Supporting Statement

Supporting Statement.doc

Rev. Proc. 2006-16, Renewal Community Depreciation Provisions

OMB: 1545-2001

Document [doc]
Download: doc | pdf

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

Revenue Procedure 2006-16


  1. CIRCUMSTANCES NECESSITATING COLLECTION OF INFORMATION


This revenue procedure provides the time and manner for states to make retroactive allocations of commercial revitalization expenditure amounts to certain buildings placed in service in the expanded area of a renewal community pursuant to § 1400E(g) of the Internal Revenue Code. Once the taxpayer has received this allocation, the taxpayer may elect to deduct the commercial revitalization expenditures over a more accelerated method than is otherwise allowable under the depreciation provisions of the Code (hereinafter, this deduction is referred to as the “commercial revitalization expenditure deduction”).


  1. USE OF DATA


The information will be used by revenue agents to determine if the taxpayer is entitled to claim the commercial revitalization deduction.


  1. USE OF IMPROVED INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TO REDUCE BURDEN


IRS Publications, Regulations, Notices and Letters are to be electronically enabled on an as practicable basis in accordance with the IRS Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998.


  1. EFFORTS TO IDENTIFY DUPLICATION


We have attempted to eliminate duplication within the agency wherever possible.


  1. METHODS TO MINIMIZE BURDEN ON SMALL BUSINESSES OR OTHER SMALL ENTITIES


Not applicable.


  1. CONSEQUENCES OF LESS FREQUENT COLLECTION ON FEDERAL PROGRAMS OR POLICY ACTIVITIES


Not applicable.


  1. SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES REQUIRING DATA COLLECTION TO BE INCONSISTENT WITH GUIDELINES IN 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2)


Not applicable.


  1. CONSULTATION WITH INDIVIDUALS OUTSIDE OF THE AGENCY ON AVAILABILITY OF DATA, FREQUENCY OF COLLECTION, CLARITY OF INSTRUCTIONS AND FORMS, AND DATA ELEMENTS


Revenue Procedure 2006-16 was originally published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin (2006-9 I.R.B. 539), on February 27, 2006.


We received no comments during the comment period in response to the Federal Register notice (77 FR 60743), dated October 4, 2012.




  1. EXPLANATION OF DECISION TO PROVIDE ANY PAYMENT OR GIFT TO RESPONDENTS


Not applicable.



  1. ASSURANCE OF CONFIDENTIALITY OF RESPONSES


Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential as required by 26 USC 6103.



  1. JUSTIFICATION OF SENSITIVE QUESTIONS


Not applicable.


  1. ESTIMATED BURDEN OF INFORMATION COLLECTION


The collections of information are in section 3.04 of this revenue procedure. Taxpayers are required to obtain from a state an allocation of commercial revitalization expenditures to claim the commercial revitalization expenditure deduction. The information will be used to verify that a taxpayer is entitled to claim the commercial revitalization expenditure deduction. The estimated total annual burden is 150 hours. The estimated annual burden per respondent varies from 1 to 4 hours, depending on individual circumstances, with an estimated average of 2.5 hours. The estimated number of respondents is 60.


Estimates of the annualized cost to respondents for the hour burdens shown are not available at this time.


  1. ESTIMATED TOTAL ANNUAL COST BURDEN TO RESPONDENTS


As suggested by OMB, our Federal Register notice dated October 4, 2012, requested public comments on estimates of cost burden that are not captured in the estimates of burden hours, i.e., estimates of capital or start-up costs and costs of operation, maintenance, and purchase of services to provide information. However, we did not receive any response from taxpayers on this subject. As a result, estimates of the cost burdens are not available at this time.


  1. ESTIMATED ANNUALIZED COST TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT


Not applicable.


  1. REASON FOR CHANGE IN BURDEN


There is no change in burden at this time. This submission is for renewal purposes only.


  1. PLANS FOR TABULATION, STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND PUBLICATION


Not applicable.


  1. REASONS WHY DISPLAYING THE OMB EXPIRATION DATE IS INAPPROPRIATE


We believe that displaying the OMB expiration date is inappropriate because it could cause confusion by leading taxpayers to believe that the revenue procedure sunsets as of the expiration date. Taxpayers are not likely to be aware that the Service intends to request renewal of the OMB approval and obtain a new expiration date before the old one expires.


  1. EXCEPTIONS TO THE CERTIFICATION STATEMENT ON OMB FORM 83-I


Not applicable.


Note: The following paragraph applies to all of the collections of information in this submission:


An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number. Books or records relating to a collection of information must be retained as long as their contents may become material in the administration of any internal revenue law. Generally, tax returns and tax return information are confidential, as required by 26 U.S.C. 6103.

OMB EXPIRATION DATE


We believe the public interest will be better served by not printing an expiration date on the form(s) in this package.


Printing the expiration date on the form will result in increased costs because of the need to replace inventories that become obsolete by passage of the expiration date each time OMB approval is renewed. Without printing the expiration date, supplies of the form could continue to be used.


The time period during which the current edition of the form(s) in this package will continue to be usable cannot be predicted. It could easily span several cycles of review and OMB clearance renewal. In addition, usage fluctuates unpredictably. This makes it necessary to maintain a substantial inventory of forms in the supply line at all times. This includes supplied owned by both the Government and the public. Reprinting of the form cannot be reliably scheduled to coincide with an OMB approval expiration date. This form may be privately printed by users at their own expense. Some businesses print complex and expensive marginally punched continuous versions, their expense, for use in their computers. The form may be printed by commercial printers and stocked for sale. In such cases, printing the expiration date on the form could result in extra costs to the users.


Not printing the expiration date on the form(s) will also avoid confusion among taxpayers who may have identical forms with different expiration dates in their possession.


For the above reasons we request authorization to omit printing the expiration date on the form(s) in this package.




File Typeapplication/msword
File TitleSUPPORTING STATEMENT
AuthorXHFNB
Last Modified ByJ11FB
File Modified2012-11-23
File Created2012-10-14

© 2024 OMB.report | Privacy Policy