[ad_1]
T The Trump administration's decision to grant tax refunds despite stopping funding from the IRS could bring it back to a legal gray area.
As with other aspects of the government's closure, the decision is political in essence: in addition to the pragmatic desire to meet the government's obligations to taxpayers, the Trump government is also motivated by the desire to avoid retaining the repayments due to the closure and further weaken the president's position in the fight on the wall of the border with Mexico.
Refunds may require the administration to potentially call back thousands of IRS employees to work without pay. But the law requires unfunded functions deemed non-essential to be closed when funding is exhausted, as is currently the case for the majority of the federal government, as long as it does not threaten property or human life.
On Tuesday, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer criticized the administration's decision, saying they were only trying to limit political pressure on congressional Republicans and their constituents .
"What worries me is the administration who thinks they can set their own rules, have their cake and eat it too," Hoyer said. "He wants to shut down the government and not undermine any of his priorities. This is not a reasonable position to take, nor, in my opinion, a legal position to take.
The decision of the administration to pay repayments also poses a dilemma to the Democrats. They would risk a political reaction in case of legal challenge of the continuation of the refund of the tax.
As a legal justification, officials on Monday quoted a 2011 Treasury Department's 2011 emergency plan to retain tax return processing, including refunds, on the grounds that not doing so could harm state property: Income generated by the collection of taxes. In addition to wanting to collect taxes, the government must also pay interest on payments, including repayments, delayed by a shutdown, which would mean that it would have less money than what it would cost. he would be without interruption.
But this 2011 focus suggested that only electronic filings could be repaid, as more effort would be needed to close the IRS automated filing system rather than continue to operate normally.
Although the Trump administration cites the 2011 forecast, the Obama Administration and Budget Office has decided not to collect taxes or issue refunds at a closure. Trump's OMB overturned this decision.
During most of the Obama administration, Mark Mazur, executive director of the Tax Policy Center and former deputy secretary in charge of tax policy at the Treasury Department, was not sure that the decision of the Trump administration is legal – but did not know either that anyone would challenge it.
"It's a gray area," Mazur said. "I think what you see are two different OMBs who make two different decisions."
Mazur added that it's hard to see who is harmed by issuing refunds, although Congress may Legally claiming that his power was illegally usurped by the IRS for refunds or employees could sue, claiming that they were illegally forced to work without pay.
But so far, the union of IRS employees and congressional Democrats are on fire, waiting to see what the detailed directions of the administration will be.
To the question of whether the Democrats would sue the government, as they did for some Trump-related orders from Trump, Hoyer responded, "We can, but let's see what happens. "
[ad_2]
Source link
