recommended Congress remove the per-clinic cap and allow the IRS to reduce the match requirement to 25%, where doing so would expand coverage to additional taxpayers.

The report also recommended requiring the IRS to timely process claims for refund or credit. It noted millions of taxpayers file refund claims with the IRS each year. Under current law, there is no requirement that the IRS pay or deny them. It may simply ignore them. The taxpayers’ remedy is to file suit in a U.S. district court or the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. For many taxpayers, that is not a realistic or affordable option. The report says the absence of a processing requirement is a “poster child” for non-responsive government. While the IRS generally does process refund claims, the claims can and sometimes do spend months and even years in administrative limbo within the IRS. The report recommended Congress require the IRS to act on claims for credit or refund within one year and impose certain consequences on the IRS for failing to do so.

The report also recommended allowing the limitation on theft loss deductions in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act to expire so scam victims aren’t taxed on the amounts stolen from them. Many financial scams involve the theft of retirement assets, the report noted. In a typical scam, a con artist may pose as a law enforcement officer, convince a victim that her retirement savings are at risk and persuade the victim to transfer her retirement savings to an account that the scammer controls. Then, the scammer absconds with the funds. Under the tax code, the victim’s withdrawal of funds from a retirement account is treated as a distribution subject to income tax and, if the victim is under age 59½, to a 10% additional tax as well. Thus, the victim may not only lose her life savings but also owe significant tax on the stolen funds. Prior to 2018, scam victims generally could claim a theft loss deduction to offset the stolen amounts included in gross income, but the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act eliminated the deduction. TAS recommends Congress allow this TCJA limitation to expire so the theft deduction is again available in these circumstances. Congress is currently planning to take up the expiring provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act this year.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Senate unveils plan to fast-track tax cuts, debt limit hike

Published

on

Senate Republicans unveiled a budget blueprint designed to fast-track a renewal of President Donald Trump’s tax cuts and an increase to the nation’s borrowing limit, ahead of a planned vote on the resolution later this week. 

The Senate plan will allow for a $4 trillion extension of Trump’s tax cuts and an additional $1.5 trillion in further levy reductions. The House plan called for $4.5 trillion in total cuts.

Republicans say they are assuming that the cost of extending the expiring 2017 Trump tax cuts will cost zero dollars.

The draft is a sign that divisions within the Senate GOP over the size and scope of spending cuts to offset tax reductions are closer to being resolved. 

Lawmakers, however, have yet to face some of the most difficult decisions, including which spending to cut and which tax reductions to prioritize. That will be negotiated in the coming weeks after both chambers approve identical budget resolutions unlocking the process.

The Senate budget plan would also increase the debt ceiling by up to $5 trillion, compared with the $4 trillion hike in the House plan. Senate Republicans say they want to ensure that Congress does not need to vote on the debt ceiling again before the 2026 midterm elections. 

“This budget resolution unlocks the process to permanently extend proven, pro-growth tax policy,” Senate Finance Chairman Mike Crapo, an Idaho Republican, said. 

The blueprint is the latest in a multi-step legislative process for Republicans to pass a renewal of Trump’s tax cuts through Congress. The bill will renew the president’s 2017 reductions set to expire at the end of this year, which include lower rates for households and deductions for privately held businesses. 

Republicans are also hoping to include additional tax measures to the bill, including raising the state and local tax deduction cap and some of Trump’s campaign pledges to eliminate taxes on certain categories of income, including tips and overtime pay.

The plan would allow for the debt ceiling hike to be vote on separately from the rest of the tax and spending package. That gives lawmakers flexibility to move more quickly on the debt ceiling piece if a federal default looms before lawmakers can agree on the tax package.

Political realities

Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters on Wednesday, after meeting with Trump at the White House to discuss the tax blueprint, that he’s not sure yet if he has the votes to pass the measure.

Thune in a statement said the budget has been blessed by the top Senate ruleskeeper but Democrats said that it is still vulnerable to being challenged later.

The biggest differences in the Senate budget from the competing House plan are in the directives for spending cuts, a reflection of divisions among lawmakers over reductions to benefit programs, including Medicaid and food stamps. 

The Senate plan pares back a House measure that calls for at least $2 trillion in spending reductions over a decade, a massive reduction that would likely mean curbing popular entitlement programs.

The Senate GOP budget grants significantly more flexibility. It instructs key committees that oversee entitlement programs to come up with at least $4 billion in cuts. Republicans say they expect the final tax package to contain much larger curbs on spending.

The Senate budget would also allow $150 billion in new spending for the military and $175 billion for border and immigration enforcement.

If the minimum spending cuts are achieved along with the maximum tax cuts, the plan would add $5.8 trillion in new deficits over 10 years, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

The Senate is planning a vote on the plan in the coming days. Then it goes to the House for a vote as soon as next week. There, it could face opposition from spending hawks like South Carolina’s Ralph Norman, who are signaling they want more aggressive cuts. 

House Speaker Mike Johnson can likely afford just two or three defections on the budget vote given his slim majority and unified Democratic opposition.

Continue Reading

Accounting

How asset location decides bond ladder taxes

Published

on

Financial advisors and clients worried about stock volatility and inflation can climb bond ladders to safety — but they won’t find any, if those steps lead to a place with higher taxes.

The choice of asset location for bond ladders in a client portfolio can prove so important that some wealthy customers holding them in a taxable brokerage account may wind up losing money in an inflationary period due to the payments to Uncle Sam, according to a new academic study. And those taxes, due to what the author described as the “dead loss” from the so-called original issue discount compared to the value, come with an extra sting if advisors and clients thought the bond ladder had prepared for the rise in inflation.

Bond ladders — whether they are based on Treasury inflation-protected securities like the strategy described in the study or another fixed-income security — provide small but steady returns tied to the regular cadence of maturities in the debt-based products. However, advisors and their clients need to consider where any interest payments, coupon income or principal accretion from the bond ladders could wind up as ordinary income, said Cal Spranger, a fixed income and wealth manager with Seattle-based Badgley + Phelps Wealth Managers.

“Thats going to be the No. 1 concern about, where is the optimal place to hold them,” Spranger said in an interview. “One of our primary objectives for a bond portfolio is to smooth out that volatility. … We’re trying to reduce risk with the bond portfolio, not increase risks.”

READ MORE: Why laddered bond portfolios cover all the bases

The ‘peculiarly bad location’ for a bond ladder

Risk-averse planners, then, could likely predict the conclusion of the working academic paper, which was posted in late February by Edward McQuarrie, a professor emeritus in the Leavey School of Business at Santa Clara University: Tax-deferred retirement accounts such as a 401(k) or a traditional individual retirement account are usually the best location for a Treasury inflation-protected securities ladder. The appreciation attributes available through an after-tax Roth IRA work better for equities than a bond ladder designed for decumulation, and the potential payments to Uncle Sam in brokerage accounts make them an even worse asset location.

“Few planners will be surprised to learn that locating a TIPS ladder in a taxable account leads to phantom income and excess payment of tax, with a consequent reduction in after-tax real spending power,” McQuarrie writes. “Some may be surprised to learn just how baleful that mistake in account location can be, up to and including negative payouts in the early years for high tax brackets and very high rates of inflation. In the worst cases, more is due in tax than the ladder payout provides. And many will be surprised to learn how rapidly the penalty for choosing the wrong asset location increases at higher rates of inflation — precisely the motivation for setting up a TIPS ladder in the first place. Perhaps the most surprising result of all was the discovery that excess tax payments in the early years are never made up. [Original issue discount] causes a dead loss.”

The Roth account may look like a healthy alternative, since the clients wouldn’t owe any further taxes on distributions from them in retirement. But the bond ladder would defeat the whole purpose of that vehicle, McQuarrie writes.

“Planners should recognize that a Roth account is a peculiarly bad location for a bond ladder, whether real or nominal,” he writes. “Ladders are decumulation tools designed to provide a stream of distributions, which the Roth account does not otherwise require. Locating a bond ladder in the Roth thus forfeits what some consider to be one of the most valuable features of the Roth account. If the bond ladder is the only asset in the Roth, then the Roth itself will have been liquidated as the ladder reaches its end.”

READ MORE: How to hedge risk with annuity ladders

RMD advantages

That means that the Treasury inflation-protected securities ladder will add the most value to portfolios in a tax-deferred account (TDA), which McQuarrie acknowledges is not a shocking recommendation to anyone familiar with them. On the other hand, some planners with clients who need to begin required minimum distributions from their traditional IRA may reap further benefits than expected from that location.

“More interesting is the demonstration that the after-tax real income received from a TIPS ladder located in a TDA does not vary with the rate of inflation, in contrast to what happens in a taxable account,” McQuarrie writes. “Also of note was the ability of most TIPS ladders to handle the RMDs due, and, at higher rates of inflation, to shelter other assets from the need to take RMDs.”

The present time of high yields from Treasury inflation-protected securities could represent an ample opportunity to tap into that scenario.

“If TIPS yields are attractive when the ladder is set up, distributions from the ladder will typically satisfy RMDs on the ladder balance throughout the 30 years,” McQuarrie writes. “The higher the inflation experienced, the greater the surplus coverage, allowing other assets in the account to be sheltered in part from RMDs by means of the TIPS ladder payout. However, if TIPS yields are borderline unattractive at ladder set up, and if the ladder proved unnecessary because inflation fell to historically low levels, then there may be a shortfall in RMD coverage in the middle years, requiring either that TIPS bonds be sold prematurely, or that other assets in the TDA be tapped to cover the RMD.”

READ MORE: A primer on the IRA ‘bridge’ to bigger Social Security benefits

The key takeaways on bond ladders

Other caveats to the strategies revolve around any possible state taxes on withdrawals or any number of client circumstances ruling out a universal recommendation. The main message of McQuarrie’s study serves as a warning against putting the ladder in a taxable brokerage account.

“Unsurprisingly, the higher the client’s tax rate, the worse the outcomes from locating a TIPS ladder in taxable when inflation rages,” he writes. “High-bracket taxpayers who accurately foresee a surge in future inflation, and take steps to defend against it, but who make the mistake of locating their TIPS ladder in taxable, can end up paying more in tax to the government than is received from the TIPS ladder during the first year or two.”

For municipal or other types of tax-exempt bonds, though, a taxable account is “the optimal place,” Spranger said. Convertible Treasury or corporate bonds show more similarity with the Treasury inflation-protected securities in that their ideal location is in a tax-deferred account, he noted.

Regardless, bonds act as a crucial core to a client’s portfolio, tamping down on the risk of volatility and sensitivity to interest rates. And the right ladder strategies yield more reliable future rates of returns for clients than a bond ETF or mutual fund, Spranger said.

“We’re strong proponents of using individual bonds, No. 1 so that we can create bond ladders, but, most importantly, for the certainty that individual bonds provide,” he said.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Why IRS cuts may spare a unit that facilitates mortgages

Published

on

Loan applicants and mortgage companies often rely on an Internal Revenue Service that’s dramatically downsizing to help facilitate the lending process, but they may be in luck.

That’s because the division responsible for the main form used to allow consumers to authorize the release of income-tax information to lenders is tied to essential IRS operations.

The Income Verification Express Service could be insulated from what NMN affiliate Accounting Today has described of a series of fluctuating IRS cuts because it’s part of the submission processing unit within wage and investment, a division central to the tax bureau’s purpose.

“It’s unlikely that IVES will be impacted due to association within submission processing,” said Curtis Knuth, president and CEO of NCS, a consumer reporting agency. “Processing tax returns and collecting revenue is the core function and purpose of the IRS.”

Knuth is a member of the IVES participant working group, which is comprised of representatives from companies that facilitate processing of 4506-C forms used to request tax transcripts for mortgages. Those involved represent a range of company sizes and business models.

The IRS has planned to slash thousands of jobs and make billions of dollars of cuts that are still in process, some of which have been successfully challenged in court.

While the current cuts might not be a concern for processing the main form of tax transcript requests this time around, there have been past issues with it in other situations like 2019’s lengthy government shutdown.

President Trump recently signed a continuing funding resolution to avert a shutdown. But it will run out later this year, so the issue could re-emerge if there’s an impasse in Congress at that time. Republicans largely dominate Congress but their lead is thinner in the Senate.

The mortgage industry will likely have an additional option it didn’t have in 2019 if another extended deadlock on the budget emerges and impedes processing of the central tax transcript form.

“It absolutely affected closings, because you couldn’t get the transcripts. You couldn’t get anybody on the phone,” said Phil Crescenzo Jr., vice president of National One Mortgage Corp.’s Southeast division.

There is an automated, free way for consumers to release their transcripts that may still operate when there are issues with the 4506-C process, which has a $4 surcharge. However, the alternative to the 4506-C form is less straightforward and objective as it’s done outside of the mortgage process, requiring a separate logon and actions.

Some of the most recent IRS cuts have targeted technology jobs and could have an impact on systems, so it’s also worth noting that another option lenders have sometimes elected to use is to allow loans temporarily move forward when transcript access is interrupted and verified later. 

There is a risk to waiting for verification or not getting it directly from the IRS, however, as government-related agencies hold mortgage lenders responsible for the accuracy of borrower income information. That risk could increase if loan performance issues become more prevalent.

Currently, tax transcripts primarily come into play for government-related loans made to contract workers, said Crescenzo.

“That’s the only receipt that you have for a self-employed client’s income to know it’s valid,” he said.

The home affordability crunch and rise of gig work like Uber driving has increased interest in these types of mortgages, he said. 

Contract workers can alternatively seek financing from the private non-qualified mortgage market where bank statements could be used to verify self-employment income, but Crescenzo said that has disadvantages related to government-related loans.

“Non QM requires higher downpayments and interest rates than traditional financing,” he said.

In the next couple years, regional demand for loans based on self-employment income could rise given the federal job cuts planned broadly at public agencies, depending on the extent to which court challenges to them go through.

Those potential borrowers will find it difficult to get new mortgages until they can establish more of a track record with their new sources of income, in most cases two years from a tax filing perspective. 

Continue Reading

Trending