Get started free →
HR 9499 119th Congress · House

Bill Targets “Ghost Preparer” Tax Fraud

Advocate

Official title: Protecting Taxpayers from Ghost Preparers Act

The Protecting Taxpayers from Ghost Preparers Act would change IRS penalty rules so they apply when a tax preparer improperly alters a return, not just when the preparer signs or files it. It also narrows one fraud-related rule so the extended assessment period for false returns applies only when the false part was made with intent “by the taxpayer.” The bill would take effect on enactment for the preparer-penalty change, with the limitation-period change applying to assessments or proceedings begun after enactment.

  • Applies IRS preparer penalties to improperly altered returns.
  • Extends the definition of “return” to cover administrative adjustment requests under section 6227.
  • Includes partnership adjustment tracking reports under section 6226(b)(4)(A).
  • Limits one fraud-based assessment rule to intent “by the taxpayer.”
  • Makes a technical conforming change to section 7508A(f), redesignating it as subsection (g).
Public Relevance 24 / 100
Niche Modest scope Broad

If you use a paid tax preparer, the bill could help hold that preparer accountable if they improperly alter your return or related partnership tax filings. If you are a taxpayer harmed by preparer fraud, Section 3 may also make it less likely that a fraud-based extension of the IRS assessment period automatically runs against you unless the fraudulent intent was your own. For most people, the change is indirect but could matter in disputes over liability, audit timing, and who bears responsibility for a bad filing.

See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysis
FOR
  • Taxpayers who use paid preparers They may support stronger penalties for preparers who alter filings, because it gives the IRS clearer authority to punish misconduct that can leave clients with unexpected tax bills, penalties, or delays.
  • Tax fraud investigators and compliance advocates They can argue the bill closes a loophole for so-called ghost preparers and makes enforcement more effective by covering related partnership documents and other filings that purport to be returns or reports.
  • Honest tax preparers They may favor a clearer rule that distinguishes legitimate preparers from those who manipulate returns, because it can protect the reputation of the profession and create a more level compliance environment.
AGAINST
  • Tax preparers concerned about liability exposure They may worry that the broader definition of “return” and the altered-return penalty framework could increase exposure to disputes over preparation errors, especially where the line between a mistake and an improper alteration is contested.
  • Taxpayers caught in preparer misconduct cases Some may be concerned about whether the new language fully protects victims from being swept into fraud-based assessment rules, since the practical effect will depend on how IRS and courts apply the revised limitation provision.
  • Small tax preparation firms They could argue that expanded penalty coverage will increase compliance costs and make routine tax-return work more legally risky, especially for firms handling partnership-related filings.
  • “apply tax return preparation penalties to improperly altered returns”

    This is the bill’s core enforcement change. It would let the IRS treat altered returns as covered for preparer-penalty purposes, which could make it harder for dishonest preparers to evade punishment.

  • “any administrative adjustment request under section 6227”

    This expands the rule beyond ordinary income-tax returns to a partnership-related adjustment process. People involved in partnership tax matters could see preparer penalties apply to misconduct in those filings too.

  • “any partnership adjustment tracking report under section 6226(b)(4)(A)”

    This specifically brings partnership reporting documents into the penalty framework. It matters for partners and preparers working through the partnership audit regime.

  • “inserting ‘by the taxpayer’ after ‘intent’”

    This narrows a fraud-related limitation rule so the key fraudulent intent must be the taxpayer’s own. That can affect whether the IRS gets extra time to assess tax in cases involving preparer fraud.

  • “shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act”

    The main preparer-penalty amendment would apply immediately once the bill becomes law, rather than waiting for a delayed implementation date.

BillBoard checks this page against public Congress.gov metadata, then adds plain-English analysis where available.

Bill
HR 9499
Congress
119th Congress
Official title
Protecting Taxpayers from Ghost Preparers Act
Policy area
Economy & Finance
Latest action
Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. (June 29, 2026)
Last updated
June 30, 2026

June 29, 2026

Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.

Take Action

Get more from BillBoard

Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.

Ask AI about this bill

Data sourced from api.congress.gov.

Free to use · No credit card

Understand every bill.
Make your voice count.

BillBoard turns dense U.S. legislation into plain-English summaries, helps you take a stance, and connects you to your representatives — in seconds.