IRS phone service is more difficult this tax filing season, experts say

Apnews - Apr 14th, 2025

Taxpayers seeking assistance from the IRS may encounter increased difficulty reaching agents due to significant staffing cuts. Experts predict these challenges will worsen next year as the Trump administration's initiative to reduce federal workforce size continues, potentially cutting the IRS workforce by nearly half. Current tax return processing times remain consistent with last year, but layoffs and buyouts are straining IRS resources, resulting in overwhelmed staff and longer phone wait times. The situation is exacerbated by the recent layoff of 7,000 probationary employees, who were later ordered to be reinstated by a judge.

The broader implications of these workforce reductions are concerning for future tax seasons. Despite assurances from the Treasury that staffing cuts aim to enhance efficiency, tax compliance experts worry about the IRS's ability to handle tax filing and collections effectively. The reductions could severely impact taxpayer services, particularly for those trying to resolve debts. The situation underscores the challenges faced by the IRS in balancing efficiency with service quality, raising questions about the long-term impact on taxpayer compliance and satisfaction.

Elon Musk Trump Administration Department Of Government Efficiency Irs Staffing Cuts Tax Season Taxpayer Services

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.2

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides a timely examination of IRS staffing issues and their impact on taxpayer services. It effectively highlights concerns from experts and provides relevant data on tax return processing times and refunds. However, the narrative is somewhat imbalanced, focusing heavily on negative aspects without offering a comprehensive range of perspectives. The use of anonymous sources and lack of detailed transparency in the methodology reduce the source quality and transparency scores. Despite these weaknesses, the article remains accessible and relevant, addressing a topic of significant public interest with potential implications for policy and public opinion. Overall, the story is informative but could benefit from greater balance and transparency to enhance its credibility and engagement potential.

Accuracy

The story presents several factual claims that align with available data, such as the increased difficulty of reaching the IRS by phone and the processing times for tax returns. The article states that processing times are largely in line with the previous year, which is supported by the reported figures of 101.4 million returns processed this year compared to 101.8 million last year. However, the claim that the IRS may lose nearly half its workforce is significant and requires further verification, as the exact numbers and future implications are not entirely clear. The mention of a federal judge ordering the reinstatement of laid-off workers adds complexity but lacks specific details on the outcome.

Balance

The article primarily focuses on the negative impacts of IRS staffing cuts, highlighting concerns from experts like Eric Santos and Sakinah Tillman. While it includes a statement from a Treasury spokesperson about efficiency improvements, it lacks a broader range of perspectives, particularly from IRS officials who might provide a different view on the staffing changes. The reliance on expert opinions without contrasting viewpoints could lead to an imbalanced narrative.

Clarity

The article is generally clear in its language and structure, making it accessible to readers. It logically presents the issues with IRS staffing and potential impacts on taxpayer services. However, some complex issues, such as the specifics of the federal judge's order and the details of the 'deferred resignation program,' could be explained more thoroughly to enhance understanding.

Source quality

The article cites various experts and an anonymous Treasury spokesperson, which lends some credibility to the claims. However, the use of anonymous sources can reduce reliability, as it limits accountability. The inclusion of named experts like Eric Santos and Sakinah Tillman adds authority, but the absence of direct quotes from IRS officials or detailed data sources weakens the overall source quality.

Transparency

The article provides limited transparency regarding the sources of its information and the methodology behind its claims. While it mentions expert opinions and a Treasury statement, it does not delve into how these conclusions were reached or provide detailed evidence to support the claims. The lack of explicit context or explanation of how the staffing cuts are expected to improve efficiency affects the transparency of the report.