[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 13 (Wednesday, February 9, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1199-S1202]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. AKAKA (for himself, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. 
        Dayton, and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 324. A bill to provide additional protections for recipients of 
the earned income tax credit; to the Committee on Finance.
  Mr. AKAKA. Mr. President, I rise to introduce the Taxpayer Abuse 
Prevention Act. Earned income tax credit, EITC, benefits intended for 
working families are significantly reduced by the use of refund 
anticipation loans, RALs, which typically carry triple digit interest 
rates.
  According to the Brookings Institution, an estimated $1.9 billion 
intended to assist low-income families was received by commercial tax 
preparers and affiliated national banks to pay for tax assistance, 
electronic filing of returns, and high-cost refund loans in 2002. 
Fifty-seven percent of consumers who received RALs in 2003 earned the 
EITC. The Children's Defense Fund recently conducted a review of EITC 
refunds in eight states and the District of Columbia. In Texas, it is 
estimated that EITC families lost an estimated $251 million in tax 
preparation fees and high interest loans. EITC families had an 
estimated $82.6 million diverted to tax preparers in Ohio.

[[Page S1200]]

  The interest rates and fees charged on RALs are not justified because 
of the short length of time that these loans are outstanding and the 
minimal risk they present. These loans carry little risk because of the 
Debt Indicator program.
  The Debt Indicator, DI, is a service provided by the Internal Revenue 
Service, IRS, that informs the lender whether or not an applicant owes 
Federal or state taxes, child support, student loans, or other 
Government obligations, which assists the tax preparer in ascertaining 
the applicant's ability to obtain their full refund so that the RAL is 
repaid. The Department of the Treasury should not be facilitating these 
predatory loans that allow tax preparers to reap outrageous profits by 
exploiting working families.
  Unfortunately too many working families are susceptible to predatory 
lending because they are left out of the financial mainstream. Between 
25 and 56 million adults are unbanked, or not using mainstream, insured 
financial institutions. The unbanked rely on alternative financial 
service providers to obtain cash from checks, pay bills, send 
remittances, utilize payday loans, and obtain credit. Many of the 
unbanked are low- and moderate-income families that can ill afford to 
have their earnings unnecessarily diminished by their reliance on these 
high-cost and often predatory financial services. In addition, the 
unbanked are unable to save securely to prepare for the loss of a job, 
a family illness, a down payment on a first home, or education 
expenses.
  My bill will protect consumers against predatory loans, reduce the 
involvement of the Department of the Treasury in facilitating the 
exploitation of taxpayers, and expand access to opportunities for 
saving and lending at mainstream financial services.
  My bill prohibits refund anticipation loans that utilize EITC 
benefits. Other Federal benefits, such as Social Security, have similar 
restrictions to ensure that the beneficiaries receive the intended 
benefit.
  My bill also limits several of the objectionable practices of RAL 
providers. It will prohibit lenders from using tax refunds to collect 
outstanding obligations for previous RALs. In addition, mandatory 
arbitration clauses for RALs that utilize Federal tax refunds would be 
prohibited to ensure that consumers have the ability to take future 
legal action if necessary.
  I am deeply troubled that the Department of the Treasury plays such a 
prominent role in the facilitation and subsequent promotion of refund 
anticipation loans. In 1995, the use of the DI was suspended because of 
massive fraud in e-filed returns with RALs. After the program was 
discontinued, RAL participation declined. The use of the DI was 
reinstated in 1999, according to H&R Block, to ``assist with screening 
for electronic filing fraud and is also expected to substantially 
reduce refund anticipation loan pricing.'' Although RAL prices were 
expected to go down as a result of the reinstatement of the DI, this 
has not occurred. Use of the Debt Indicator should once again be 
stopped. The DI is helping tax preparers make excessive profits from 
low- and moderate-income taxpayers who utilize RALs. The IRS should not 
be aiding efforts that take the earned benefit away from low-income 
families and allow unscrupulous preparers to take advantage of low-
income taxpayers. My bill terminates the DI program. In addition, this 
bill removes the incentive to meet congressionally mandated electronic 
filing goals by facilitating the exploitation of taxpayers. My bill 
would exclude any electronically filed tax returns resulting in tax 
refunds distributed by refund anticipation loans from being counted 
towards the goal established by the IRS Restructuring and Reform Act of 
1998, which is to have at least 80 percent of all returns filed 
electronically by 2007.

  Mr. President, my bill also expands access to mainstream financial 
services. Electronic Transfer Accounts, ETA, are low-cost accounts at 
banks and credit unions intended for recipients of certain Federal 
benefit payments. Currently, ETAs are provided for recipients of other 
Federal benefits such as Social Security payments. My bill expands the 
eligibility for ETAs to include EITC benefits. These accounts will 
allow taxpayers to receive direct deposit refunds into an account 
without the need for a refund anticipation loan.
  Furthermore, my bill would mandate that low- and moderate-income 
taxpayers be provided opportunities to open low-cost accounts at 
federally insured banks or credit unions via appropriate tax forms. 
Providing taxpayers with the option of opening a bank or credit union 
account through the use of tax forms provides an alternative to RALs 
and immediate access to financial opportunities found at banks and 
credit unions.
  I thank my colleagues, Senators Bingaman, Sarbanes, Dayton, and 
Durbin for cosponsoring this legislation. I also thank Representative 
Jan Schakowsky for introducing the companion legislation in the other 
body.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the Taxpayer Abuse 
Prevention Act, support letters and an accompanying fact sheet from the 
Association of Community Organizations for Reform, the Children's 
Defense Fund, the Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, the 
National Consumer Law Center, the Center for Responsible Lending, and 
the text of the national summary of the refund anticipation studies 
done by the Children's Defense Fund be printed in the Record.
  I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation that will 
restrict predatory RALs and expand access to mainstream financial 
services.

  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 324

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Taxpayer Abuse Prevention 
     Act''.

     SEC. 2. PREVENTION OF DIVERSION OF EARNED INCOME TAX CREDIT 
                   BENEFITS.

       (a) In General.--Section 32 of the Internal Revenue Code of 
     1986 (relating to earned income tax credit) is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(n) Prevention of Diversion of Credit Benefits.--The 
     right of any individual to any future payment of the credit 
     under this section shall not be transferable or assignable, 
     at law or in equity, and such right or any moneys paid or 
     payable under this section shall not be subject to any 
     execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, offset, or other 
     legal process except for any outstanding Federal obligation. 
     Any waiver of the protections of this subsection shall be 
     deemed null, void, and of no effect.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON DEBT COLLECTION OFFSET.

       (a) In General.--No person shall, directly or indirectly, 
     individually or in conjunction or in cooperation with another 
     person, engage in the collection of an outstanding or 
     delinquent debt for any creditor or assignee by means of 
     soliciting the execution of, processing, receiving, or 
     accepting an application or agreement for a refund 
     anticipation loan or refund anticipation check that contains 
     a provision permitting the creditor to repay, by offset or 
     other means, an outstanding or delinquent debt for that 
     creditor from the proceeds of the debtor's Federal tax 
     refund.
       (b) Refund Anticipation Loan.--For purposes of subsection 
     (a), the term ``refund anticipation loan'' means a loan of 
     money or of any other thing of value to a taxpayer because of 
     the taxpayer's anticipated receipt of a Federal tax refund.
       (c) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the 
     date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 4. PROHIBITION OF MANDATORY ARBITRATION.

       (a) In General.--Any person that provides a loan to a 
     taxpayer that is linked to or in anticipation of a Federal 
     tax refund for the taxpayer may not include mandatory 
     arbitration of disputes as a condition for providing such a 
     loan.
       (b) Effective Date.--This section shall apply to loans made 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 5. TERMINATION OF DEBT INDICATOR PROGRAM.

       The Secretary of the Treasury shall terminate the Debt 
     Indicator program announced in Internal Revenue Service 
     Notice 99-58.

     SEC. 6. DETERMINATION OF ELECTRONIC FILING GOALS.

       (a) In General.--Any electronically filed Federal tax 
     returns, that result in Federal tax refunds that are 
     distributed by refund anticipation loans, shall not be taken 
     into account in determining if the goals required under 
     section 2001(a)(2) of the Restructuring and Reform Act of 
     1998 that the Internal Revenue Service have at least 80 
     percent of all such returns filed electronically by 2007 are 
     achieved.
       (b) Refund Anticipation Loan.--For purposes of subsection 
     (a), the term ``refund anticipation loan'' means a loan of 
     money or of any other thing of value to a taxpayer because of 
     the taxpayer's anticipated receipt of a Federal tax refund.

[[Page S1201]]

     SEC. 7. EXPANSION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR ELECTRONIC TRANSFER 
                   ACCOUNTS.

       (a) In General.--The last sentence of section 3332(j) of 
     title 31, United States Code, is amended by inserting ``other 
     than any payment under section 32 of such Code'' after 
     ``1986''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to payments made after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act.

     SEC. 8. PROGRAM TO ENCOURAGE THE USE OF THE ADVANCE EARNED 
                   INCOME TAX CREDIT.

       (a) In General.--Not later than 6 months after the date of 
     the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury 
     shall, after consultation with such private, nonprofit, and 
     governmental entities as the Secretary determines 
     appropriate, develop and implement a program to encourage the 
     greater utilization of the advance earned income tax credit.
       (b) Reports.--Not later than the date of the implementation 
     of the program described in subsection (a), and annually 
     thereafter, the Secretary of the Treasury shall report to the 
     Committee on Finance of the Senate and the Committee on Ways 
     and Means of the House of Representatives on the elements of 
     such program and progress achieved under such program.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out 
     the program described in this section. Any sums so 
     appropriated shall remain available until expended.

     SEC. 9. PROGRAM TO LINK TAXPAYERS WITH DIRECT DEPOSIT 
                   ACCOUNTS AT FEDERALLY INSURED DEPOSITORY 
                   INSTITUTIONS.

       (a) Establishment of Program.--Not later than 1 year after 
     the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the 
     Treasury shall enter into cooperative agreements with 
     federally insured depository institutions to provide low- and 
     moderate-income taxpayers with the option of establishing 
     low-cost direct deposit accounts through the use of 
     appropriate tax forms.
       (b) Federally Insured Depository Institution.--For purposes 
     of this section, the term ``federally insured depository 
     institution'' means any insured depository institution (as 
     defined in section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 
     U.S.C. 1813)) and any insured credit union (as defined in 
     section 101 of the Federal Credit Union Act (12 U.S.C. 
     1752)).
       (c) Operation of Program.--In providing for the operation 
     of the program described in subsection (a), the Secretary of 
     the Treasury is authorized--
       (1) to consult with such private and nonprofit 
     organizations and Federal, State, and local agencies as 
     determined appropriate by the Secretary, and
       (2) to promulgate such regulations as necessary to 
     administer such program.
       (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated such sums as are necessary to carry out 
     the program described in this section. Any sums so 
     appropriated shall remain available until expended.
                                  ____



                             National Consumer Law Center Inc,

                                     Boston, MA, February 7, 2005.
     Hon. Daniel K. Akaka,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Akaka: The Association of Community 
     Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), Center for Responsible 
     Lending, Children's Defense Fund, Consumer Federation of 
     America, Consumers Union, and National Consumer Law Center 
     (on behalf of its low-income clients), write to support your 
     bill, the ``Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act.'' By prohibiting 
     lenders from making loans against the Earned Income Tax 
     Credit, this bill would greatly reduce the scope of abuses 
     caused by refund anticipation loans (RALs), which carry 
     effective annualized interest rates of about 40% to over 
     700%.
       According to IRS data, 57% of consumers who received RALs 
     in 2003 were beneficiaries of the Earned Income Tax Credit. 
     These EITC recipients paid about $740 million in loan and 
     ``administrative'' fees for RALs. These fees divert hundreds 
     of millions of EITC dollars, paid out of the U.S. Treasury, 
     into the coffers of multimillion dollar commercial 
     preparation chains and big banks. It's time to stop lenders 
     from making high cost, abusive loans using the precious 
     dollars intended to support working poor families.
       Furthermore, we support the ``Taxpayer Abuse Prevention 
     Act'' for its provisions that halt several of the most 
     egregious practices of RAL lenders, such as seizing 
     taxpayers' tax refunds as a form of debt collection and 
     slipping in mandatory arbitration clauses, which leave RAL 
     consumers without their day in court. Moreover, we appreciate 
     the termination of the IRS Debt Indicator program, which 
     would stop the IRS's practice of sharing taxpayer's personal 
     financial information in order to make RALs more profitable 
     for lenders. Finally, we applaud the provisions of the bill 
     that support linking unbanked taxpayers with bank accounts, 
     such as the provision to permit them to open Electronic 
     Transaction Accounts to receive federal tax refunds.
       Thank you again for all your efforts to combat taxpayer 
     abuse by the RAL industry.
           Sincerely,
         Maude Hurd, National President Association of Community 
           Organizations for Reform Now; Jean Ann Fox, Director of 
           Consumer Protection, Consumer Federation of America; 
           Chi Chi Wu, Staff Attorney, National Consumer Law 
           Center; Deborah Cutler-Ortiz, Director of Family 
           Income, Children's Defense Fund; Susanna Montezemolo, 
           Legislative Representative, Consumers Union; Yolanda 
           McGill, Senior Policy Counsel, Center for Responsible 
           Lending.
                                  ____


  How the Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act Addresses the Worst Aspect of 
                       Refund Anticipation Loans

     What are Refund Anticipation Loans (RALs)?
       Refund anticipation loans (RALs) are high cost short-term 
     loans secured by taxpayers' expected tax refunds. To get a 
     RAL, consumers pay:
       A loan fee to the lender, ranging from about $30 to $115 in 
     2005.
       A fee for commercial tax preparation, typically around 
     $120;
       In some cases, a fee to the commercial preparer to process 
     the RAL, sometimes called a ``administrative'', 
     ``application'', or ``document preparation'' fee, around $30;
     Who gets RALs?
       Over 12 million taxpayers got RALs in 2003, according to 
     the latest available data from IRS, costing taxpayers an 
     estimated $1.4 billion dollars. Nearly 80% of these taxpayers 
     are low-income, making less than $35,000 per year. Over half 
     taxpayers who get RALs receive the Earned Income Tax Credit 
     (EITC). The EITC is a tax benefit for working people who earn 
     low or moderate incomes. It reduces the tax burden on these 
     working families, boosting millions of households out of 
     poverty. EITC recipients are disproportionately represented 
     in the ranks of those who get RALs, since these taxpayers 
     make up just 17% of the taxpayer population. RALs cost EITC 
     recipients $740 million in loan and application/
     administrative fees, plus these EITC recipients paid nearly 
     an estimated $1 billion in tax preparation and check cashing 
     fees.
     What are some of the problems with RALs?
       RALs drain hundreds of millions in EITC benefits, and 
     diminish the EITC's poverty-fighting power.
       The Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act prohibits RALs made 
     against EITC funds. RAL contracts permit a lender to grab a 
     taxpayer' refund to repay any outstanding RAL debt, even if 
     the debt was to another lender.
       The Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act prohibits debt collection 
     from a taxpayer's refund. RAL contracts contain anti-consumer 
     mandatory arbitration clauses that deprive taxpayers of their 
     day in court if they have a problem with their RALs.
       The Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act prohibits mandatory 
     arbitration clauses in RAL contracts. The IRS helps increase 
     profits for RAL lenders by sharing taxpayer's personal 
     financial information in the form of the Debt Indicator, 
     which tells tax preparers and RAL lenders when a tax refund 
     offset exists.
       The Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act terminates the Debt 
     Indicator program, ensuring that IRS resources are not used 
     to help the bottom line of RAL lenders.
     Isn't this denying EITC taxpayers an option to get their 
         refund money at tax time?
       RALs cost an enormous amount for what is essentially a loan 
     of less than two weeks, draining billions for a mostly 
     useless product. Because they are such short term loans, the 
     RAL loan fee translates into effective annualized interest 
     rates of about 40% to over 700%, or 70% to over 1700% if 
     administrative fees are included. If the taxpayer's refund is 
     reduced or denied by the IRS, the taxpayer is on the hook to 
     repay the loan--a tough task for the low-income taxpayers who 
     mostly get RALs.
       The EITC is money paid out of the federal Treasury to make 
     sure working families are lifted out of poverty. Other 
     similar government programs have longstanding similar 
     prohibitions against making a loan against those benefits. 
     For example, the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 407(a), 
     prohibits lenders from seizing, garnishing, attaching, taking 
     an assignment in or securing a loan against Social Security 
     benefits. The Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act prohibition's 
     against RALs secured by the EITC was modeled on this 
     provision of the Social Security Act, with the addition of a 
     prohibition against offsets of EITC benefits.
                                  ____



                                      Children's Defense Fund,

                                   Washington, DC, February, 2005.

     Keeping What They've Earned: Working Families and Tax Credits

       As the height of tax-filing season approaches, Americans 
     are being bombarded with advertisements from commercial tax 
     preparers on high-cost options for getting their taxes 
     prepared. Many of these commercial tax preparers focus on 
     low-income neighborhoods and lure their clients with the 
     promise of ``Fast Money,'' Money Now'' or ``Rapid Refunds.''
       Two out of every three people nationwide who claim the 
     Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) use commercial tax preparers 
     to prepare their returns. These low-income families end up 
     paying high preparation fees and many of them take out high-
     interest loans against their expected refund. Unfortunately, 
     many of these low- to moderate-income working Americans are 
     unaware of other options--including free tax preparation 
     through Volunteer Income Tax Assistance sites.
       Enacted in 1975, the EITC is our nation's largest and most 
     effective anti-poverty program, generating billions of 
     dollars to help

[[Page S1202]]

     families meet their most basic needs. Research shows families 
     use their refunds to pay bills such as utilities and rent, to 
     purchase basic household commodities and clothing, to cover 
     the costs of tuition, and some even reserve parts of their 
     EITC for savings. In sum, EITC helps low- to moderate-income 
     families make ends meet while stimulating the local economy.


     THE FULL VALUE OF THE PROGRAM IS NOT REACHING WORKING FAMILIES

       Unfortunately, low-income taxpayers lost over $690 million 
     in loan charges in 2003 and a total of $2.3 billion if the 
     cost of commercial tax preparation is included. These costs 
     can include tax preparation, documentation preparation or 
     application handling fees, electronic filing fees and a 
     Refund Anticipation Loan (RALs). The RALs are loans secured 
     by tax-payer's tax refund, including the EITC.
       In middle and upper income communities, consumers have 
     access to loans and credit cards at competitive rates, and 
     branch offices of mainstream banks and savings and loans 
     offer a full array of banking services. Low-income consumers 
     are forced to patronize fringe financial service providers 
     that charge exorbitant rates for personal loans and limited 
     banking services.


                     RALS TARGET HIGH POVERTY AREAS

       Recent research has shown that low-income taxpayers who 
     claim the EITC represent the majority of the marketplace for 
     RALs. The product's popularity varies substantially across 
     the U.S., but the most recent Internal Revenue Service 
     figures indicate that 79 percent of RAL recipients in 2003 
     had adjusted gross incomes of $35,000 or less. Minority 
     consumers are heavier RAL users. Twenty-eight percent of 
     African Americans and 21 percent of Latino taxpayers told 
     surveyors they received RALs compared with 17 percent of 
     White consumers.
       The Children's Defense Fund's review of eight states and 
     the District of Columbia reveals that almost $960 million 
     dollars has been siphoned away from low-income tax payers in 
     these states, because of tax preparation and high interest 
     loan fees.
       California lost an estimated $236.5 million.
       Minnesota lost and estimated 5.1 million.
       Mississippi lost an estimated $54 million.
       New York lost an estimated $182 million.
       Ohio lost an estimated $82.6 million.
       South Carolina lost an estimated $57 million.
       Tennessee lost an estimated $57 million.
       Texas lost an estimated $251 million.
       Washington D.C. lost an estimated $5.8 million.


           THE APPEAL OF RALS AND WHAT TAXPAYERS AREN'T TOLD

       Many low-income families may feel they have little choice 
     but to take out a RAL. First, many are unlikely to have $100 
     on hand to pay for tax preparation fees. In setting up the 
     loan, the commercial tax preparers deduct these fees first, 
     relieving the families from the need to find alternative 
     resources. Second, and probably more significantly, RALs 
     enable families to access the amount of money they expect 
     from their refunds within 48 hours, rather than having to 
     wait for the IRS to process their returns. This wait could 
     last 6-8 weeks if the family does not file electronically and 
     does not have a bank account to accept an electronic transfer 
     of the refund. Indeed, many low-income families lack bank 
     accounts. According to the Federal Reserve, one out of four 
     families with incomes less than $25,000 does not have a bank 
     account of any kind.


                            RECOMMENDATIONS

       1. Simplify the rules and process. Working families should 
     be able to complete their own taxes, without having to pay 
     for professional assistance. Federal and state laws, 
     especially those that govern working families income taxes, 
     need to be simplified and federal and state tax credit 
     programs need to be coordinated.
       2. Ensure that free tax assistance for EITC families is 
     available, accessible and well-publicized. Very few people 
     know that free tax assistance for low-income families is 
     available at Volunteer Income Tax Assistance sites, Tax 
     Counseling for the Elderly, AARP and other free tax 
     preparation sites in many communities, but very few people 
     know this. The community groups and nonprofit 
     organizations that operate many of these sites need help. 
     Different levels of government, employers, foundations, 
     churches and other community groups can all provide 
     financial assistance, make site locations available, 
     donate computers for electronic filing, help recruit 
     volunteers and conduct outreach with potential EITC 
     families. EITC families should also be made aware that 
     there are free or low-cost tax filing websites available 
     that they can access through the IRS and other websites.
       3. Strengthen consumer protection and education. There is 
     little regulation of tax preparers even though they are 
     entrusted with personal information and expected to stay 
     abreast of many complex tax laws. The federal and state 
     governments could do more to regulate and monitor the 
     practices of paid preparers as well as the national banks 
     with which they partner to offer RALs. Families need to 
     understand what they can expect of their tax preparer, as 
     well as the drawbacks and hidden costs of RALs. On the 
     federal level, the Taxpayer Abuse Prevention Act (TAPA) 
     legislation introduced by Senators Akaka (D-HI) and Bingaman 
     (D-NM) and Representative Schakowsky (DIL) would prohibit the 
     use of RALs against the EITC.
       4. Connect more low-income families with fmancial 
     institutions and increase their financial literacy. Having a 
     tax refund electronically deposited directly into a bank 
     account speeds up the turnaround time significantly, but one 
     out of four families with incomes less than $25,000 does not 
     have a bank account. Recent efforts to partner free tax 
     assistance with financial institutions have been successful.


  CHILDREN NEED ADEQUATE FAMILY INCOME IF THEY ARE TO MEET THEIR MOST 
 BASIC NEEDS, FROM DIAPERS To DOCTORS To HEALTHY FOOD AND SAFE HOUSING

       Whether a child will flounder or flourish can hinge on 
     things that money buys: good quality child care, eyeglasses 
     to read the chalkboard, a little league fee, a musical 
     instrument, or simply the peace of mind that lets parents 
     create a warm and nurturing family life free from worries 
     about eviction or hunger.
       Yet almost 13 million children are poor and millions more 
     live in struggling families with incomes just above the 
     official poverty line. Giving children economic security 
     means providing stronger tax credits for low-paid working 
     families and a more reliable safety net when jobs fall short. 
     It also means making more effective use of available programs 
     and ensuring that families have access to the tax credits and 
     food, health, and other benefits that already exist.
       The millions of dollars lost by working families to 
     commercial tax preparers is money that could have been used 
     to help provide their children with a safe home, nutritious 
     meals and a good education.
       These hardworking families are trying to lift themselves 
     out of poverty but are falling victim to targeted marketing 
     tactics that are taking their hard-earned money. The 
     Children's Defense Fund's efforts to educate and assist 
     families that may otherwise, fall prey to these 
     unconscionable sales tactics can make a difference in the 
     lives of the working poor.
                                 ______