Jeff Bingaman

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Taxpayer Protection and Assistance Act of 2007'' with Senators Smith, Akaka, Durbin, Kerry, and Lieberman. My colleagues may recall that similar legislation, S. 832, was introduced last Congress and ultimately reported out of the Finance Committee last year but unfortunately it never made it to the floor of the Senate. This Congress, the House has already passed taxpayer rights legislation which makes me optimistic that many of these long overdue reforms may finally become law. This Act is a combination of a variety of well-vetted provisions that will ensure that our Nation's taxpayers are better able to prepare and file their tax returns each year in a fashion that is fair, reasonable and affordable. As long as we continue to require taxpayers to determine their own tax liability, Congress has a responsibility to ensure that we do not leave taxpayers vulnerable to abuses from those masquerading as tax professionals. The current environment is bad for everyone including the majority of tax return preparers who provide professional and much needed services to taxpayers in their communities. I encourage all of my colleagues to work with us to pass this legislation before the next filing season begins. The first section of the Taxpayer Protection and Assistance Act would create a $10 million matching grant program for lower income tax preparation clinics much like the program we currently have in place for tax controversies. I have seen first hand the impact free tax preparation clinics can have on taxpayers and their communities, as we are fortunate to have one of the best State-wide programs in the Nation in New Mexico. Tax Help New Mexico, which has been in operation for many years, helped over 20,000 New Mexicans prepare and file their returns last year, resulting in over $20 million in refunds--all without refund anticipation loans. This program has turned into one of the best delivery mechanisms for public assistance I have seen in the State and has been fortunate enough to receive additional funding from the Annie E. Casey Foundation and the McCune Foundation. In order to continue to grow, though, we need to do our part in Congress and give them matching funding so they can continue their outreach into new communities in need of assistance. The second set of provisions contained in this legislation would ensure that when taxpayers hire someone to help them with their tax returns they can be sure that the person is competent and professional. The first part of the bill makes sure that an enrolled agent, a tax professional licensed to practice before the IRS, shall have the exclusive right to describe him or herself as an ``enrolled agent,'' ``EA,'' or ``E.A.'' In New Mexico, enrolled agents play an important role in helping taxpayers with problems with the IRS and with preparing their returns. Enrolled agents have earned the right to use their credentials. Furthermore, we should protect the credentials of those who have taken the rigorous exams and have experience in tax preparation rather than allow others to confuse the public into thinking they too have the same credentials. The next part of the bill requires the Secretary of the Treasury to determine what standards need to be met in order for a person to prepare tax returns commercially. Like all other tax professionals, this will require people who make a living preparing tax returns to pass a minimum competency exam and take brush up courses each year to keep up to date with changes in tax law. The majority of tax return preparers already meet these standards, including many who have received credentials from the State or from a nationally recognized association of accountants or tax return preparers. We provide specific authority to the Secretary to determine whether people who have already taken a written proficiency exam as part of some other tax return credentialing will need to take the new exam. The Secretary will be able to exercise these authorizations only after thorough review of the specific examination and only for those examinations subsequently determined to be comparable. In that light, we urge the Secretary to exercise his authority in this area in a manner consistent with the goal of protecting taxpayers through ensuring the competency of enrolled preparers. The Treasury Department will also be required to operate a public awareness campaign so that taxpayers will know that they need to check to be sure that someone preparing their tax returns for a fee is qualified. The fourth set of provisions would directly address the problems with refund anticipation loans (RALs)--a problem throughout the country, but one that is particularly troublesome in New Mexico. First, this bill requires refund loan facilitators to register with the Treasury Department. Refund loan facilitators are those people who solicit, process, or otherwise facilitate the making of a refund anticipation loan in relation to a tax return being electronically filed. The legislation also requires these refund loan facilitators to properly disclose to taxpayers that they do not have to get a RAL in order to file their return electronically, as well as clearly disclose what all the costs involved with the loan. Finally, the refund loan facilitators must disclose to taxpayers when the loans would allow their refunds to be offset by the amount of the loan. Much like the public awareness campaign for advertising the credentials required for preparing Federal tax returns, the Act requires the Treasury Department to operate a program to educate the public on the real costs of RALs as compared to other forms of credit. This program will be funded, at least in part, by amounts collected from penalties imposed on refund loan facilitators who have broken the law. The next section of the bill is an issue that my colleague from Hawaii, Senator Akaka, has been actively working on for the last several years. This provision would authorize the Treasury Department to award grants to financial institutions or charitable groups that help low income taxpayers set up accounts at a bank or credit union. Because many taxpayers do not have checking or savings accounts, their refunds from IRS cannot be electronically wired to them. The alternative is to have the check mailed to the taxpayer or to have the refund immediately loaned to the taxpayer in the form of a RAL. Of course, getting people to set up a checking or savings account for purposes of receiving their tax refund will also have the benefits of getting many of these people to start saving for the first time. Finally, we have added two new provisions to clarify existing law. The first clarifies that the National Taxpayer Advocate has the authority to issue taxpayer assistance orders in cases involving closing agreements and compromises. The other clarifies that the Secretary of the Treasury has the authority to take into account a taxpayers specific facts and circumstances when evaluating an offer in compromise. Both of these provisions are the result of bipartisan negotiations and are an improvement to our tax system. I hope my colleagues will join with me and the cosponsors of this bill to pass this important legislation. Our voluntary tax system is dependent on taxpayers being able to receive the best advice and assistance possible. We have a responsibility to our Nation's taxpayers to make sure that they do receive such advice and assistance. This bill goes a long way toward that goal. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the ``Taxpayer Protection and Assistance Act of 2007'' with Senators Smith, Akaka, Durbin, Kerry, and Lieberman. My colleagues may recall that similar legislation, S. 832, was introduced last Congress and ultimately reported out of the Finance Committee last year but unfortunately it never made it to the floor of the Senate. This Congress, the House has already passed taxpayer rights legislation which makes me optimistic that many of these long overdue reforms may finally become law. This Act is a combination of a variety of well-vetted provisions that will ensure that our Nation's taxpayers are better able to prepare and file their tax returns each year in a fashion that is fair, reasonable and affordable. As long as we continue to require taxpayers to determine their own tax liability, Congress has a responsibility to ensure that we do not leave taxpayers vulnerable to abuses from those masquerading as tax professionals. The current environment is bad for everyone including the majority of tax return preparers who provide professional and much needed services to taxpayers in their communities. I encourage all of my colleagues to work with us to pass this legislation before the next filing season begins. The first section of the Taxpayer Protection and Assistance Act would create a $10 million matching grant program for lower income tax preparation clinics much like the program we currently have in place for tax controversies. I have seen first hand the impact free tax preparation clinics can have on taxpayers and their communities, as we are fortunate to have one of the best State-wide programs in the Nation in New Mexico. Tax Help New Mexico, which has been in operation for many years, helped over 20,000 New Mexicans prepare and file their returns last year, resulting in over $20 million in refunds--all without refund anticipation loans. This program has turned into one of the best delivery mechanisms for public assistance I have seen in the State and has been fortunate enough to receive additional funding from the Annie E. Casey Foundation and the McCune Foundation. In order to continue to grow, though, we need to do our part in Congress and give them matching funding so they can continue their outreach into new communities in need of assistance. The second set of provisions contained in this legislation would ensure that when taxpayers hire someone to help them with their tax returns they can be sure that the person is competent and professional. The first part of the bill makes sure that an enrolled agent, a tax professional licensed to practice before the IRS, shall have the exclusive right to describe him or herself as an ``enrolled agent,'' ``EA,'' or ``E.A.'' In New Mexico, enrolled agents play an important role in helping taxpayers with problems with the IRS and with preparing their returns. Enrolled agents have earned the right to use their credentials. Furthermore, we should protect the credentials of those who have taken the rigorous exams and have experience in tax preparation rather than allow others to confuse the public into thinking they too have the same credentials. The next part of the bill requires the Secretary of the Treasury to determine what standards need to be met in order for a person to prepare tax returns commercially. Like all other tax professionals, this will require people who make a living preparing tax returns to pass a minimum competency exam and take brush up courses each year to keep up to date with changes in tax law. The majority of tax return preparers already meet these standards, including many who have received credentials from the State or from a nationally recognized association of accountants or tax return preparers. We provide specific authority to the Secretary to determine whether people who have already taken a written proficiency exam as part of some other tax return credentialing will need to take the new exam. The Secretary will be able to exercise these authorizations only after thorough review of the specific examination and only for those examinations subsequently determined to be comparable. In that light, we urge the Secretary to exercise his authority in this area in a manner consistent with the goal of protecting taxpayers through ensuring the competency of enrolled preparers. The Treasury Department will also be required to operate a public awareness campaign so that taxpayers will know that they need to check to be sure that someone preparing their tax returns for a fee is qualified. The fourth set of provisions would directly address the problems with refund anticipation loans (RALs)--a problem throughout the country, but one that is particularly troublesome in New Mexico. First, this bill requires refund loan facilitators to register with the Treasury Department. Refund loan facilitators are those people who solicit, process, or otherwise facilitate the making of a refund anticipation loan in relation to a tax return being electronically filed. The legislation also requires these refund loan facilitators to properly disclose to taxpayers that they do not have to get a RAL in order to file their return electronically, as well as clearly disclose what all the costs involved with the loan. Finally, the refund loan facilitators must disclose to taxpayers when the loans would allow their refunds to be offset by the amount of the loan. Much like the public awareness campaign for advertising the credentials required for preparing Federal tax returns, the Act requires the Treasury Department to operate a program to educate the public on the real costs of RALs as compared to other forms of credit. This program will be funded, at least in part, by amounts collected from penalties imposed on refund loan facilitators who have broken the law. The next section of the bill is an issue that my colleague from Hawaii, Senator Akaka, has been actively working on for the last several years. This provision would authorize the Treasury Department to award grants to financial institutions or charitable groups that help low income taxpayers set up accounts at a bank or credit union. Because many taxpayers do not have checking or savings accounts, their refunds from IRS cannot be electronically wired to them. The alternative is to have the check mailed to the taxpayer or to have the refund immediately loaned to the taxpayer in the form of a RAL. Of course, getting people to set up a checking or savings account for purposes of receiving their tax refund will also have the benefits of getting many of these people to start saving for the first time. Finally, we have added two new provisions to clarify existing law. The first clarifies that the National Taxpayer Advocate has the authority to issue taxpayer assistance orders in cases involving closing agreements and compromises. The other clarifies that the Secretary of the Treasury has the authority to take into account a taxpayers specific facts and circumstances when evaluating an offer in compromise. Both of these provisions are the result of bipartisan negotiations and are an improvement to our tax system. I hope my colleagues will join with me and the cosponsors of this bill to pass this important legislation. Our voluntary tax system is dependent on taxpayers being able to receive the best advice and assistance possible. We have a responsibility to our Nation's taxpayers to make sure that they do receive such advice and assistance. This bill goes a long way toward that goal. I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry be authorized to conduct a hearing during the session of the Senate on April 25, 2007 at 9:30 a.m. in SD-106. The title of this committee hearing is, ``Challenges and Opportunities Facing American Agriculture Producers Today, Part III.''

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to hold a business meeting during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 25, 2007, at 2:30 p.m., in room 253 of the Russell Senate Office Building. The purpose of this meeting will be to consider and approve the following legislation following bills: S. 294, S. 428, S. 924, S. 311, S. 675, S. 1142, the Identity Theft Prevention Act, and the promotion of Mr. Gribbin, in the United States Coast Guard.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet to conduct a markup on Wednesday, April 25, at 10 a.m. in Dirksen Room 226. I. Committee Authorization: Authorization of Subpoenas in Connection with Investigation into Replacement of U.S. Attorneys. II. Bills: S. 376, Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2007; Leahy, Specter, Grassley, Kyl, Sessions, Cornyn, S. 119, War Profiteering Prevention Act of 2007; Leahy, Feinstein, Feingold, Schumer, Durbin, Cardin, S. 1079, Star-Spangled Banner and War of 1812 Bicentennial Commission Act; Cardin, Warner, Kennedy, S. 735, Terrorist Hoax Improvements Act of 2007; Kennedy, Kyl, Coleman, Schumer, Leahy, Grassley, Cornyn, H.R. 740, Preventing Harassment through Outbound Number Enforcement (PHONE) Act of 2007; Scott, Conyers, Forbes, Boucher, Jackson-Lee, Gutierrez, Sherman, S. 221, Fair Contracts for Growers Act of 2007; Grassley, Feingold, Kohl, Leahy, Durbin, S. 495, Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2007; Leahy, Specter, Feingold, Schumer, S. 239, Notification of Risk to Personal Data Act of 2007; Feinstein, S. 879, No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act of 2007; (Kohl, Specter, Leahy, Grassley, Feingold, Schumer, Coburn, Durbin. III. Nominations: Robert Gideon Howard, Jr. to be United States Marshal for the Eastern District of Arkansas; Frederick J. Kapala to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Illinois; Benjamin Hale Settle to be United States District Judge for the Western District of Washington; John Roberts Hackman to be United States Marshal for the Eastern District of Virginia. IV. Resolutions: S. Res. 125, designating May 18, 2007 as ``Endangered Species Day''; Feinstein, Collins, Feingold, Biden, S. Res. 116, designating May 2007 as ``National Autoimmune Disease Awareness Month''; Biden, S. Res. 146, designating June 20, 2007, as ``American Eagle Day''; Alexander, Byrd, Kennedy, Feinstein, S. Res. 162, commemorating and acknowledging the dedication and sacrifice made by the men and women who have lost their lives while serving as law enforcement officers; Leahy, Specter, Biden, Grassley, Cornyn, Durbin.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 to hold a hearing on mental health issues. The hearing will take place in room 418 of the Russell Senate Office Building beginning at 2 p.m.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Airland be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 25, 2007, at 10 a.m., in open session to receive testimony on whether the army is properly sized, organized, and equipped to respond to the most likely missions over the next two decades while retaining adequate capability to respond to all contingencies along the spectrum of combat in review of the Defense Authorization request for fiscal year 2008 and the Future Years Defense Program.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 25, 2007, at 10 a.m. in room 406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The agenda to be considered: Oversight Hearing on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 25, 2007, at 2 p.m., to receive testimony on efforts to improve the Department of Defense's language and cultural awareness capabilities.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces be authorized to meet in open session during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 25, 2007, at 3:30 p.m., to receive testimony on Department of Energy atomic energy defense programs in review of the defense authorization request for fiscal year 2008.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Water and Power be authorized to hold a hearing during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the hearing is to receive testimony on the following bills: S. 175, to provide for a feasibility study of alternatives to augment the water supplies of the Central Oklahoma Master Conservancy District and cities served by the District; S. 324, to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a study of water resources in the State of New Mexico; S. 542, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to conduct feasibility studies to address certain water shortages within the Snake, Boise, and Payette River systems in the State of Idaho, and for other purposes; S. 752, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to participate in the implementation of the Platte River Recovery Implementation Program for Endangered Species in the Central and Lower Platte River Basin and to modify the Pathfinder Dam and Reservoir; S. 1037, to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to assist in the planning, design, and construction of the Tumalo Irrigation District Water Conservation Project in Deschutes County, OR; S. 1116 and H.R. 902, to facilitate the use for irrigation and other purposes of water produced in connection with development of energy resources; and S. 1112 and H.R. 235, to allow for the renegotiation of the payment schedule of contracts between the Secretary of the Interior and the Redwood Valley County Water District, and for other purposes.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 172, which was submitted earlier today.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the conference report of the supplemental appropriations bill, H.R. 1591, on Thursday, April 26, at 10 a.m., regardless of whether the Senate has yet received the papers from the House; that the time immediately following the prayer and the pledge until 12:45 p.m. be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees; and that the Senate vote, without any intervening action, provided that the message has been received in the Senate on passage of the conference report at 12:45 p.m. on Thursday.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, if there is no further business, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 9:15 a.m., Thursday, April 26; that on Thursday following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders reserved for their use later in the day, with a period of morning business until 10 a.m. with Senators permitted to speak therein; with the Senate proceeding to the conference report to accompany H.R. 1591, as provided for under a previous order.

Mr. BINGAMAN

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague and I thank the Senator from South Carolina for their courtesy. My understanding is that the Senator from South Carolina wishes to set aside the pending amendment and offer an amendment; is that correct?

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I will have to object to offering three amendments. I have no problem if he wants to set aside the pending amendment and bring one amendment up, whichever amendment he would like, and we will deal with them one at a time. I think that will be the appropriate procedure for us to follow.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I appreciate the thought that has gone into the amendment, but, frankly, this is an amendment that is in the jurisdiction of the Banking Committee. Obviously, the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation came out of the Banking Committee and it is squarely within their jurisdiction. We are informed they have not had a chance to review the amendment, have not had a chance to have hearings on the amendment, and wish a chance to come to the floor and discuss it before there is any vote. There is some objection to going to any kind of vote on it at this point, so I am not prepared to discuss the merits of it. I do believe we need to provide an opportunity for those Senators on the Banking Committee who want to come and discuss the merits to come and engage in that debate. However, I mention to the Senator from South Carolina, I am informed he also has an amendment related to looking at the Tax Code for possible problems with barring innovation; is that correct?

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, we are not in a position to say yet--we are trying to talk to the Finance Committee, because, of course, they have jurisdiction over tax issues--but we are trying to determine if there is any objection to Senator DeMint's amendment relating to taxes. Perhaps the right thing to do, since the majority leader has tried-- not just on this bill but as a general matter--to avoid the circumstance where we are bringing up amendments, setting aside amendments; bringing up amendments, setting aside amendments, without ever having disposed of anything for a long period, perhaps the Senator could go ahead and describe this other amendment related to taxes. By the time he has completed that, we might know whether we are in a position to proceed to some kind of action on that.

Mr. BINGAMAN. As I say, if it is another amendment that is going to require a debate and vote here, I think maybe we would want to go ahead and try to get the Banking Committee people here to deal with the Sarbanes-Oxley amendment before we get the Finance Committee people here to deal with the Tax Code amendment. Perhaps the Senator could put the Senate on notice as to what the amendment entails, and by the time he is through with that discussion, we may know enough to be able to tell him whether we could accept the amendment or whether there is going to be objection.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I know the Senator from Tennessee has some comments on the amendment. Maybe we could continue with that discussion and debate for a few more minutes to see if we can get a little more of a response from people in the Finance Committee.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I am informed we do not have a clear response from the Finance Committee. I agree with the substance of what the Senator from Tennessee said. I don't see this causes any difficulty in the overall thrust of the legislation, so I would be inclined to urge the Senator from South Carolina to go ahead and ask permission to set aside the pending amendment, bring this up, and then conclude any debate he wants to on this amendment related to the study, and then we can dispose of it--by voice vote, as far as I am concerned, unless the Senator wants a recorded vote.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, we need to determine when we would want to go ahead since, as I understand the Senator, he wishes a rollcall vote. We want to have a chance to check with our floor managers, the assistant majority leader, and determine when this is appropriate, so I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, let me briefly speak to the amendment of the Senator from South Carolina related to earmarks. I obviously would have to object to it. I think he will find probably any and all Senators involved with appropriations would have to object to it. The way I read it, it says it is not in order to consider any bill that proposes a congressional earmark on appropriated funds unless you have 60 votes. The definition of a congressional earmark is contained in the legislation, but any appropriations bill that comes to the floor virtually by definition is going to contain something that falls into this definition of congressional earmark. It is one thing to be concerned about the addition of earmarks once the Appropriations Committee has presented legislation to the Congress or to the full Senate. But to say we cannot bring up a bill, an appropriations bill, if it has anything in it that might meet this definition is substantially more onerous than I would think would be good policy.