FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: FEBRUARY 1, 2016
A MINEFIELD OF RISKS FOR TAXPAYERS
New Analysis on the Perils Taxpayers Face from Unregulated Preparers, Lack
of Fee Disclosure, and Tax-Time Financial Products
(BOSTON) With all the W-2s sent and tax season in high gear, advocates
from the National Consumer Law Center and Consumer Federation of America
issued their annual advisory warning of the risks and problems faced by
taxpayers who use paid tax preparers. These include:
Fraud and errors from unregulated preparers. The vast majority
of paid tax preparers are not required to meet any minimum educational,
competency, or training standards. Consumers are at risk from preparers who
make errors or even commit fraud, exposing them to the possibility of
audits by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) or even criminal sanctions.
Lack of price transparency and inability to comparison shop.
Tax preparation is one of the few services that do not provide meaningful
price information to consumers. Fees can be as high as $400 to $500, but
preparers often refuse to provide firm price quotes ahead of time.
Needless fees paid for financial products. Paid preparers offer
and promote financial products that can be unnecessary and expensive, such
as refund anticipation checks (RACs).
“There’s a minefield of dangers for the tens of millions of consumers who
use paid tax preparers to fill out their most important financial document
of the year,” said Chi Chi Wu, staff attorney at the National Consumer Law
Center (NCLC). “The hazards range from losing a chunk of their refund for
unnecessary financial products, to errors or even fraud committed by
Consumer advocates are also seeing a new generation of refund anticipation
loans (RALs) on the market. These RALs are different from the ones that
were driven from the market several years ago in that they claim not to
charge a fee for the loan. However, some of these products could pose other
perils, such as the possibility that paid preparers will increase their tax
prep fee to include the cost of the RAL.
Taxpayers at Risk from Incompetent and Abusive Paid Preparers
In all but four states (CA, MD, NY and OR), paid tax preparers are not
required to meet any minimum educational, competency, or training
standards. While some tax preparers are licensed as attorneys, certified
public accountants (CPAs) or credentialed by the IRS as enrolled agents,
these certifications are not mandatory and most preparers do not have
them. Indeed, the only tax preparers, apart from attorneys, CPAs and
enrolled agents, required to pass a test are the unpaid volunteers at
Volunteer Income Tax Assistance (VITA) and AARP Tax-Aide sites.
A recent national poll commissioned by the Consumer Federation of America
reveals broad public support for government oversight of tax preparers. The
poll found that more than 4 out of 5 respondents believe that paid tax
preparers should be required to pass a competency test, be licensed by the
state, and provide a clear, upfront list of fees before completing a
taxpayer’s return. In particular, the poll found that:
· 80% of the public supports requiring paid tax preparers to pass
a test administered by the government that would ensure that paid
preparers have the knowledge and training to complete taxpayer returns
· 56% believe paid preparers should have special training but
don’t need a degree and 31% of the public believes that paid tax preparers
should have a college degree in accounting.
· 83% of the public supports licensing requirements for paid
preparers a state agency that would also accept and resolve complaints,
and enforce consumer protections.
The complete results of the poll are available at: http://bit.ly/1PpGALd
“This new national poll shows that taxpayers want the protection and peace
of mind that their preparer is competent and held accountable,” said
Michael Best, senior policy advocate at the Consumer Federation of America.
“State legislatures and Congress have the authority to implement common
sense protections for taxpayers, who have expressed strong support for such
The lack of competency standards for paid preparers exposes consumers to
potential error or even fraud, as well as potentially costing federal and
state governments tens of millions of dollars in lost tax revenue. Multiple
rounds of mystery shopper tests of tax preparers have found high levels of
errors, and even instances of fraud by tax preparers
In 2015, mystery shopper testing
single parent who was not entitled to claim her minor child because the
child lived with the other parent for more than 50% of the time. Yet 8 of
the 15 preparers claimed the child, resulting in an improper Earned Income
Tax Credit (EITC) of $2,523. Another set of testers posed as graduate
students with a paid internship for which s/he was given a 1099. Ten of the
14 preparers did not properly use a Schedule C to report the internship
income, resulting in the omission of nearly $1,300 in self-employment tax.
And 3 of the 4 preparers who did properly use a Schedule C took
questionable deductions, including one preparer who made up $9,562 in
fictitious businesses expenses.
In 2014, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO)
19 randomly selected tax preparer offices. Only two of the 19, or 11
percent, of the returns had the correct refund amount. Other rounds of
mystery shopper testing are summarized in a March 2014 report
percentages of problematic tests in these other testing programs ranging
from 25 percent to 90 percent. NCLC has developed a Model Individual Tax
Preparer Regulation Act
for states to consider in regulating tax preparers.
Tax Preparation Fees Are High and Opaque
Tax preparation fees are often high, and almost always non-transparent,
making it nearly impossible for consumers to comparison shop. Tax
preparers can charge up to $500 or more in fees, yet many will claim they
cannot give a price quote or will give inaccurate estimates.
Mystery shopper testing conducted last year by consumer groups revealed
wildly differing fees for each of the two testing scenarios. Fees ranged
from $37 to $427 for the single parent scenario, and $50 to $341 for the
graduate student scenario. Furthermore, fees were generally higher for the
single parent tester when the preparer improperly claimed the daughter. The
GAO testing in 2014 similarly found widely varying fees, even between
offices affiliated with the same chain: between $160 to $408 for one
testing scenario and $300 to $587 in the other.
“The lack of transparency and disclosure in tax preparation fees is
appalling,” stated National Consumer Law Center staff attorney Chi Chi Wu.
“Without adequate price information, it’s a complete failure of the
The CFA poll, previously discussed above, found overwhelming public support
for requiring paid preparers to disclose their fees: 89% of respondents
support requiring paid preparers to supply an upfront list of fees. The NCLC
Model Individual Tax Preparer Regulation Act includes a provision that
would require paid preparers to provide a standardized disclosure of their
fees in the form of a table.
“It is not surprising that the public overwhelmingly supports requiring
upfront pricing from paid preparers—households need every penny of their
refunds and should be able to comparison shop paid preparers for the best
value just like they can for other services,” said CFA senior policy
advocate Michael Best.
Two free alternatives for low-income taxpayers are Volunteer Income Tax
Assistance (VITA) sites (1-800-906-9887 or www.irs.gov) and AARP Tax-Aide
sites: (www.aarp.org/findtaxhelp). Choosing a VITA or AARP Tax-Aide site
saves eligible taxpayers the cost of a tax preparation fee. Many VITA sites
can also help taxpayers open a bank account or get a low-cost prepaid card,
which enables taxpayers to get fast refunds without paying a fee. Free tax
preparation may be available on military bases as well.
There are also a number of websites that allow low- and middle-income
taxpayers to prepare and file their taxes online for free, such as the IRS
Free File program (www.irs.gov).
Tax-Time Financial Products Evolve
In the past, millions of taxpayers lost a significant chunk of their
refunds to high-cost, high-risk refund anticipation loans (RALs) made by
banks. While these bank RALs are no longer being made, other tax-time
financial products can drain the refunds of taxpayers or otherwise put them
– Refund anticipation checks (RACs) – RACs are a financial product
used to deliver tax refunds and to pay for tax preparation fees by
deducting them from the refund. Preparers charge a fee for these RACs of
$25 to $60, instead of setting up direct deposit for free.
– RALs from non-bank lenders – Payday and other non-bank lenders are
offering RALs. These loans could be more expensive and riskier than bank
– “No–fee” RALs – Some lenders are offering RALs that do not impose a
charge directly on the consumer, though there is concern that some
preparers may pass the cost of the loans onto the taxpayer through an
increased tax preparation fee or junk fees.
With RACs, the bank opens a temporary bank account into which the IRS
direct deposits the refund monies. After the refund is deposited, the bank
issues the consumer a check or prepaid card and closes the temporary
account. RACs do not deliver refund monies any faster than the IRS can,
yet they cost $25 to $60. Some preparers charge additional “add-on” junk
fees for RACs, fees that can range from $25 to several hundred dollars.
RACs are the major tax-time financial product on the market. There were an
estimated 21.6 million taxpayers who received a RAC in 2014.
Since the main purpose of a RAC is to defer payment of the tax preparation
until the refund arrives, it can be viewed as a high-cost loan of that
fee. If a taxpayer pays $35 to defer payment of a $350 tax preparation fee
for 3 weeks, the annual percentage rate (APR) is 174%.
Non-bank and “No-Fee” RALs
After banks exited the RAL market in 2012, non-bank lenders, such as payday
lenders, started to make RALs. These RALs are not nearly as widespread as
bank RALs once were. In 2014, only 35,000 consumers applied for a non-bank
RAL, according to IRS data. In comparison, about 12.7 million consumers
obtained a RAL at the height of the industry in 2002.
Non-bank RALs could be more costly or riskier than the ones made by banks.
For example, in 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)
against a non-bank RAL lender, Southwest (S/W) Tax Loans, that targeted
Native American taxpayers. The CFPB alleged that the RALs had Annual
Percentage Rates (APRs) of over 240%, but that S/W Tax Loans fraudulently
disclosed lower APRs. In addition, when customers asked about the status of
their refunds, they were deceptively persuaded to take out a second or
third RAL even though the IRS had already sent their refunds.
One of the largest non-bank RAL lenders is 1st Money Center. Previously, 1st
Money Center offered RALs through Liberty Tax Service and software
providers such as Drake Software, for which it charged fees translating
into APRs as high as 218%. This year, 1st Money Center is offering
“advances” that do not impose a charge on the consumer for the loan. In
addition, 1st Money Center states it has exited the payday loan business.
1st Money Center is offering “no-fee” RALs of up to $750 through a number
of entities, such as Jackson Hewitt and Liberty Tax. In addition, 1st Money
Center is the official lender for the “Prefund” no-fee RAL offered by Santa
Barbara Tax Products Group (SBTPG), which was purchased in 2014 by prepaid
card provider Green Dot.
Another lender that is making “no-fee” RALs is Republic Bank & Trust.
Republic was the last bank to stop making high-cost RALs in 2012, and it
appears that the bank is back in the business of tax refund lending.
Even though these “no-fee” RALs do not impose a fee directly on the
consumer, this new generation of tax-time loans could present risks for
consumers. The lenders charge the tax preparers a fee of $35 to $45 for
these RALs. Preparers might pass along these fees, or charge even more, by
padding their tax preparation fees or by charging separate “add-on” junk
fees. Since few consumers get a firm price estimate before having their
refund prepared, these hidden fees can be hard to avoid. SBTPG has stated
that it prohibits preparers from charging higher tax preparation fees to
Prefund customers and that it will audit preparers to enforce that rule. In
addition, consumers apply for Prefund RALs directly with SBTPG, so the
preparer does not know which customers are approved for the loan. However,
tax preparers who use RALs offered through other channels might pass along
the RAL fee.
Previously, one risk of RALs was that, if the refund is miscalculated or
seized by the government to repay a student loan or another debt, the
consumer could be liable for repaying the loan. However, SBTPG has stated
that its no-fee RALs is a non-recourse loan, i.e., the consumer is not
required to repay the loan if the refund is not received. According to the
Republic Bank’s loan is non-recourse as well. However, it is unclear
whether other “no-fee” RALs are non-recourse.
Upcoming Report Available in March 2016
NCLC and CFA will publish its annual comprehensive report on the tax
preparation industry and tax-time financial products in March 2016. The
report will be available on NCLC’s website at www.nclc.org and on CFA’s
website at www.consumerfed.org.
*NCLC Report: **Prepared in Error* (April 2015) is available at:
*NCLC Report: **Riddled Returns* (March 2014) is available at:
*NCLC’s Model Individual Tax Preparer Regulation Act* (November 2013), is
NCLC has worked for over a decade on the issue of tax-time financial
products, particularly refund anticipation loans (RALs). NCLC’s annual RAL
reports and other materials are available at
*CFA Report: **Public Views on Paid Tax Preparation: Strong Public Support
for New Consumer Protections to Prevent Errors and Fraud* (January 2016) is
available at: http://bit.ly/1PpGALd
*CFA Report:* *Protecting Consumers at Tax Time: Federal and State Efforts
to Address Common Problems Associated with Paid Tax Preparation* (January
2015) is available at: http://bit.ly/1He2Cm5