Opposing IRS’ tax preparation plan

Commentary

JAMES YU, CPA

Board Member, Las Vegas Asian

Chamber of Commerce

AS a long-serving Certified Public Accountant in Las Vegas, I’ve worked with businesses that are incredibly diversified. They have different levels of income, different types of expenses, some have dozens of employees, some just a handful, some have been in business for generations, some are just starting out.

But they all have a few things in common when it comes to tax preparation and the Internal Revenue Service. One, they depend on their tax returns to boost their income and provide essential family expenses. Two, they are diligent about getting every deduction and benefit available to them under the law.

And three, they are very wary about an expansion of the IRS, particularly into the field of tax return filing. Such a plan, much to the dismay of taxpayers nationwide, is currently being considered in our nation’s capital. It’s a truly terrible idea, as articulated in several articles in national publications.

The argument is pretty straightforward: the IRS should stick to tax collection and enforcement.

It makes little sense to give the very agency that has the power to audit tax returns the power to prepare and file tax returns. Individual taxpayers and small businesses trust their CPA to maximize the tax benefits to which they are rightfully, and legally, entitled.

It’s also a question of priorities.

The amount of unpaid taxes

Americans owe the IRS is upwards of a shocking one trillion dollars. Shouldn’t the agency be more focused on recouping that money then wading into the tax preparation business?

Lots of ideas come out of Washington, D.C. Expansion of the Internal Revenue Service to allow them to prepare and file tax returns is a genuinely terrible one.

* and provide their important evaluation on the risk of infiltration by extremist and terrorist groups.

* * The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the Asian Journal, its management, editorial board and staff.

The United States has made it clear: the Afghan nationals applying for the SIV will only be housed in the Philippines on a temporary basis, with all costs of the entire process to be shouldered by the U.S. government.

The Afghan nationals are not refugees, although the nature of the request in many people’s view is humanitarian in nature because these are individuals whose lives and that of their loved ones could be in peril because they worked for the U.S. government before the Taliban returned to power in Afghanistan.

Just to put it in the right perspective, the U.S. request is based on two points that need to be highlighted. One, the U.S. looks at the Philippines as an ally and friend, and two, we have in the past showed compassion for people in need, with history demonstrating that we have a strong humanitarian tradition of providing relief for displaced individuals.

This became very evident in

Virtual Reality

T ONY L OPEZ

SIX of the country’s richest families or largest conglomerates have joined forces. The Manila International Airport Consortium (MIAC) has offered to modernize and manage the present Ninoy Aquino International Airport for 25 years until 2048.

MIAC has offered $5 billion –$1 billion (P57 billion upfront) to the government, $1 billion (P57 billion) to rehab NAIA’s three terminals (they will be conjoined) and $3 billion over the next 25 years or $120 million per year. Effectively, MIAC will just be spending $2 billion; the promised $3-billion balance will come from operating the NAIA itself for 25 years.

NAIA sits on 63 hectares of prime land that is cheek by jowl to Makati, the business capital. I value the vast airport land at $4 billion, as land per se; its value rises as an aviation hub.

MIAC claims that in 25 years, they will bring benefits to the economy of P446 billion or $7.82 billion in “gross economic values.”

I find the $2-billion offer dirt

1934 when President Manuel L. Quezon allowed Jewish refugees fleeing the Nazis to come to the Philippines, providing a safe haven for a persecuted race at a time when many countries turned their backs and shut their doors. Despite strong criticism, President Quezon issued Proclamation No. 173 on Aug. 21, 1937 known as the “Open Door Policy” that saved at least 1,300 European Jews. It is no surprise therefore that there are monuments in Israel, such as the Open Doors monument in Rishon Lezion’s Holocaust Memorial Park, that stand as a symbol of friendship between Filipinos and the Jewish people. The Open Doors monument also serves as a reminder of President Quezon’s act of compassion that happened decades ago, and yet continues to resonate strongly to this day.

I have personally experienced the impact of this shared history with the American-Jewish community in Washington, D.C. that are frequently in touch with us. The members tell me they look at the Philippines and Filipinos with deep affection because of what President Quezon did for them during a dark period in their history, at a time when they needed friends the most.

Another well-known act of humanitarian compassion involved the Vietnamese refugees – known as the “boat people” – who were displaced during the Vietnam War. Thousands of Vietnamese rode in small boats, many of them dying along the way. One of the countries that granted them asylum on the basis of humanitarian grounds was the Philippines under then President Marcos Sr.

“Granting temporary asylum meant that the government took on the responsibility of protecting refugees,” wrote refugee historian Ria Sunga in “Exploring the foundations of Philippine refugee policy towards Vietnamese refugees,” adding that the UNHCR, the UN refugee agency, “noted that the government upheld the principle of non-refoulement – no refugees were turned away or repatriated back to Vietnam.”

When I was in California before the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, two Vietnamese businessmen approached me to express their gratitude. As it turned out, they were among a batch of Vietnamese “boat people” who landed in the Philippines. They eventually ended up in the United States where they are doing extremely well, with their businesses flourishing.

Like Senator Francis Tolentino, many of us believe that this U.S. request for the temporary stay of Afghan citizens in the country while their SIVs are being processed is humanitarian in nature because potentially, these people and their families may be in danger if they remain in Afghanistan.

Like most Filipinos, I take pride in the legacy of humanitarian compassion that we have demonstrated many times in the past – opening our doors to those in need not only because it is the right thing to do but more importantly – it is morally correct. (Philstar.com) * * * The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the Asian Journal, its management, editorial board and staff. * * * babeseyeview@gmail.com