From: Kirkland Glenn P
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 8:21 AM
To: Durbala R Joseph; Brown Carolyn N
Subject: FW: Forms 8903 and 8913 ICB burden -- revised volume estimates for review
Add to file for these ICRs.
 
Thanks,
Glenn

From: Hunt, Alexander T. [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2007 7:03 PM
To: Guyton John; Kroening, Linda M.
Cc: Hedemann Janice M; Kirkland Glenn P; Sottile Sue M; Tavenner Carolyn A; Lee Wu-Lang; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Williams David R; Bayder Helene B; Potter, Rachel F.; Larson, Lauren
Subject: RE: Forms 8903 and 8913 ICB burden -- revised volume estimates for review

John et al -- Thanks for providing these revised estimates.  We will use these updated estimates in the forthcoming ICB. 
 
Glenn/Robert -- Please submit non-substantive change requests that adjust the burden to reflect the revised volume and burden numbers.

From: Guyton John [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2007 1:23 PM
To: Kroening, Linda M.
Cc: Hunt, Alexander T.; Hedemann Janice M; Kirkland Glenn P; Sottile Sue M; Tavenner Carolyn A; Lee Wu-Lang; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Williams David R; Bayder Helene B
Subject: Forms 8903 and 8913 ICB burden -- revised volume estimates for review

Hi Linda --
 
I believe Alex has already addressed your first question below.
In response to your second two questions, I have provided the attached spreadsheet with updated CY2007 estimates of 300K and 2.4M non-business taxpayers for Forms 8903 and 8913, respectively.
If fiscal year estimates are needed we will need to modify the volume estimates and resign ourselves to talking about 8913 again in next year's ICB.
These estimates, while substantially below what was expected, reflect the current best estimates based on available actuals for 8913 from last year and partial year data from this filing season for both forms.
Quantifying the impact of the take up rate for these two credits required a fair bit of professional judgment, but I believe I was well guided in this regard.
I would like to thank David Williams, Carolynn Tavenner and her staff, along with Allen Lerman, Susan Nelson, and John McClelland form OTA, for support of my staff with data and assistance with the estimates.
 
Per Alex's request, I have also updated and attached the relevant IRS chapter of the ICB to reflect these changes (except as noted) and expanded the TETR section to add discussion of 1040-EZ-T.
My suggested changes are tracked to assist your review.  Please let me know if you have questions or if my forecasting staff may be of further assistance.
 
-- John
 
John Guyton
Chief, Forecasting & Service Analysis
IRS NHQ Office of Research
IRS:RAS:R
202 874 0607

From: Kroening, Linda M. [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 5:45 PM
To: Guyton John
Cc: Hunt, Alexander T.; Hedemann Janice M
Subject: RE: Form 8913 burden

Hi John, me again.  We need some additional info. re: the burdens so that hopefully we can explain them better in the report.  So anything you can give us re: the following questions is much appreciated.

 

  1. Can we quantify how much of the projected increase from 05 to 06 is from the shift in methodology?
  2. For the manufacturing production credit, where did the 27 million filers come from?  It seems high for # of manufacturers although I recall that the way the statute defined “manufacture” was really loose.  But if you could give us some idea how you got that number.
  3. For the Form 8913, could you give us the numbers of individuals we thought would/could use the form?  Same for non-individuals?

 

We are running out of time to revise the report so anything you can get to us sooner rather than later will help.  Thanks much.

 

PS – Hi Janice.

 

From: Guyton John [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 12:51 PM
To: Kroening, Linda M.
Cc: Hunt, Alexander T.; Hedemann Janice M
Subject: RE: Form 8913 burden

 

Hi Linda --

 

The burden shown for 8913 is only for the business use of this dual use form.

The individual portion is rolled up in the 1040-series burden estimates.

Only the individual portion is derived from the Individual Taxpayer Burden Model.

The business portion -- and thus the published 8913 estimate -- are from the old ADL methodology administered by Forms and Publications.

My understanding is that most of the taxpayers using 8913 are businesses as most individuals elected the standard amount.

I should also add that the ICB is typically developed prior to the filing season and thus reflects the expected volume for a particular form.

I think it is no secret that that the actuals for TETR-related activity have come in well below expectations.

The originally projected volume contributes significantly to the large 8913-related spike.

In contrast, and only due to an accident of this year's production schedule, the individual taxpayer TETR provisions were scored based on updated volume estimates from the middle of the filing season.

As such they do not reflect the high volume assumptions used for the 8913, or that we might have use prior to the start of the filing season.

You are welcome to give me a call if you'd like me to clarify this further.  I am on a call until 2:30 but available later today.

 

-- John

 

Chief, Forecasting & Service Analysis

IRS HQ Office of Research

IRS:RAS:R

202 874 0607

 

From: Kroening, Linda M. [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 12:13 PM
To: Guyton John
Subject: Form 8913 burden

Hi John, I understand that a big spike in the paperwork burden this year relates to the Form 8913 for telephone excise tax.  How does the model work in estimating that?  Does it calculate the burden based on taxpayers eligible to claim the refund?  So that all those that chose the safe harbor $30 would be in the original burden estimate?  Thanks.