An official website of the U.S. Gov
When taxpayers disagree with the IRS, they should have access to a forum that is fair, impartial, and independent. That is the purpose of the IRS Independent Office of Appeals. For many taxpayers, Appeals is the best opportunity to resolve a dispute without the cost, stress, and delay of litigation.
But for Appeals to fulfill that role, taxpayers must have confidence that they are receiving an independent review, not simply another conversation with the same IRS functions whose position they are challenging. Independence must be real, and it must be visible to the taxpayer.
That is why I support H.R. 8134, the Strengthen Taxpayer Rights Act of 2026. Introduced on March 27, 2026, by Representatives Monica De La Cruz and Zachary Nunn, the bill would amend IRC § 7803(e) to provide that no IRS employee, other than an employee of the IRS Independent Office of Appeals, may appear in an Appeals conference without the consent of the taxpayer who requested the appeal. As of July 22, 2026, H.R. 8134 remains pending before the House Committee on Ways and Means and has not been enacted.
I believe Congress should enact this bill.
Appeals exists to resolve disputes without litigation in a way that is fair and impartial to both the government and the taxpayer. Congress underscored that role in the Taxpayer First Act of 2019 when it codified the Independent Office of Appeals in IRC § 7803(e). That statutory recognition was important. It reflected what taxpayers, practitioners, and TAS have long understood: Taxpayers should not have to go to court to feel they received a fair and independent review of an IRS decision. That is why a strong, independent, and effective Appeals function is so important to our tax system.
If taxpayers believe Appeals is simply another stop on the road to defending an IRS adjustment, they are less likely to view the process as meaningful, less likely to engage fully, and more likely to conclude that the only real path to an independent review is litigation.
That outcome serves no one well, not taxpayers, not the IRS, and not the tax system.
On December 29, 2025, Appeals issued interim guidance titled “Participation in Appeals conferences by IRS employees” (AP-08-1225-0051). That memorandum was designed to add consistency and transparency when IRS Compliance personnel or Chief Counsel attorneys participate in Appeals conferences.
There is much to like in that guidance. It requires managerial approval in cases not assigned to Appeals Team Case Leaders before IRS Compliance or Counsel may participate. It calls for an “Expectations Meeting,” unless the taxpayer waives it, so the parties can understand in advance how the conference will proceed. It requires an agenda so taxpayers know who will be present and what issues will be discussed. It also limits Compliance and Counsel to the non-settlement portion of the conference, meaning they may discuss facts and legal positions but must be excluded from settlement negotiations.
Those are sensible guardrails. They should reduce surprise, add discipline, and make the process more transparent. They also reflect a recognition by Appeals that the presence of non-Appeals personnel in a taxpayer conference is not routine and should not be handled casually.
I applaud Appeals for taking that step.
The December guidance improves the process, but it does not solve the central problem. It still leaves the participation decision with Appeals, not with the taxpayer. The internal guidance expressly says Appeals has discretion to invite IRS Compliance or Counsel to the non-settlement portion of the conference, and it further states that Appeals’ decision to allow or disallow that participation is final and not subject to administrative or judicial review.
That is the gap H.R. 8134 would close.
To be clear, this is not about diminishing the important roles of Compliance or Counsel. Compliance develops the facts and applies the law during examinations, collection matters, and other IRS actions. Counsel provides legal advice and protects the government’s interests. Both functions are important to tax administration, and Appeals may benefit from their expertise, particularly in complex cases.
But neither function is neutral, and the taxpayer’s Appeals conference is different. It is the taxpayer’s opportunity to seek independent review. When representatives of the IRS functions whose position is being challenged are present over the taxpayer’s objection, the conference can feel less like an independent review and more like a continuation of the dispute.
For some taxpayers, the presence of Compliance or Counsel may inhibit open discussion. For others, it may undermine confidence that Appeals is acting as an independent decision-maker rather than as a convener of competing IRS voices. In technically complex cases, taxpayers may reasonably worry that Appeals will defer too heavily to Counsel’s legal views. Even when that does not happen, appearances matter.
A forum designed to be independent should look independent to the taxpayers using it.
This concern goes to the heart of the Taxpayer Bill of Rights. Taxpayers have the rights to challenge the IRS’s position and be heard, and to appeal an IRS decision in an independent forum. Those rights are not fully vindicated if taxpayers can be required to present their case in a conference that includes representatives of the very functions whose position they are contesting.
H.R. 8134 would address that concern directly. The bill would add a new section to the Internal Revenue Code (IRC § 7803(e)(8)), which would provide that no IRS employee other than an Appeals employee may appear in an Appeals conference without the consent of the taxpayer who requested the appeal.
That is the right rule. It is clear and easy to administer.
Importantly, H.R. 8134 would not prevent Appeals from preparing thoroughly or obtaining technical input outside the conference. Appeals could still review the case file, seek legal or technical assistance, request written input, and evaluate the hazards of litigation. The bill simply says that if non-Appeals IRS personnel are going to appear in the taxpayer’s conference, the taxpayer must agree.
That distinction matters. The issue is not whether Appeals may be informed. Appeals should be informed. The issue is whether taxpayers should be required to present their case in the presence of non-Appeals IRS personnel whose positions they are challenging. In my view, they should not.
This approach is also consistent with my 2026 Purple Book Legislative Recommendation #36, which recommends requiring taxpayers’ consent before allowing IRS Counsel or Compliance personnel to participate in Appeals conferences.
The bill also complements section 601 of S. 3931, Taxpayer Assistance and Service Act (the TAS Act), introduced by Senators Mike Crapo and Ron Wyden on February 26, 2026. Section 601 would authorize the Chief of Appeals to appoint attorneys in Appeals who report directly to the Chief of Appeals rather than to Chief Counsel.
These two reforms address different aspects of the same issue.
One reform is procedural. The other is structural. Together, they would move Appeals in the right direction.
Appeals’ December guidance was a meaningful administrative improvement. It adds transparency, requires planning, and limits the role of IRS Compliance and Counsel personnel when they attend conferences. I appreciate that progress, but administrative guidance is not the same as a statutory taxpayer protection.
Guidance can be revised. A statute gives taxpayers clarity and certainty.
More importantly, the internal guidance answers only part of the question. It tells us how IRS Compliance and Counsel may participate. H.R. 8134 answers the more important question of who decides whether they should participate at all. In my view, that decision should belong to the taxpayer.
As I have stated multiple times over the years, Appeals plays a critical role in tax administration. When it functions well, it resolves disputes fairly, strengthens confidence in the system, and reduces the need for litigation. But Appeals can only play that role if taxpayers believe the forum is genuinely independent. The Taxpayer First Act was an important first step. H.R. 8134 would be the next one.
H.R. 8134 is a narrow but important reform. It would not deprive Appeals of expertise. It would not prevent Appeals from preparing thoroughly. It would simply ensure that when a taxpayer comes to Appeals seeking independent review, the taxpayer decides whether non-Appeals IRS personnel will be in the room.
That is a common-sense taxpayer protection. It would:
Most importantly, it would strengthen taxpayer confidence that Appeals is what Congress intended it to be, which is an independent forum for resolving federal tax controversies fairly and impartially.
The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the National Taxpayer Advocate. The National Taxpayer Advocate presents an independent taxpayer perspective that does not necessarily reflect the position of the IRS, the Treasury Department, or the Office of Management and Budget. NTA Blog posts are generally not updated after publication. Posts are accurate as of the original publication date. Portions of this blog may have been developed with the assistance of artificial intelligence. All AI-assisted content has been reviewed, verified, and approved by the National Taxpayer Advocate or TAS staff to ensure accuracy and integrity.
