OMB Generic Survey Clearance_110812

OMB Generic Survey Clearance_110812.pdf

IRS TAXPAYER BURDEN SURVEYS

OMB: 1545-2212

⚠️ Notice: This form may be outdated. More recent filings and information on OMB 1545-2212 can be found here:

Document [pdf]

Download: pdf | pdf

OMB #1545-2212

OMB SUPPORTING STATEMENT
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE
IRS TAXPAYER BURDEN SURVEYS
TIRNO-10-Q-00152
The Supporting Statement for OMB 1545-2212
IRS Taxpayer Burden Surveys
Surveys Covered Under This Clearance Request.
Individual Taxpayers
2010 Individual Burden Survey (already approved) (Data collection 9/1/2011-5/31/2012)
2011 Individual Burden Survey (Data collection 5/1/2012-5/31/2013)
2011 Taxpayer Compliance Burden Survey (Data collection 8/1/2012- 11/13/2012)
2012 Individual Burden Survey (Data collection 5/1/2013-6/31/2014)
2012 Taxpayer Compliance Burden Survey (Data collection 3/1/2013-7/31/2013)
Entity Taxpayers
2010 Tax Exempt Entity Burden Survey (Data collection 11/22/2010-9/24/2012)
2012 Business Taxpayer Burden Survey (Data collection 5/1/2013-7/31/2015)

Justification

Circumstances Making the Collection of Information Necessary.
The IRS Taxpayer Burden Surveys are designed to gather statistically representative taxpayer data that allow
the IRS to estimate taxpayer compliance burden as well as to understand how and why taxpayer burden
changes over time. Because tax law is ever-changing, IRS regulations are regularly issued and updated, and
tax-filing technology continues to improve, an ongoing survey effort is necessary to inform the IRS of the
impact of these changes on taxpayer burden. The suite of burden surveys recognizes differences between
taxpayers (individuals, corporations, partnerships, and tax-exempt organizations). However, across all of the
surveys, the data are captured in an internally consistent manner (in terms of time and money). The survey
data are not viewed discretely, but rather used as inputs to improve its Taxpayer Burden Model (discussed
below).
Unlike the more common customer satisfaction surveys, the success of the IRS Taxpayer Burden Surveys
depends significantly on being able to cross walk results back to previous surveys. By doing so, the Taxpayer
Burden Model can assist the IRS and policy makers in determining the sources of changes to taxpayer burden.
Although it may be possible to combine certain questions or it may be deemed beneficial to split an existing
question into two or more specific questions, we strive to ensure comparability across successive data
collection efforts.
Individual Taxpayers
Each year, individual taxpayers in the United States submit more than 140 million tax returns to the Internal
Revenue Service (IRS). The IRS uses the information in these returns, recorded on roughly one hundred
distinct forms and supporting schedules, to administer a tax system whose rules span thousands of pages.
Managing such a complex and broad-based tax system is costly but represents only a fraction of the total
burden of the tax system. Equally, if not more burdensome, is the time and out-of-pocket expenses that
citizens spend in order to comply with tax laws and regulations.

OMB #1545-2212

The IRS has conducted prior surveys of individual taxpayers in 1984 (OMB 1545-0802), 1999 (OMB 15451688), 2000 (W&I taxpayers OMB 1545-1688, Self-employed taxpayers OMB 1545-1740), 2007 (OMB
1545-1349). Changes in tax regulations, tax administration, tax preparation methods, and taxpayer behavior
continue to alter the amount and distribution of taxpayer burden. To update our understanding of this burden,
the IRS contracted Westat to survey individual taxpayers regarding the time and money taxpayers spend in
response to their federal income tax obligations. We intend to conduct an updated survey to better reflect the
current tax rules and regulations, the increased usage of tax preparation software, increased efficiency of such
software, changes in tax preparation regulations, the increased use of electronic filing, the behavioral response
of taxpayers to the tax system, the changing use of services, both IRS and external, and related information
collection needs.
Entity Taxpayers
The purpose of the IRS entity surveys is to provide Congress and the President with accurate estimates of the
costs incurred by corporations, partnerships, limited liability companies, tax-exempt organizations, and
government entities in complying with federal rules and regulations.
The critical items on the survey concern respondents’ time and cost burden estimates for complying with tax
filing regulations. Additional items on the survey will serve as contextualizing variables for interpretation of
the burden items. These items include information regarding tax preparation methods and activities, taxrelated recordkeeping, gathering materials, learning about tax law, using IRS and/or non-IRS taxpayer
services, and tax form completion.

Purpose and Use of the Information Collection.
The IRS is developing improved methods for measuring, estimating, and modeling taxpayer burden. The data
collected from this survey of individual taxpayers will be used as an input to a micro-simulation model that
estimates taxpayer burden. The IRS will also publish the relevant updated burden estimates in tax form
instructions to inform taxpayers. Three types of questions will be asked: questions framing the activities to be
measured, burden measurement questions, and questions to better inform taxpayer needs related to their
compliance burden.
The information collected via the IRS Burden Surveys will be used by IRS to support or achieve several
important goals:
1. Fulfill its mission to provide top quality service to taxpayers
2. Better understand taxpayer time and out-of-pocket burden
3. Improve the accuracy and comparability of the information collection budget estimates it provides under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
4. Provide data to be used in micro-simulation models to allow estimation of the impact of proposed
legislation on taxpayer burden before the legislation is enacted
5. Support ongoing analysis of the role of compliance costs in influencing taxpayer behavior and identifying
taxpayer needs.
6. Provide information to the Executives and Operating Divisions for assessing the impact of programs on
taxpayer burden
7. Support tax analysis in the Treasury Department Offices
8. Assist the IRS in evaluating the effectiveness and associated impact on taxpayer costs and behavior of the
following IRS initiatives:
• Return preparer e-file initiative
• Return preparer regulation initiative
• Tax package mailing cost reduction initiative

OMB #1545-2212

The purpose of the collection is to develop or update the IRS Taxpayer Burden Model (ITBM).
The ITBM is a mathematical representation of the compliance burden associated with pre-filing and filing
activities, such as tax-related recordkeeping and return preparation that would not have been incurred in the
absence of the federal tax system.
Compliance costs incurred post-filing as a result of amended returns or IRS enforcement processes are also
included in the model. This model was first developed for individual taxpayers in 2005 and has since been
periodically updated and expanded to cover other taxpayer types.
Information about the time and costs collected from the IRS taxpayer burden surveys allow for development
of a robust predictive model. This information is not available in the administrative tax return data so
surveys are a critical input to the model. Each survey is linked to the matching administrative record to
create the estimation data set. The administrative record includes selected items from the primary tax forms
and various secondary forms and schedules.
Both the survey and administrative records are extensively reviewed and cleaned for memory recall,
administrative, or processing errors. The data receive further cleaning through the application of robust
regression methods. Data missing as a result of incomplete responses or robust regression are imputed using
multiple imputation techniques.
The micro-simulation model is used to develop baseline and what-if compliance cost estimates. These
estimates are used to support recommendations to simplify the tax forms or schedules or provide better IRS
instructions to the taxpayers. The model is also used to better understand the choices taxpayers make when
preparing their tax returns (e.g., filing electronically, using a paid tax preparer). In addition, the model is
used to provide the information reporting estimates to OMB related to the impact on the baseline
compliance burden of proposed or recently enacted legislative or regulatory changes.
The model also helps understanding the role of technological advancements in mitigating compliance
burden, even as the tax law becomes more complex, because the tax preparer and tax software industries
continue to develop innovative ways to help taxpayers comply with new tax laws and IRS regulations. The
role of these preparation methods is represented in the model.
Advancements in electronic tax administration also play a role in reducing burden. OMB’s burden
reduction data calls have asked us to emphasize how technology affects burden. Estimates generated by the
burden model allow us to provide this information.
For a complete description of the Individual Taxpayer Burden Model, see
2010_Final_Research_Conference_Paper.pdf.

Consideration Given to Information Technology.
Data will be collected by using a mixed mode (i.e., mail, web-based, and telephone) data collection
methodology. The primary methods of collecting the survey data will be via mail or web. All respondents
will be offered the option of completing the survey online. The secure web survey will be posted online using
a proprietary web survey delivery system developed by our contractor, Westat. The software allows
participants to skip questions and complete the survey in more than one session (i.e., the respondent can leave
the web survey and come back to finish it at a later time). Participant responses will be captured, stored and
tracked in a response database which can then be used to update and extend the Burden Model, as applicable.

The mail survey will be created using TeleForm technology, a software system for intelligent data capture and
image processing. The software extracts indexing information automatically from any document type
through the use of multiple recognition engines. TeleForm reads hand print, machine print, optical marks, bar
codes, and signatures. This will expedite the collection of responses from the mail survey and minimize error.

OMB #1545-2212

Follow-up prompting will make use of automated software that will manage telephone calls (both prerecorded messages and prompts delivered by live interviewers) to respondents. A tailored survey management
system will track cases throughout all modes of contact, including the survey invitation, prompting reminders,
and data retrieval.

Duplication of Information.
To our knowledge, there is no duplication of information. This burden survey asks for information regarding
how an individual/entity taxpayer prepares and submits their tax return. Information regarding the
preparation method (use of a paid preparer, use of tax software, self preparation without assistance) and
submission method (electronically filed, mail) are available from tax return data, but are asked on the survey
in order to target questions about specific methods to respondents using those methods, thus reducing
respondent burden.

Reducing the Burden on Small Entities.
These individual/entity burden survey efforts will impact small businesses to the extent that some selected
respondents are self-employed sole proprietors or small corporations, partnerships. Collecting information
from these small businesses will enable the IRS to better understand what processes or tax items are
particularly burdensome for small business and will support IRS efforts to target those items for burden
reduction administratively, as well as in coordination with policymakers.
The surveys will be conducted using either a mail-first or web-first initial contact method. All respondents,
including those that are self-employed small businesses, will be given the option to take the survey using the mode
that is the most convenient and least burdensome to them. We anticipate that providing the option to complete the
survey using the web-based survey (as opposed to a CATI/telephone survey) will reduce the burden of completing
the survey by allowing small businesses and other taxpayers to complete the survey at a time and place of their
convenience.

6. Consequences of Not Conducting Collection.
The IRS compliance burden surveys are instrumental to estimating and tracking approximately 75% of the
total information collection budget of the federal government. This reporting is required by Congress under
the Paperwork Reduction Act. Further, IRS methodology and associated estimates of the monetized value of
time derived from these studies has been used by OMB in estimating the overall monetized burden of all
federal government information collections. Results from the surveys also support program evaluation and
policy design for IRS and other Offices of the Department of the Treasury. These surveys are sent to
taxpayers shortly after they submit their tax returns in an effort to minimize recall bias about this information
filing process. Periodic updates of the survey are necessary in order to identify changes in the impacts of
different drivers of taxpayer burden, allowing us to adjust the model and associated estimates appropriately
over time. Failing to collect these data would limit the Government’s ability to provide accurate current
estimates of these costs.
Support of OMB Initiatives. A major program evaluation question for the Department of the Treasury
specifically, and OMB generally, is estimating the extent to which Federal agency partnerships with third
parties in the area of Electronic Tax Administration have generated productivity gains which in turn lower
burden. A cross-sectional analysis can inform estimation of the impact of more taxpayers using technologyassisted methods but cannot speak to the extent to which such methods have become more productive over
time as a result of government and third-party investments. Qualitative evidence discussed in the FY2010
Information Collection Budget point to the likely existence of significant burden reductions over the past
decade from Treasury Department technology investments and industry partnerships. Such an analysis
critically depends on time-series data as the point of the analysis is to estimate how productivity of a given
information collection method changes over time. The 2010, 2011, and 2012 Individual Taxpayer Burden

OMB #1545-2212

Surveys will inform this research by providing, for the first time, time-series data collected on an annual basis,
with comparability to earlier data collections.
Support of Paid Preparer Program. Key questions in the evaluation of the paid preparer regulation
initiative and the preparer e-file mandate involve determining the impact of registration and mandatory efiling on compliance burden and return quality. The individual burden survey provides effective cost-benefit
analysis of these transformative programs in tax administration by using a difference-in-difference analysis
comparing data from survey respondents who used an unregistered tax preparer (incurring no additional
regulatory costs) versus respondents that used a registered tax professional (incurring the additional regulatory
costs), controlling for other sources of variation. The Return Preparer Office will use this information as part
of its evaluation and management of the program.
Evaluation of tax-exempt organization Form 990 redesign. Tax Year 2010 is the first year for which a
multi-part, multi-year series of changes to the 990 family of forms and associated filing requirements for tax
exempt organizations have been fully phased-in. As such it represents a unique need and opportunity to
update the baseline burden associated with the completely redesigned forms and processes. While an earlier
effort was made to estimate the change in burden associated with the redesign effort, these estimates were
made with an older model based on relationships estimated more than two decades prior to the redesign. A
new survey based on experiences with the fully-phased in redesign would give us a strong new baseline
against which to estimate future changes.
Compliance burden reduction research. The IRS seeks to better understand taxpayer needs and how unmet
needs affect tax preparation and filing behavior. A better understanding of compliance burden is foundational
to this research because the costlier it is to submit information properly, the less likely it is to be submitted
properly. Improperly submitted information is a major driver of IRS administrative costs and associated
taxpayer post-filing burden. Better understanding this relationship informs both prioritization of information
collection and identification of communications, services, and technology to lower the cost of a given
information collection. The taxpayer burden surveys are a key component of this research plan.
Integrated reporting of taxpayer burden across taxpayer segments. Currently, individual and entity-level
taxpayer burden is estimated and reported using different methodologies. This hinders integrated reporting
across taxpayer segments and leads to inconsistent estimates for so-called dual use forms used by both
business entities and individuals. The IRS is currently collecting business taxpayer burden data in such a way
as to be able to produce business taxpayer burden estimates consistent with the individual taxpayer burden
numbers. The last remaining major taxpayer segment for inclusion in this integrated modeling and reporting
framework is the tax-exempt segment. Delaying the tax-exempt organization survey will delay integrated
reporting and analysis across the taxpayer segments and will further perpetuate the reporting of compliance
burden for tax exempt organizations using data and technological assumptions that are almost 30 years old.

Special Circumstances.
There are no special circumstances. The collection of information is conducted in a manner consistent with
the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.6.

Consultations with Persons Outside the Agency.
Although the program is led and managed by the IRS, the IRS consults external stakeholders and survey
research experts for input related to the program at key decision points. This research program and the
associated data collections have been discussed with representatives of the following groups outside of IRS:
• Department of the Treasury, Office of Tax Analysis
• Westat (survey vendor)
• Enrolled Practitioners

OMB #1545-2212

•
•

Stakeholder representatives to the IRS National Public Liaison
Academic, non-profit, and public sector tax policy-makers and researchers through the meetings of the
National Tax Association and the IRS Research Conference

Payment or Gift.
No incentive will be provided to respondents of a Business or Tax-Exempt Entity Burden Survey. Past
survey response rates and professional judgment of our survey vendor indicate that an incentive is not
necessary for surveys of corporations, partnerships, tax-exempt entities, and other established and legal
entities.
There are no studies that suggest that an incentive would improve the response rate for the Taxpayer
Compliance Burden Survey. We do not have sufficient variance information to create an efficient enough
sample design to conduct such a test of the Post-Filing population with our planned sample size without
collapsing strata. Thus, no incentive will be offered in our initial Taxpayer Compliance Burden Survey, but
we may revisit this design aspect in a subsequent study once we have good variance data for this population.
For the 2011 ITB survey, each respondent will receive a $2 incentive with the survey mailing. The decision to
include the $2 incentive is based on the preliminary findings for the 2010 Individual Burden Survey. The
2010 Individual Burden Survey protocol included an extensive experiment involving whether a small
monetary incentive included with the first contact could improve the response rate. Based on Wave 1 results,
respondents who received the $2 incentive had an overall higher response rate than those who did not.
ITB10 Completes by Incentive Treatments (as of 4/20/12)
With incentive

44.92%

No incentive

38.42%

Incentives would be offered to attract respondent interest. They would not be offered for non-response
conversion.
Note: In the past fifteen years, the survey industry has experienced a steady decline in response rates (e.g.,
Groves, Dillman, Eltinge, and Little, 2002). In order to decrease nonresponse, incentives are often one
technique used to encourage participation.
Studies have consistently shown the inclusion of an incentive increases response rates, and that prepaid
incentives are more effective than incentives that are contingent upon completion of the survey (e.g., Church,
1993; Petriola and Bhattacharjee, 2009; Dillman, 2009). Shettle and Mooney (1999) concluded that incentives
in government surveys provide a “decided cost advantage” in improving response rates, without negatively
impacting non-response bias, data quality, or respondent good will.
While studies have shown that the marginal returns diminish as the incentive amount increases (James and
Bolstein 1990; Shaw et. al. 2001; Teisl et. al. 2009), there is still no agreement on an “optimal” incentive
amount. In fact, a study by Trussell and Lavrakas (2004) suggests that the optimal amount is variable and
dependent upon an individual’s previous interactions with the organization sponsoring the survey.
Given the unique relationship that individuals have with the IRS, the FY2010 Individual Taxpayer Burden
survey (ITB), previously approved, provided that half of the respondents receive a $2 incentive, while the
other half received no incentive. A comparison of the ITB survey response rates between the two surveys will
inform the use of incentives for the individual taxpayer burden surveys going forward. IRS will share its
findings in this regard with OMB in a timely manner.

OMB #1545-2212

Church, A.H., “Estimating the Effect of Incentives on Mail Survey Response Rates: A Meta-Analysis”,
Public Opinion Quarterly, 57: 62-79 (1993).
Dillman, D., Smyth, J., and Christian, L., Internet, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design
Method, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons (2008).
Groves, R., Dillman, D., Eltinge, J., and Little, R, Survey Nonresponse, New York: John Wiley and Sons
(2002).
James, Jeannine M., and Richard Bolstein, ‘‘The Effect of Monetary Incentives and Follow Up Mailings
on the Response Rate and Response Quality in Mail Surveys,’’ Public Opinion Quarterly 54:346–61
(1990).
Millar, M.M. and Dillman, D.A., “Improving Response to Web and Mixed-Mode Surveys”, Public
Opinion Quarterly, 1-21 (2011).
Petrolia, D.R. and Bhattacharjee, S., “Revisiting Incentive Effects: Evidence from a Random-Sample
Mail Survey on Consumer Preferences for Fuel Ethanol”, Public Opinion Quarterly, 73:537-550
(2009).
Shaw, M.J. et al, “The Use of Monetary Incentives in a Community Survey: Impact on Response Rates,
Data Quality, and Cost”, Health Services Research, 35: 1339-1346 (2001).
Shettle, C. and Mooney, G., “Evaluation of Using Monetary Incentives in a Government Survey”,
Mathematics Policy Research, National Science Foundation (1999).
Teisl, M.F., Roe, B. and Vayda, M., “Incentive Effects on Response Rates, Data Quality, and Survey
Administration Costs”, International Journal of Public Opinion Research 18 (2005).
Trussell, N. and Lavrakas, P.J., “The Influence of Incremental Increases in Token Cash Incentives on
Mail Survey Response: Is there an Optimal Amount?” Public Opinion Quarterly 68: 349-367 (2004).

10.

Confidentiality.
Confidentiality is not provided to respondents, however, they are reminded that participation is voluntary and
that the information collected will be used for research purposes only.

11.

Questions of a Sensitive Nature.
The survey itself does not include questions that would commonly be considered private or sensitive in nature.

12.

Burden of Information Collection.
Each respondent will receive either a letter with instructions to complete the survey (web-first) or a letter
and survey (mail-first), which they may spend about one minute reading. Each potential respondent will
participate only once. The potential response rate, which varies depending on the type of survey, is indicated
in the burden estimate charts below.
Estimated time to complete the surveys is based on results from prior cognitive interviews. We estimate that it
will take approximately the same time to complete the mail, web and phone versions of the questionnaire. The
content included in each instrument will be the same.
The total annual burden estimates for the covered surveys is as follows:

OMB #1545-2212

2010 Surveys
2011 Surveys
2012 Surveys

5,033 hours
4,093 hours
7,699 hours

The estimated burden for each survey is itemized below:
2010 Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey
Activity
Number of
Respondents
Reading invitation letter &
20,000
reminder postcards
Survey Completion
10,000
Total
2010 Tax Exempt Entity Burden Survey
Activity
Number of
Respondents
Reading invitation letter &
12,000
reminder postcards
Survey Completion
6,000
Total
2011 Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey
Activity
Number of
Respondents
Reading invitation letter &
20,000
reminder postcards
Survey Completion
10,000
Total
2011 Taxpayer Compliance Burden Survey
Activity
Number of
Respondents
27
Testing*
Reading invitation letter &
8,000
reminder postcards
Survey Completion
2,400
Total
2012 Business Taxpayer Burden Survey
Activity
Number of
Respondents
Reading invitation letter &
24,000
reminder postcards
Survey Completion
9,400
Total
2012 Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey
Activity
Number of
Respondents
Reading invitation letter &
20,000

Frequency of
Response
1
1

Frequency of
Response
1
1
1

Frequency of
Response
1
1

Frequency of
Response
1

Average Time

Annual Hour Burden

1 minute

333hours

18 minutes

3,000 hours
3,333 hours

Average Time

Annual Hour Burden

1 minute

200 hours

15 minutes

1,500 hours
1,700 hours

Average Time

Annual Hour Burden

1 minute

333 hours

18 minutes

3,000 hours
3,333 hours

Average Time

Annual Hour Burden

60 minutes
1 minute

27 hours
133 hours

15 minutes

600 hours
760 hours

Average Time

Annual Hour Burden

1 minute

400 hours

20 minutes

3,133 hours
3,633 hours

Average Time
1 minute

Annual Hour Burden
333 hours

OMB #1545-2212

reminder postcards
Survey Completion
Total

10,000

2012 Taxpayer Compliance Burden Survey
Activity
Number of
Respondents
Reading invitation letter &
8,000
reminder postcards
Survey Completion
2,400
Total

Frequency of
Response
1
1

18 minutes

Average Time

3,000 hours
3,333 hours

Annual Hour Burden

1 minute

133 hours

15 minutes

600 hours
733 hours

The annual burden cost to respondents is estimated to total $107,455 (5,033 hours x $21.35) for 2010, $87,386
(4,093 hours x $21.35) for 2011, and $164,374 (7,699 hours x $21.35) for 2012. This estimate is derived using
$21.35, the May 2010 average wage rate from the Bureau of Labor and Statistics Occupational Employment
Statistics Survey.

*The FY2011 Taxpayer Compliance Burden Survey will be the first attempt to collect information from the
post-filing population in a manner that allows integrated analysis with pre-filing and post-filing burden. To
better inform our survey effort and to ensure proper representation among post-filing groups (Correspondence
Audits, Field/Office Audits, Appeals and Collections) in the survey test process, we are requesting additional
respondents for survey testing for this survey only. Results of the Taxpayer Compliance Burden Survey testing
can be found in the accompanying file TCB Recommendations Memo FINAL_041612 v2.docx

13.

Annual Cost to Respondents.
There are no capital/start-up or ongoing operation/maintenance costs associated with collection of
taxpayer burden information.

14.

Cost to the Federal Government.
The estimated annualized cost to the Federal government for administering these surveys is estimated to be:
2010 Burden Surveys

___$2,200,000___.

•

Employee labor and materials (for developing the surveys, including developing, printing, storing
forms, developing computer systems, screens, or reports to support the collection, travel costs,
labor and materials for collecting the information, analyzing, evaluating, summarizing, and/or
reporting on the collected information): ___ $400,000_ _____.

•

Cost of contractor services:

____$1,800,000______.

OMB #1545-2212
2011 Taxpayer Burden Surveys

___$1,900,000_____.

•

Cost of contractor services:

$1,500,000

2012 Taxpayer Burden Surveys

15.

$2,800,000____.

•

Cost of contractor services:

$2,200,000

Reason for Change.
Survey efforts are being expanded to individual post-filing issues in an effort to provide data that will
supplement the pre-filing and at-filing compliance burden data that is obtained through the Individual
Taxpayer Burden Surveys.
The survey scope is also expanded to include corporations, partnerships, and tax-exempt organizations in
order to better understand the compliance burden faced by these organizations and how that burden compares
to the burden incurred by taxable corporations. Taken together, this will allow for an updated compliance
burden baseline for the IRS. It will also allow development of an associated model supporting subpopulation
and what-if analyses for these entities, similar to that currently provided in support of the 1545-0074
reporting. This will further allow consolidated reporting of forms by taxpayer type along the lines of 15450074 improving the ability of IRS, Treasury and OMB to management the associated information collections.

16.

Tabulation of Results, Schedule, Analysis Plans.
Upon conclusion of data collection for each survey, IRS staff will then use the results to develop updated
estimates of compliance burden for the relevant taxpayer segments. Detailed results from the survey will be
used to update the estimated relationships between taxpayer burden and taxpayer filing attributes. These
estimates will then be used to update the micro-simulation model that provides taxpayer burden estimates and
other tax-related information.
In addition, the IRS uses the survey results and micro-simulation model to estimate the changes in taxpayer
burden resulting from changes in tax law and/or administrative regulations. IRS will use the results of the
model to update our model producing annualized burden estimates, which are necessary for compliance with
the information collection budget and associated public reporting. Burden estimates (OMB No. 1545-0074)
based on the tax year 2010 and tax year 2011 individual taxpayer burden surveys will be used for the tax year
2012 and tax year 2013, respectively. Corresponding taxpayer-level estimates of burden for business and taxexempt taxpayers is envisioned beginning with tax year 2012 or 2013, subject to OMB approval once survey
results are available. Further publication of results is planned in tax research publications, internal IRS
program evaluation documents, and Department of Treasury tax policy analysis.

17. Display of OMB Approval Date.
The bureau will comply with requirements to display the expiration date for OMB approval of the
information collection on all instruments. It is requested that the currently approved OMB number
for the tax year 2010 individual burden survey (OMB No. 1545-2212) be approved for use with all of
the IRS burden surveys covered under this amended clearance request.
10

OMB #1545-2212
18.

Exceptions to Certification for Paperwork Reduction Act Submission.
Not applicable. No exceptions are believed to exist.

PART B – JUSTIFICATION
1. Describe (including a numerical estimate) the potential respondent universe and any
sampling or other respondent selection methods to be used.
Individual Burden Surveys
The potential respondent universe is composed of wage and investment and self-employed taxpayers living in the
United States. These taxpayers file a Form 1040, 1040-A, 1040-EZ, 1040-NR, 1040-NR-EZ, or 1040-X (as well as
supporting forms and schedules). The sample frame will be developed using IRS administrative data sources, such
as the returns transaction file (RTF). Some populations will be explicitly excluded from the survey population. This
includes taxpayers that are minors, deceased taxpayers, and taxpayers that have international addresses, including
active duty military serving overseas.
When sub-populations vary considerably, it is advantageous to sample each subpopulation (stratum) independently.
Stratification is the process of grouping members of the population into relatively homogeneous sub-groups before
sampling. The strata should be:
•
•

Mutually Exclusive. Members must be assigned to only one stratum, and
Collectively Exhaustive. No members can be excluded.

Then, random or systematic sampling can be applied within each stratum. Stratification often improves the
representativeness of the sample by reducing sampling error. It also tends to produce a weighted mean that has less
variability than the arithmetic mean of a simple random sample of the population. For these reasons, the proposed
sample design for this study is a stratified random sample.
The sampling approach has been designed to ensure that key taxpayer subgroups are adequately represented in the
study findings. The stratification includes two main criteria:
•

Preparation method. The method by which the taxpayer prepared his or her return.
o Prepared by a paid professional (paid)
o Prepared using tax preparation software (soft)
o Prepared by hand (self)

•

Differential burden. Variable reflecting type of activities performed by taxpayers to meet their Federal tax
obligations. Taxpayers are assigned burden corresponding to the highest burden item reported on their tax
forms.

OMB #1545-2212
Differential burden is summarized in the following table.

Strata

Definition

Low

Wage income;
Interest income;
Unemployment income;
Withholding;
Earning income tax credit (with no qualifying children) or advanced EIC;
Does not meet any of the conditions for higher levels of differential burden
Capital gain income (includes capital gains distributions and undistributed capital gains);
Dividend income;
Earned income tax credit (with qualifying children);
Estimated tax payments;
Retirement income (includes SS benefits, IRA distributions, or pensions and annuities);
Any non-refundable credit (includes child and dependent care expenses, education
credits, child tax credit, elderly or disabled credit);
Household employees;
Non-business adjustments;
Does not meet any of the conditions for higher levels of differential burden
Itemized deductions (includes mortgage interest, interest paid to financial institution;
charitable contributions, and medical expenses);
Foreign income, expense, tax, credit, or payment;
Moving expenses;
Simple Schedule C or C-EZ;
General business credit;
Does not meet any of the conditions for higher levels of differential burden
Farm income as reported on Schedule F;
Owns rental property as reported on Schedule E, including farm rental and low income
housing;
Estate or trust income as reported on Schedule E;
Employee business expense deductions;
Files AMT without AMT preference items;
Prior year alternative minimum tax credit;
Investment interest expense deduction;
Net loss as reported on Schedule C;
Depreciation or amortization as reported on Schedule C;
Expenses for business use of home as reported on Schedule C;
Does not meet any of the conditions for higher levels of differential burden
Cost of goods sold as reported on Schedule C;
Partnership or S-Corp income as reported on Schedule E;
Files AMT with AMT preference items

Low-Medium

Medium

Medium-High

High

These variables were chosen for stratification because of their importance to the modeling of taxpayer burden and
behavioral activities. The differential burden variable is included to ensure that different tax concepts, tax provisions,
and tax characteristics with differential recordkeeping and reporting requirements are included. The tax preparation
method variable ensures both a proper balance and an adequate representation of paid preparers, software preparers,
and self preparers, allowing us to reflect the role of technology and services in meeting recordkeeping and reporting
requirements.
The specifications of the sample design are developed to balance three main issues. The first is that it must be
efficient in the way the sample is distributed so that estimates from the sample are reliable (i.e., meet confidence
interval range requirements). Specifically, the aim is for the coefficient of variation to be under 2%. The second is
to ensure that there are a sufficient number of cases to meet the needs of the modeling tool to identify the
determinants of burden within and across strata. The third is that the design should facilitate comparisons between
future Individual Taxpayer Burden surveys and the previous surveys.
12

OMB #1545-2212
To make the Individual Taxpayer Burden survey comparable with the previous surveys, we continue to use the same
design variable (total monetized burden), the same stratified random sampling approach, and the same stratification
variables as in the tax year 2007 survey. In the 2007 survey, the Neyman allocation method was used to determine
the sample size for each stratum, subject to the total sample size of 15,000. It aimed to minimize the variance of
estimated mean burden; however, it limited the sophistication of the modeling of certain thin populations of interest.
For the tax year 2010 survey, we adjusted the Neyman allocation by requiring a minimum number of observations
per stratum. The minimum number of observations was defined by applying a common rule of thumb, which states
that a sample must include at least 10 or 15 observations per independent variable in a regression model (Stevens,
2002; Bartlett et al., 2001). To be conservative, we chose 15. Given that the expected number of independent
variables is 15, the minimum desired number of complete responses for modeling each stratum is 225.
Our objective was to minimize the variance of estimated mean burden constrained on this minimum sample size for
modeling, with response rate incorporated. We started with the same total sample size of 15,000 as in the tax year
2007 study, considering this as our base sample. We then calculate the coefficient of variation, given the minimum
stratum size of 225. Because the coefficient of variation was too large for the sample size of 15,000, we adjusted the
sample size to 20,000, and recalculated the coefficient of variation. The sample size of 20,000 resulted in a
coefficient of variation of 1.62%. This coefficient of variation met our requirement. Because we used a new data
collection protocol, it also allowed us some additional confidence that we will achieve the desired number and mix
of complete responses. See Table B1, Overall Return Distribution by Strata, below.
Table B1 – Sample allocation for ITB TY2010 survey
Monetized Burden
Projected
Est.
Est.
Strata
Pop Count
Mean
Std. Dev.
11 paid, low
12 paid, low-medium
13 paid, medium
14 paid, medium-high
15 paid, high
21 self, low
22 self, low-medium
23 self, medium
24 self, medium-high
25 self, high
31 soft, low
32 soft, low-medium
33 soft, medium
34 soft, medium-high
35 soft, high
Total
Overall CV

9,822,075
26,114,402
15,940,360
15,732,824
10,685,596
3,503,015
2,707,918
1,695,808
770,422
288,597
10,478,344
15,971,640
10,942,941
6,336,666
1,639,707
132,630,316

190.46
295.10
619.92
946.43
1,837.13
85.97
157.75
499.83
715.88
923.48
116.18
185.25
518.45
769.97
1,278.71
551.90

241.53
370.49
980.87
1,157.12
2,524.26
115.25
225.08
709.51
876.97
881.83
159.24
228.28
713.67
1,015.50
1,615.97

Est.
Response
Rate
0.2558
0.3213
0.3916
0.3970
0.3894
0.3594
0.3436
0.4355
0.4046
0.4119
0.3058
0.3678
0.4620
0.4396
0.4772

Sample
Allocation
880
1,644
2,656
3,092
4,582
626
655
517
556
546
736
619
1,327
1,093
472
20,000

Expected
Number of
Respondents
225
528
1,040
1,228
1,784
225
225
225
225
225
225
228
613
480
225
7,701
1.62%

A similar approach is expected for the TY2011 ITB survey. Using preliminary results from the TY2010 to guide the
sample allocation, we expect to be able to further refine the accuracy and efficiency of the information collection.
However, not having the benefits of this analysis at this time, we will conservatively assume identical sample size,
response rate and CV for the TY2010 and TY2011 ITB surveys.
The 2011 Taxpayer Compliance Burden Survey Universe is predominately TY2008, TY2009, and TY2010
taxpayers who had either a Collection or Examination case close in Calendar Year 2011. For this study we propose
to survey 8,000 taxpayers stratified into lower and higher return complexity and by their subsequent interaction with
IRS Examination, Collection and Appeals processes. Not having appropriate post-filing burden variance data
available, the 2011 Post-filing burden study will use the variance of post-filing cycle time to stratify the sample as a
proxy. We propose a follow-up 2012 post-filing burden of similar design, which would use burden variance from
the 2011 study to derive a more accurate and efficient design.
13

OMB #1545-2212
The Taxpayer Compliance Burden Strata are defined below.
Return
Complexity
Low

High

Post-Filing
Issue
Complexity
Appl
Coll-Low

Coll-High

Exam - Low

Definition
Wage income;
Interest income;
Unemployment income;
Withholding;
Earning income tax credit (with no qualifying children) or advanced EITC;
Does not meet any of the conditions for higher levels of differential burden
Capital gain income (includes capital gains distributions and undistributed capital gains);
Dividend income;
Earned income tax credit (with qualifying children);
Estimated tax payments;
Retirement income (includes SS benefits, IRA distributions, or pensions and annuities);
Any non-refundable credit (includes child and dependent care expenses, education
credits, child tax credit, elderly or disabled credit);
Household employees;
Non-business adjustments;
Does not meet any of the conditions for higher levels of differential burden
Itemized deductions (includes mortgage interest, interest paid to financial institution;
charitable contributions, and medical expenses);
Foreign income, expense, tax, credit, or payment;
Moving expenses;
Simple Schedule C or C-EZ;
General business credit;
Farm income as reported on Schedule F;
Owns rental property as reported on Schedule E, including farm rental and low income
housing;
Estate or trust income as reported on Schedule E;
Employee business expense deductions;
Files AMT without AMT preference items;
Prior year alternative minimum tax credit;
Investment interest expense deduction;
Net loss as reported on Schedule C;
Depreciation or amortization as reported on Schedule C;
Expenses for business use of home as reported on Schedule C;
Cost of goods sold as reported on Schedule C;
Partnership or S-Corp income as reported on Schedule E;
Files AMT with AMT preference items
Definition

Case closed to Appeals (CY 2011)
Case closed to Collections (CY 2011);
Completed an Instalment Agreement;
Paid Balance in Full;
Does not meet any of the conditions for higher levels of differential Collection burden
Account was placed in Currently Not Collectible Status Due to Hardship;
Balance Due Exceeded $25000;
Requested a Collections Due Process Hearing;
Requested an Equivalent Hearing;
Had a Federal Tax Lien to Released;
Submitted/Completed an Offer in Compromise;
Case Closed to Examination (CY 2011);
14

OMB #1545-2212

Exam-Med
Exam-High
Amended
Preparation
Method
Assisted
Unassisted

Case Closed to Automated Underreporter (CY 2011);
Examination technique was Correspondence;
Does not meet any of the conditions for higher levels of differential Examination burden
Examination technique was Office;
Does not meet any of the conditions for higher levels of differential Examination burden
Examination technique was Field
Filed an Amended Individual Income Tax Return (CY 2011)
Definition
Prepared by a paid professional (paid)
Prepared using tax software (soft)
Prepared by hand (self)

Entity Burden Surveys
Business entity taxpayers are defined here as corporations, limited liability companies, or partnerships filing any of
the following income tax returns: Forms 1065, 1065-B, 1066, 1120, 1120-F, 1120-FSC, 1120-L, 1120-ND, 1120-PC,
1120-RIC, 1120-REIT, 1120-S, or 1120-SF.
Tax-exempt organizations to be surveyed are taxpayers filing any of the Form 990, 990-EZ, or 990-PF.
Organizations filing Form 990-N are excluded from this planned survey data collection because their filing
requirements and compliance burden are minimal. The sample frame is all such tax exempt returns from the IRS
Returns Inventory and Classification System (RICS). Business entities and tax-exempt organizations will be selected
using a modified Neyman allocation. The sample strata will be based on return type, preparation method, and total
revenue. Preparation and revenue strata are shown below:
Preparation Method Strata:
1. Self Prepared
2. Paid Prepared (defined as presence of a paid preparer)
Total Revenue Strata:
Self Prepared:
1. Less than $5,000
2. $5,001 - $100,000
3. $100,001 - $1,000,000
4. $1,000,001 or more
Paid Prepared:
1. Equal to zero
2. $1 - $5,000
3. $5,001 – 50,000
4. $50,001 - $100,000
5. $100,001 - $500,000
6. $500,001 - $1,000,000
7. $1,000,001 - $5,000,000
8. $5,000,001 - $10,000,000
9. $10,000,001 or more
The specifications of the sample design were developed to balance two main issues. The first and most important is
to ensure that there are a sufficient number of expected complete responses to meet the needs of the modeling tool to
identify the determinants of burden and their relative impacts. The second issue is that the sample design must be
efficient in the way the sample is distributed so that estimates from the sample are reliable (i.e., meet confidence
range requirements).

OMB #1545-2212
As defined above, the three variables that will be used for stratification are: tax form type, tax preparation method,
and total revenue. These variables were chosen for stratification because of their importance to the modeling of
taxpayer behavior activities. Tax form type is included to ensure that an adequate number of the different form types
are included. The tax preparation method ensures both a proper balance and an adequate representation of paid
preparers versus self-preparers. Stratifying on total revenue will ensure that an even distribution of different
organization sizes will be included.
For each stratification variable, category breaks were chosen to increase the precision of sample estimates. This is
accomplished by choosing breakpoints that segment taxpayers into groups whose burden is homogeneous – or
alternatively, breakpoints that create separate estimation strata for groups whose burden is highly variable. Sample
size can then be concentrated on taxpayer segments with heterogeneous burden, thus increasing the precision of
population estimates.
The overall return distribution for the 2010 Tax-Exempt Burden Survey is shown in Table B2 below.
Table B2 – Overall Tax-Exempt Entity Return Distribution by Strata
Wave1
cycle_pst201137
Stratum

TotProj

SmplRate

Wave2
cycle_pst_201152

Wave3
cycle_pst201226

ActualPop ExpSmpl ActualPop ExpSmpl ActualPop ExpSmpl

Less than $5,000

31081

0.01603972

16,217

260

8,948

144

5,916

$5,001 - $100,000

81248

0.00520988

41,085

214

21,877

114

18,286

$100,001 - $1,000,000

48578

0.01841616

24,509

451

13,362

246

10,707

197

$1,000,001 or more

18489

0.02488922

7,400

184

6,105

152

4,984

124

6273

0.05491527

2,318

127

2,081

114

1,874

103

$1 - $5,000

Equal to zero

16889

0.01651608

8,264

136

5,134

3,491

$5,001 – 50,000

80604

0.00438926

37,090

163

24,401

107

19,113

$50,001 - $100,000

69488

0.00957306

29,409

282

21,594

207

18,485

177

$100,001 - $500,000

134164

0.01604597

51,418

825

42,048

675

40,698

653

$500,001 - $1,000,000

41783

0.01558878

12,310

192

12,827

200

16,646

259

$1,000,001 - $5,000,000

55838

0.05082828

14,195

722

16,894

859

24,749

1,258

$5,000,001 - $10,000,000

12482

0.05021166

2,459

123

3,900

196

6,122

307

$10,000,001 or more

19014

0.09529285

2,801

267

6,495

619

9,718

926

249,475

3,947

185,667

3,717

180,789

4,337

615931

Percent of sample

0.3289

0.3097

0.3614

We plan to sample 12,000 TY2010 Tax Exempt taxpayers drawn from the strata above. For the proposed TY2011
Business Taxpayer Burden survey we expect to sample 24,000 taxpayers in a manner similar to that approved for
TY2009 under OMB control #1545-1432. While we expect to improve the efficiency of the design of the TY2011
Business Taxpayer Burden survey based on analysis of the TY2009 data, until such time as we conduct that analysis
we will conservatively assume a burden impact corresponding to the assumption of the TY2009 Business Taxpayer
Burden information collection request.

OMB #1545-2212
The overall post-filing return distribution for the 2011 Tax Compliance Burden Survey is shown in Table B3 below.
Table B3 – Overall Post-filing Return Distribution by Strata

Strata

Post Filing Issue
Complexity

Appl

Exam - High

Appl

Exam - Medium

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

Coll - High
Coll - High
Amended
Amended
Exam - High
Coll - High
Exam - Low
Exam - Medium
Exam - Low
Coll - High
Amended
Coll - Low
Coll - Low
Amended
Exam - Low
Exam - Low
Coll - Low
Coll - Low

Return Complexity

Preparation Method PopCount Pop%

Other than High and
Assisted
Other than High and
Assisted
High
Other than High and
Assisted
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High
Low
High

Other than High and
Assisted
Other than High and
Assisted
Assisted
Other than High and
Assisted
Unassisted
Unassisted
Unassisted
Unassisted
Assisted
Assisted
Unassisted
Assisted
Unassisted
Assisted
Assisted
Unassisted
Unassisted
Assisted
Assisted
Assisted
Assisted
Assisted

Sample
Allocation

2,552

0.02%

591

4,548

0.04%

591

8,294

0.07%

591

10,168

0.08%

591

17,175
23,015
27,091
32,183
65,083
74,933
90,776
92,153
132,179
193,443
257,990
308,263
386,219
472,121
1,459,608
2,055,678
2,361,685
4,037,175

0.14%
0.19%
0.22%
0.27%
0.54%
0.62%
0.75%
0.76%
1.09%
1.60%
2.13%
2.55%
3.19%
3.90%
12.05%
16.97%
19.50%
33.33%

591
591
591
591
591
591
591
591
591
591
591
591
591
591
591
591
591
591

2. Describe the procedures for the collection of information.
We have two objectives in the design of the following protocols. The first is the efficient collection of the current
sample; the second is to inform the design of future studies. The exact form of each of these contacts will vary
somewhat, depending upon several factors. First, it will depend upon whether the contractor is able to obtain a
telephone number for sampled taxpayers. For those respondents able to be matched with phone numbers,
communication will take place via mail with telephone follow-up contact, if necessary. For respondents without
phone numbers, all communication will necessarily take place via mail. The anticipated success rate for matching the
sample to telephone numbers is about 50%.

OMB #1545-2212
Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey 2010
The survey protocols for the web-first or survey-first options are shown below.

□ Web-First Option

□ Survey-First Option

Step 1:
Invitation to the
survey.

A hardcopy letter will be sent to the
targeted respondent inviting the
individual taxpayer or individual
most familiar with the entity’s tax
return to go to the website URL to
complete the online survey. The
invitation will include information
about the survey, assurances that
there is no risk associated with
participation, and web access
information. In addition, respondents
will be given directions on how to
obtain a paper survey if they do not
have access to the web or would
prefer a hard copy. This mailing will
also include a letter from an IRS
official endorsing the survey and
emphasizing the importance of the
data collection effort.

A paper questionnaire will be mailed to
the targeted respondent. The paper-andpencil mail survey will include a
postage-paid return envelope. The
survey will include a series of frequently
asked questions that will provide
information about the survey and
assurances that there is no risk
associated with participation.
Respondents will also be informed of the
option to complete a web survey. This
mailing will also include a letter from an
IRS official endorsing the survey and
emphasizing the importance of the data
collection effort.

Step 2: Mail
survey sent.

A paper questionnaire will be mailed to those households who have not
responded to either the initial letter invitation within 15 days of the initial
mailing. The paper-and-pencil mail survey will include a postage-paid return
envelope.

Step 3: Thank
you/Reminder
postcard
(Nonrespondents
not matched with
phone numbers)

Approximately 30 days after the initial mailing, a thank you/reminder postcard
will be mailed to all respondents, including those who 1) have completed the
survey or 2) who have not completed the survey and for whom no contact phone
number is available. The postcard will thank those who have already submitted a
completed web survey and ask those who have not to please do so. The postcard
will include access information for the web survey.

Step 3: Phone
prompt.

If no completed survey is received either by mail or web within approximately 30
days after the initial mailing, non-respondents that have been matched to a phone
number will receive a prompt from a telephone interviewer asking them to
complete the survey. Telephone interviewers will be prepared at this stage to
administer the interview over the telephone if the respondent wishes.

Step 4: Thank
you/second
reminder
prompt.

Approximately 60 days after the initial mailing, a thank you/reminder postcard
will be mailed to all respondents. The postcard will thank those who have already
submitted a completed web survey and ask those who have not to please do so.
The postcard will include access information for the web survey.

OMB #1545-2212
In the case of undeliverable mail, there are two possible scenarios: (1) a new address is available and supplied
by the post office and (2) no new address is available. For each scenario, a detailed outline of the modified
contact approach is shown on the next page.

New Address Available

No Address Available

Step 1

A paper questionnaire will be mailed to the
targeted respondent at the new address.
The paper-and-pencil mail survey will
include a postage-paid return envelope.
The survey will include a series of
frequently asked questions that will give
information about the survey and
assurances that there is no risk associated
with participation. Respondents will also
be informed of the option to complete a
web survey. This mailing will also include
the letter from an IRS official endorsing
the survey and emphasizing the importance
of the data collection effort.
Because of time constraints, this package
will be sent via UPS.

If a phone number is available for the
respondent, an interviewer will contact
the respondent to request an updated
mailing address. The interviewer will
briefly introduce the survey and will be
able to answer questions about the
survey and the process. In addition, the
interviewer will administer the interview
over the telephone if the respondent
wishes.

Step 2

If no completed survey is received,
respondents will receive a reminder
prompt from a telephone interviewer
asking respondents to complete the survey.
Telephone interviewers will be prepared at
this stage to administer the interview over
the telephone if the respondent wishes.

If a respondent is willing to provide an
updated mailing address, a survey
package will be mailed to the respondent
at the new address. The paper-andpencil mail survey will include a
postage-paid return envelope. The
survey will include a series of frequently
asked questions that will give
information about the survey and
assurances that there is no risk
associated with participation.
Respondents will also be informed of the
option to complete a web survey. This
mailing will also include the letter from
an IRS official endorsing the survey and
emphasizing the importance of the data
collection effort.

If no phone number is available,
respondents will receive a reminder
postcard asking the respondent to please
complete the survey.

Step 3

N/A

If no completed survey is received,
respondents will receive a reminder
prompt from the same telephone
interviewer who contacted them in Step
1. This interviewer will be prepared to
administer the interview over the
telephone if the respondent wishes.

OMB #1545-2212
Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey 2011 and 2012, Taxpayer Compliance Burden Survey 2011 and 2012
Contact
Description
Schedule
Contact 1: Pre-note
The pre-note is a hardcopy letter from an IRS official
Beginning of data
endorsing the survey and emphasizing the importance of collection period
the data collection effort. It notifies the respondent of
selection for the survey, as well as provides information
about the survey and assurances that there is no risk
associated with participation. In addition, respondents
will be given directions on how to view the survey on
the taxstats website.
Contact 2: Survey packet
The survey packet consists of a paper-and-pencil
2 – 3 weeks after
questionnaire, a pre-addressed postage paid reply
Contact 1 mails
envelope, and a letter from the survey vendor indicating
that the enclosed survey is the one referred to in the
previously-received pre-note, a reminder that completing
the survey is voluntary, and indicating that the enclosed
$2 incentive is a token of appreciation. The paper survey
also includes information on how the respondents may
complete the survey on the web, if so desired. A $2
incentive will be enclosed in this mailing only.
3 weeks after Contact
Contact 3: Thank
All respondents will be mailed a thank you/reminder
2 mails
you/reminder Postcard
postcard, including those who 1) have completed the
survey or 2) who have not completed the survey and for
whom no contact phone number is available. The
postcard will thank those who have already submitted a
completed survey and ask those who have not to please
do so.
Contact 4: Survey packet
Nonrespondents are sent the survey packet, which
2 weeks after Contact
provides a second copy of the paper-and-pencil
3 mails
questionnaire, a pre-addressed postage paid reply
envelope, and a letter from the survey vendor asking for
response. As with the first survey packet, the paper
survey also includes information on how the respondents
may complete the survey on the web, if so desired.
Contact 5: Phone call (only If no completed survey is received either by mail or
2 weeks after Contact
for nonrespondents that
web, non-respondents that have been matched to a
4 mails
have been matched to a
phone number will receive a prompt from a telephone
phone number)
interviewer asking them to complete the survey.
Telephone interviewers will be prepared at this stage to
administer the interview over the telephone if the
respondent wishes.
Contact 5: Reminder
Nonrespondents that have not been matched to a phone
2 weeks after Contact
postcard (only for
number will receive a reminder postcard.
4 mails
nonrespondents that have
NOT been matched to a
phone number)
2 weeks after Contact
Contact 6: Survey packet
Nonrespondents are sent the survey packet, which
5 phone or postcard
provides a third copy of the paper-and-pencil
follow-up
questionnaire, a pre-addressed postage paid reply
envelope, and a letter from the survey vendor asking for
response. As with the first and second survey packets,
the paper survey also includes information on how the
respondents may complete the survey on the web, if so
desired.

OMB #1545-2212
Additional contacts planned for the 2012 Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey
Contact 7: Reminder
If no completed survey is received either by mail or
postcard (only for
web, all non-respondents a reminder postcard.
nonrespondents that have
NOT been matched to a
phone number)
Contact 8: Survey packet
A subgroup of nonrespondents will be selected to
receive a fourth survey package. Responses from these
surveys will be analyzed to determine the efficacy of
incorporating an 8th contact into future survey protocols
to support response rate.
2010 Tax Exempt Organization Burden Survey
Contact
Description
Contact 1: Initial survey packet
The initial survey packet consists of a paper-andpencil (TeleForm) survey, a letter from the IRS
endorsing the survey, a letter from Westat with
instructions on completing the survey online, and a
postage-paid return envelope.
Contact 2: Thank you/reminder
All respondents will be mailed a thank
Postcard
you/reminder postcard, including those who 1)
have completed the survey or 2) who have not
completed the survey and for whom no contact
phone number is available. The postcard will thank
those who have already submitted a completed
survey and ask those who have not responded to
please do so.
Contact 3: Follow-up survey
All sampled organizations will receive a follow-up
packet
survey packet, which will include the paper-andpencil (TeleForm) survey, a letter from the IRS
endorsing the survey, and a letter from Westat with
instructions on completing the survey online.4 The
letters will be tailored to acknowledge the earlier
survey package sent to the respondent.
Contact 4: Telephone
If no completed survey is received either by mail
nonresponse follow-up
or web, non-respondents that have been matched to
a phone number will receive a prompt from a
telephone interviewer asking them to complete the
survey. Telephone interviewers will be prepared at
this stage to administer the interview over the
telephone if the respondent wishes.

2 weeks after Contact
6 mails

2 weeks after Contact
7 mails

Schedule
Beginning of data
collection period

7 – 10 days after
Contact 1 mails

OMB #1545-2212
2012 Business Taxpayer Burden Survey
Contact
Description
Contact 1: Initial survey packet
The initial survey packet consists of a paper-andpencil (TeleForm) survey, a letter from the IRS
endorsing the survey, a letter from Westat with
instructions on completing the survey online, and a
postage-paid return envelope.
Contact 2: Thank you/reminder
All respondents will be mailed a thank
Postcard
you/reminder postcard, including those who 1)
have completed the survey or 2) who have not
completed the survey and for whom no contact
phone number is available. The postcard will thank
those who have already submitted a completed
survey and ask those who have not responded to
please do so.
Contact 3: Follow-up survey
All sampled organizations will receive a follow-up
packet
survey packet, which will include the paper-andpencil (TeleForm) survey, a letter from the IRS
endorsing the survey, and a letter from Westat with
instructions on completing the survey online.4 The
letters will be tailored to acknowledge the earlier
survey package sent to the respondent.

Schedule
Beginning of data
collection period

7 – 10 days after
Contact 1 mails

7 – 10 days after
Contact 2 mails

Web survey. The secure web survey will be posted online using a proprietary web survey delivery system
developed by our contractor, Westat. The software easily accommodates different question formats, including openended response fields. It also allows participants to skip questions and complete the survey in more than one session
(i.e., the respondent can leave the web survey and come back to finish it at a later time). Development and testing of
the web survey will follow well-established, documented best methods.
Paper-and-pencil survey. The paper-and-pencil mail survey will be designed to be user friendly, easy to navigate,
and with clear and simple instructions. The survey will be created using TeleForm technology, a software system for
intelligent data capture and image processing. The software extracts indexing information automatically from any
document type through the use of multiple recognition engines. TeleForm reads hand print, machine print, optical
marks, bar codes, and signatures.
Data storage and usage. Response data will be stored and tracked in a response database which can then used to
update and extend the IRS compliance burden model. In addition, a tailored Survey Management System will track
cases throughout all modes of contact, including mail, telephone, and IVR.

3. Describe methods to maximize response rates and to deal with issues of nonresponse.
Upon completion of the survey protocol, we will conduct a non-response bias analysis. This analysis will be the
same as what was done for previously-conducted surveys, using a raking technique as a way to control for bias in a
multivariate scenario. The process is further outlined in the paper “Response Mode and Bias Analysis in the IRS’
Individual Taxpayer Burden Survey”, by J. Michael Brick, George Contos, Karen Masken, and Roy Nord.

4. Describe any tests of procedures or methods to be undertaken.
To ensure that the collection of information is not burdensome and that the questions are clearly written and will
produce accurate and valid results, the IRS will conduct cognitive testing for any new or revised survey instrument.
Cognitive testing is a well-established qualitative research method intended to identify problems respondents have
with comprehension of survey questions (Willis 2005)1. The testing will be conducted with taxpayers in the

Willis, G.B. (2005). Cognitive Interviewing: A Tool for Improving Questionnaire Design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.

OMB #1545-2212
Washington, D.C. area. Respondents will be recruited according to specific criteria (e.g., filing status, complexity of
return, and filing method). Efforts will be made to recruit respondents who are demographically representative of the
population being surveyed.
In addition, at the outset as well as after each interaction of testing, the instrument will undergo extensive review by
the IRS, the contractor, and stakeholders.

5. Provide the names and telephone numbers of individuals consulted on statistical
aspects of the design and the name of the agency unit, contractor(s), grantee(s), or
other person(s) who will actually collect and/or analyze the information for the
agency.
IRS Office of Research/Department of the Treasury Office of Tax Analysis
Statistical Design:
Michael Sebastiani (statistical lead), IRS Research, Analysis, & Statistics 202-874-0831
Wei Liu, formerly IRS Research, Analysis, & Statistics, currently IRS Office of Compliance Analytics
Karen Masken, formerly IRS Research, Analysis, & Statistics, currently IRS Return Preparer Office
Ahmad Qadri IRS Research, Analysis, & Statistics
Leann Weyl, IRS Research, Analysis, & Statistics
Collection and Analysis:
John Guyton (overall lead), IRS Research, Analysis, & Statistics 202-874-0607
Brenda Schafer (deputy lead), IRS Research, Analysis, & Statistics 202-874-0764
George Contos, IRS Research, Analysis, & Statistics
Ronald H. Hodge II, IRS Research, Analysis, & Statistics
Patrick Langetieg, IRS Research, Analysis, & Statistics
Sandy Lin, formerly IRS Research, Analysis, & Statistics, currently IRS Office of Compliance Analytics
Melissa Vigil, Research, Analysis, & Statistics
Allen Lerman (policy analysis advisor), Department of Treasury, Office of Tax Policy 202-622-1325
Susan Nelson (policy analysis advisor), Department of Treasury, Office of Tax Policy 202-622-1324

Westat
Data Collection:
Kerry Levin, Project Manager, 301-294-3928
Jennifer O’Brien, Project Director, 301-251-4272
Jocelyn Newsome, Research Analyst
Martha Stapleton, Project Manager
Statistical Design and Analysis:
Mike Brick, Statistician

File Type	application/pdf
File Title	Microsoft Word - OMB Generic Survey Clearance_110812.doc
Author	QNFPB
File Modified	2012-11-14
File Created	2012-11-14