Friday, March 9, 2007

Conflict waivers anyone?

In another brilliant move by the administration:

IRS staff has been cut by a fifth over the last decade. At the same time, Congress has made increased the complexity of the CODE. In a recent formal notice, the agency has said it lacks resources to issue as much guidance as taxpayers are seeking.

The answer?

Let the lawyers write the CODE so they wont need to ask for guidance!

The logic behind this new policy proposal is consistent with Captain Destruction's prior legislation aimed at curbing wildfires by leveling forests (see the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003).

This is like asking hackers to write encryption software...and then sending the hackers back out into the world to do what they do. It's like sanctioned hacking.

The Internal Revenue Service is asking tax lawyers and accountants who create tax shelters and exploit loopholes to take the lead in writing some of its new tax rules.

The pilot project represents a further expansion of the increasingly common federal government practice of asking outsiders to do more of its work, prompting academics and other critics to complain that the government is going too far.

They worry that having private lawyers and accountants draft tax rules could allow them to subtly skew them in favor of their clients.

“It’s not the fox guarding the hen house, it’s the fox designing the hen house,” said Paul C. Light, a professor of political science at New York University, who studies the f ederal work force.

What say you, IRS?

Donald L. Korb, the I.R.S. general counsel, defended the plan, saying in an interview that he believed that the pilot project was “not changing this process one iota.”


Well stated. But there is one change that could have some interesting implications, which is that the law will be different. Oh, and that the changes will be made by corporate attorneys. Korb must've just skimmed this part of the plan. Lawyers don't get around the CODE by exploiting the process. Ok, no that's not true but you know what I mean. I mean that's not the only way they get around the CODE.

“Whoever’s pen the first draft comes out of has a big advantage,” said Dr. Graham, [who has a PhD in Statements of the Obvious and] who ran the Office of Regulatory and Information Affairs for the White House before becoming dean last week of the graduate school at RAND, the nonprofit research organization.
Several regulation experts and tax lawyers warned of dangers if the tax police must enforce rules written by those skilled at devising tax-free paths through the maze of the Internal Revenue Code.


I'm not really sure what they're implying here. If they're trying to say there's a risk that unscrupulous lawyers will take advantage of this plan by changing the subtleties of the CODE fo favor their clients, I'm deeply offended. I don't know any unscrupulous tax lawyers and this is just plain irresponsible, Matt.

But then, a voice of reason rings out:

Gary D. Bass, executive director of OMB Watch, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization that tracks the Office of Management and Budget, warned that the Bush administration was turning over too much government responsibility to those it is supposed to be keeping an eye on.

“Why don’t we just privatize Congress and outsource the development of our laws?” he asked.


Indeed, why not? I love this country. Where you can criticize your government without fear of persecution, where you can follow whatever religion you like without fear of unequal protection (as long as it's some denomination of Christianity), you can marry whoever you'd like (wait, scratch that), and where corporate tax lawyers write the tax laws (this one's true). And if that wasn't enough, the implications of this greatly improve my chances to get a good grade in int'l tax this semester.

No comments: