William Roth

Mr. ROTH

Mr. ROTH. In other words, the purpose is to stack the votes.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I think the distinguished Senator from Maine now seeks recognition. Ms. COLLINS addressed the Chair.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, if there are no further speakers on this, I would say that this amendment is acceptable to both sides, and I urge its adoption.

Mr. ROTH. I think, I say to the distinguished Senator, that we are all very concerned about this problem of the year 2000. We must solve it. We have no alternative. We have no choice. So we are all going to work to accomplish that. At the same time, it is critically important that we move ahead, bringing about the kind of reforms we have been debating and talking about this week. Neither one has to take a back seat. We want to move forward together. I assure you that we have been working with Senator Moynihan, with Commissioner Rossotti, as well as Joint Taxation. And Senator Moynihan will be offering an amendment that will address some of the concerns you are raising. This is going to be an ongoing process. As time moves on, we may have to adjust, because we are going to make certain, as the committee with oversight responsibility, that this agency meets its obligations.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise in order to accept this amendment-- which deals with the effective dates of many of the provisions in the IRS Restructuring Bill. As I have stated before, this legislation has three main purposes-- first, to reorganize, restructure, and re-equip the IRS to make it more customer friendly in its tax-collecting mission; second, to protect taxpayers from abusive practices and procedures of the IRS. And third, to deal with the management problem and misconduct of some IRS employees. In order to accomplish these goals--to bring about fundamental reform, we are enacting numerous provisions. Some of those provisions will require the IRS to undergo significant reprogramming of its systems; some of them can be accomplished with little burden. I recognize that the IRS needs to continue to function at the same time that it makes these important changes. The IRS also needs to deal with massive computer reprogramming brought about by the century date change--the so called ``year 2000 problem.'' It is not my intention to impose unreasonable effective dates on the IRS. At the same time, I recognize that sometimes we need to push the IRS, to prompt it to make changes. We should not simply defer to their assessment that they will be unable to accomplish the goals we have set. On April 23, Commissioner Rossotti expressed his concern that the effective dates in our bill could severely impact the ability of the IRS to deal with the year 2000 computer problem. I understood his position. Nevertheless, I believed then, and I believe now, that justice delayed is justice denied. Many of the reforms in our bill are long overdue. Taxpayers have already been waiting for them for a long time. Innocent spouses should not have to wait any longer for relief. Taxpayers in installment agreements should not have to wait any longer for reduction of their failure to pay penalty. Taxpayers subject to IRS audits should not have to wait any longer for the IRS to complete its business. To find a middle ground, I asked the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation to meet with representatives of the IRS in order to discuss the impact of the effective dates. Joint Tax did so, and on Tuesday, May 5, they provided Senator Moynihan and me with their recommendations. Joint Tax recommended that many of the effective dates remain the same, but that some others be delayed. This amendment adopts most of the recommendations made by Joint Tax. Specifically, the amendment does not delay the effective date for the major taxpayer protections in the bill. The amendment does not delay innocent spouse relief--in other words, as of the date of enactment of this bill, innocent spouses will no longer suffer under the burden of paying for their spouse's tax fraud. The amendment also does not delay due process for taxpayers--meaning that among other things, taxpayers will receive rights of appeal and rights of notice before their property is seized. These are fundamental rights that we should get to taxpayers as soon as possible. The amendment also does not delay what we have referred to as the one year rule. This means that effective next tax year--1998--taxpayers will know that the IRS has one year to tell them whether they owe any additional tax. If the IRS is delinquent, all interest and penalties on that additional tax will be suspended until the IRS gets its act together and notifies the taxpayer of the deficiency. The amendment also does not delay what we refer to as cascading penalties. That means that taxpayers can designate which period their deposits are applied to, and can avoid the situation where a taxpayer is making payments, but nevertheless, accruing penalties even faster. I have said already, these reforms are long overdue. Our guiding principle should be rapid relief for American taxpayers--for the individuals who have suffered long enough because of the practices and procedures of the IRS. This bill is all about taxpayer protections. We should deliver those protections to taxpayers as soon as possible. I note that President Clinton recently stated that these reforms should be enacted as soon as possible. I assume that he did not mean that the law should go into effect two years from now. Mr. President, this bill is also about changing the culture of the IRS. Under Chairman Rossotti's leadership, that had already begun. We expect that to continue. The fact that we are accommodating some of the IRS' requests and delaying certain effective dates should not be taken as a sign that we are not serious about reforming the agency. On that subject, let there be no mistake. This bill will bring about fundamental change at an agency that is in dire need of such change. We expect the IRS to improve its service--to change its culture--to be more responsive to taxpayers--at the same time that it implements its system changes. For those reasons, Mr. President, I will accept this amendment.

Mr. ROTH. I say to the distinguished Senator from Nebraska that one of my real concerns has been that there has not been adequate oversight of IRS as well as other agencies. That is one of the things that got me moving a year ago, because I think, as the Senator, it is critically important that we assure the agency is functioning as the President and Congress intend it to function. That has not been the case with IRS. So I can assure the good Senator that it is my intention to have continuing oversight hearings. I think it is important now that we are involved in this massive reorganization opportunity to change culture that we do have at least once a year, if not more often, the kind of hearing the Senator is talking about. We are all very pleased to have this new Commissioner. We think we have an individual with the type of qualifications and background that will really make a major change. At the same time, I think it is our responsibility to continue from time to time to hold hearings to see if progress is being made. So I assure the Senator that as long as I am chairman of the committee we will continue to do so.

Mr. ROTH. We have one further amendment that I am aware of and some close-up business. But then we would have the vote on the motion as the final vote.

Mr. ROTH. I thank the Senator for bringing this to my attention and I can assure the Senator that we will take a look at this in conference.

Mr. ROTH. The answer is no.

Mr. ROTH. No.

Mr. ROTH. There are no further amendments. Mr. President, there are no further amendments. Amendment No. 2353--Motion to waive the Budget Act

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I appreciate and concur with the comments of the Senator from Oklahoma.

Mr. ROTH. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, these amendments have been cleared on both sides of the aisle. I urge their adoption.

Mr. ROTH. I thank the Senator from Montana and the Senator from Texas for their comments, and I will certainly look at these issues as this legislation moves to conference with the House.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendments be dispensed with.

Mr. ROTH

Mr. ROTH. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendments Nos. 2365 and 2366, Withdrawn

Mr. ROTH. I further note that this amendment has been cleared on both sides of the aisle. It is a good amendment. I urge its adoption. Mr. KERREY addressed the Chair.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to withdraw amendment No. 2365 and amendment No. 2366.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, the second amendment of Senator Craig would limit the disclosure and use of Federal tax return information to the States to purposes necessary to administer State income-tax laws. I send the amendment to the desk.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I have two amendments that have already been discussed by the senior Senator from Idaho, Senator Craig. Both amendments have been cleared on both sides of the aisle. Amendment No. 2377 (Purpose: To require disclosure to taxpayers concerning disclosure of their income tax return information to parties outside the Internal Revenue Service)

Mr. ROTH. I send the amendment to the desk.

Mr. ROTH. The first amendment I will offer would require disclosure to taxpayers concerning disclosure of their income-tax return information to parties outside the Internal Revenue Service.

Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.