Recommendation: To improve oversight of the collection of restitution, the Attorney General should develop and implement performance measures and goals for each USAO related to the collection of restitution, and measure progress towards meeting those goals. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Justice
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2019, the Department of Justice (DOJ) reported that Executive Office for United States Attorneys developed a core set of performance measures for evaluating collection activities. Further, DOJ officials reported that DOJ was in the process of developing an analytical tool to allow DOJ and U.S. Attorneys Offices' (USAOs) to assess USAO restitution collection efforts and results based on relevant factors. In November 2019, DOJ officials reported that DOJ had begun piloting the analytical tool and expected that it would be fully implemented by July 2020. However, in July 2020, DOJ officials reported that the technical challenges they encountered, as well as the impacts to government operations as a result of the 2019 COVID pandemic, have directly impacted their operations and resulted in delays. While DOJ's initial completion time frame was scheduled for October 2020, the challenges they have encountered have resulted in the timeline for implementation now expected to take place during the first quarter of FY 2021. We will continue to monitor DOJ's progress and time frames for implementation.

Recommendation: As Congress considers reauthorizing NFIP, it should consider comprehensive reform to improve the program's solvency and enhance the nation's resilience to flood risk, which could include actions in six areas: (1) addressing the current debt, (2) removing existing legislative barriers to FEMA's revising premium rates to reflect the full risk of loss, (3) addressing affordability, (4) increasing consumer participation, (5) removing barriers to private-sector involvement, and (6) protecting NFIP flood resilience efforts. In implementing these reforms, Congress should consider the sequence of the actions and their interaction with each other.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, Congress has not passed comprehensive reform of NFIP, but Congress is considering various reforms as it works to reauthorize the program. We will review the status of this item if and when such legislation passes.

Recommendation: To preserve the balance between the importance of repaying federal student loan debt and protecting a minimum level of Social Security benefits put in place by the Debt Collection Improvement Act of 1996, Congress should consider modifying Social Security administrative offset provisions, such as by authorizing the Department of the Treasury to annually index the amount of Social Security benefits exempted from administrative offset to reflect changes in the cost of living over time.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of December 2018, Congress has not yet taken action on this matter.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should inform affected borrowers of the suspension of offset and potential consequences if the borrower does not take action to apply for a TPD discharge. Such information could include notification that interest continues to accrue and that offsets may resume once their disability benefits are converted to retirement benefits.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education does not currently notify borrowers of the suspension of offset, but plans to implement a process to do so in the future using a new mailing sent to affected borrowers by their default servicer. The current budget situation does not allow for this type of enhancement, and it is not clear when that will change. In the interim, the agency is exploring alternative notification approaches that could be put in place prior to the implementation of an automated solution. Although Education reported in December 2018 that it has implemented this recommendation, we will consider closing it when we receive documentation that this effort has been completed. As of October 2020, Education's website includes information about the suspension of offset. However, affected borrowers may not know to check the website and the agency has not provided documentation that it has directly alerted affected borrowers.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should revise forms sent to borrowers already approved for a TPD discharge to clearly and prominently state that failure to provide annual income verification documentation during the 3-year monitoring period will result in loan reinstatement.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The FUTURE Act (H.R. 5363), signed into law on Dec. 19, 2019, requires the Department of Education (Education) to automate the income monitoring process for borrowers whose loans are discharged for total and permanent disability. As a result of automating the process, borrowers will no longer need to receive Education's forms requesting the borrower to individually provide their income verification documentation during the 3-year monitoring period.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should inform borrowers about the financial hardship exemption option and application process on the agency's website, as well as the notice of offset sent to borrowers.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education agrees with the recommendation and said that they will include this change in upcoming revisions to the agency's web content. The agency reported that the Notice of Offset to borrowers is sent by Treasury and that they will share this recommendation with Treasury and discuss possible changes to the notice. As of October 2020, Education's website notes that borrowers can request a review of their offset , but it does not specifically note that they may do so because of a financial hardship. Although Education reported in December 2018 that it has implemented this recommendation, we will consider closing it when we receive documentation that the agency has notified borrowers about the financial hardship exemption process on its website and the notice of offset sent to borrowers.

Recommendation: To improve program design for Social Security offsets and related relief options, the Secretary of Education should implement an annual review process to ensure that only eligible borrowers are exempted from offset for financial hardship on an ongoing basis.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education reported that it plans to fully automate their process for tracking hardships and other exceptions from offset. However, due to competing priorities and funding limitations, full implementation of these improvements have not been scheduled. As they fully implement this process, they will review complementary strategies to assist borrowers in complying with annual reporting requirements. As of December 2018, Education reported that it is in the process of re-designing the student loan financial services environment, which will lead to major improvements such as offset exceptions. They are conducting market research on the new environment, then plan to develop requirements and timelines in support of a procurement with a projected completion in September 2020. We will consider closing this recommendation when we receive documentation that the agency has implemented an annual review process.

Recommendation: To improve risk management in the collection of AD/CV duties and to identify new or changing risks, CBP should regularly conduct a comprehensive risk analysis that assesses both the likelihood and the significance of risk factors related to AD/CV duty collection. For example, CBP could construct statistical models that explore the associations between potential risk factors and both the probability of nonpayment and the size of nonpayment when it occurs.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of December 2019, CBP was taking steps to conduct the type of risk analysis GAO recommended in July 2016. In November 2019 we reported that according to CBP , the agency had developed and successfully tested two models using risk factors including, but not limited to, the type of good, country of origin of the good, and whether the importer is from a foreign country. One test demonstrated that, using data from fiscal years 2007-2015, CBP could have predicted over 95 percent of the importers with delinquent antidumping and countervailing (AD/CV) duty bills in fiscal years 2016 and 2017. CBP requested $17 million in fiscal year 2020 funds to make updates to its information systems necessary to facilitate the implementation of statistical models. CBP is also working on long-term enhancements to the models that it says will leverage additional modeling techniques, such as social network and spatial analysis. Regularly conducting a comprehensive risk analysis of factors related to AD/CV duty non-collection could enhance CBP's capacity to collect additional revenue by enabling CBP to increase bonding amounts for continuous entry and single-transaction bonds for importers with a greater risk of nonpayment. In a December 2019 Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee report, CBP said that it planned to begin rolling out a risk-based bonding framework in March 2020. The new framework relies on a bond formula that is in part based on risk factors identified by the statistical models .

Recommendation: To improve risk management in the collection of AD/CV duties, CBP should, consistent with U.S. law and international obligations, take steps to use its data and risk assessment strategically to mitigate AD/CV duty nonpayment, such as by using predictive risk analysis to identify entries that pose heightened risk and taking appropriate action to mitigate the risk.

Agency: Department of Homeland Security: United States Customs and Border Protection
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of December 2019, CBP was taking steps to develop a risk-based AD/CV bonding framework to use in conjunction with the development of an AD/CV risk assessment model. CBP is developing a supplemental AD/CV duty continuous entry bond that incorporates nonpayment risk factors identified in its statistical models and has worked with Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee (COAC) to test the proposed risk based bonding formula by applying it to historical data. CBP has estimated that the collection rate under the risk-based bonding framework using the proposed formula would have been significantly higher than the collection rate under its existing bond policies during fiscal years 2007-2017, both in number and value of the bills collected; however, COAC members said the proposed bond formula would have resulted in overinsurance, which could increase cost to importers. The use of supplemental continuous entry bonds may require regulatory changes and modifications to CBP's database. CBP has also conducted an analysis of the use of single-transaction bonds using historical data, and found that this procedure would have allowed CBP to collect significantly more revenue in fiscal years 2007-2018. CBP is working with COAC members to test a risk-based application of single-transaction bonds to historical AD/CV duty entries to assess whether the bond would have reduced the amount of uncollected duties. In a December 2019 Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee report, CBP said that it plans to rolls out its risk-based bonding framework in March 2020.

Recommendation: To ensure effective and appropriate recovery of DI overpayments and administration of penalties and sanctions, the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should clarify its policy for assessing the reasonableness of expenses used in determining beneficiaries' repayment amounts to help ensure that withholding plans are consistently established across the agency and accurately reflect individuals' ability to pay.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, SSA reported taking a number of steps to address this recommendation. According to SSA, it updated its guidance in 2017 to help ensure that staff consistently process various requests from overpaid individuals. SSA also reported that it is taking additional steps to update instructions on how staff should consider whether expenses reported by individuals are reasonable when approving withholding plans. The agency expects these instructions to be complete by the end of fiscal year 2021. We will close this recommendation once SSA releases additional guidance on assessing the reasonableness of expenses.

Recommendation: To ensure effective and appropriate recovery of DI overpayments and administration of penalties and sanctions, the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should adjust the minimum withholding rate to 10 percent of monthly DI benefits to allow quicker recovery of debt.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: SSA agreed with this recommendation and in 2017 estimated that this change would result in an additional $213 million in collections over a 5-year period. The fiscal year 2021 President's budget submission contained a legislative proposal to make this change, and budgets since 2017 have contained similar proposals. As of June 2020, SSA reported that it plans to continue to submit similar legislative proposals. SSA also included the proposal in its regulatory agenda, noting that the change can also be implemented via regulatory change. We will close this recommendation once SSA achieves resolution from Congress on its legislative proposal or from its own regulatory efforts.

Recommendation: To ensure effective and appropriate recovery of DI overpayments and administration of penalties and sanctions, the Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration should consider adjusting monthly withholding amounts according to cost of living adjustments or charging interest on debts being collected by withholding benefits. Should SSA determine that it is necessary to do so, it could pursue legislative authority to use recovery tools that it is currently unable to use.

Agency: Social Security Administration
Status: Open

Comments: Although SSA initially disagreed with this recommendation, the agency reassessed its response in June 2019 and decided to take additional actions. As of June 2020, SSA is developing a system to track debts (the Debt Management Product) which will have the ability to store, track, and apply interest and penalties to overpayment debts. SSA also reports that it is seeking a regulatory change to clarify procedures to charge interest on debts. While SSA is pursuing these measures to position itself to charge interest on debts, the agency has not yet decided whether it will ultimately do so. We will close this recommendation once SSA makes a decision on how to proceed with charging interest on overpayment debts.

Recommendation: To help ensure that Income-Based Repayment, Pay As You Earn, and Public Service Loan Forgiveness serve their intended beneficiaries to the greatest extent possible, the Secretary of Education should take steps to consistently and regularly notify all borrowers who have entered repayment of income-driven repayment plan options, including Income-Based Repayment and Pay As You Earn.

Agency: Department of Education
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Education generally concurred with our recommendation, stating that it is committed to ensuring that federal student loan borrowers have the information they need to manage their debt, including details regarding income-driven repayment plans and loan forgiveness programs. However, Education stated that it is not clear that providing information on repayment options to all borrowers is the most efficient or effective way to achieve this goal. Beginning in 2015, Education directed its loan servicers to start sending detailed income-driven repayment information, such as projected monthly payment amounts and total amounts paid over the life of the loan under each plan, on a quarterly basis to all borrowers who are in school or in the 6-month grace period after leaving school. Education reported that in 2016 its loan servicers also began sending an email to borrowers in the fifth month of their grace period with information about applying for income-driven repayment plans and Public Service Loan Forgiveness. Education also reported that in December 2016 it began sending emails about the Revised Pay As You Earn plan directly to certain groups of borrowers, including those who expressed interest in income-driven plans during exit counseling, were less than 227 days delinquent, or had Federal Family Education Loans. In August 2018, Education indicated that borrowers are notified about income-driven repayment through information posted on websites; billing statements and forbearance and deferment notices; and during various points of delinquency. We acknowledged these efforts in our 2015 report and discussed their limitations. For example, while Education provides detailed information about income-driven repayment on its website, borrowers must actively seek out this information. In addition, we reviewed recent sample billing statements for each of the Department's loan servicers and found the information on income-driven repayment limited to the names of the specific repayment plans. The statements did not include information about how the plans work or eligibility requirements. Additionally, Education reported that in June 2019 it began sending emails about income-driven repayment plans and Public Service Loan Forgiveness directly to certain groups of borrowers, including those in the Standard repayment plan who were 31 to 270 days delinquent or in a discretionary forbearance. While a positive step, these emails were only sent to select groups of borrowers. We maintain that borrowers need sufficient and timely information to ensure they are aware of and can make informed decisions about repayment options. To fully implement this recommendation, Education should consistently and regularly notify all borrowers who have entered repayment about income-driven repayment options, including borrowers who have not been contacted by Education through its targeted notification efforts.

Recommendation: To better ensure that economically similar outcomes are taxed similarly and minimize opportunities for abuse, the Secretary of the Treasury should undertake a study that compares the current approach to alternative approaches for the taxation of financial derivatives. To determine if changes would be beneficial, such a study should weigh the tradeoffs to IRS and taxpayers that each alternative presents, including simplicity, administrability, and economic efficiency.

Agency: Department of the Treasury
Status: Open

Comments: Treasury disagreed with this recommendation based on the fact that many outside studies already exist and IRS did not comment. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act enacted in December 2017 did not include any requirements that Treasury study alternative approaches for the taxation of financial derivatives. However members of Congress have released proposals for a mark-to-market tax system, which would include financial derivatives. GAO continues to maintain that further study is needed in coordination with IRS and will continue to monitor the climate for such a study.

Recommendation: To better ensure the notice phase is achieving desired results at the lowest costs, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should provide IRS collection managers and executives accessible, reliable information on what the business rules are.

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2017, IRS provided documentation of plans to periodically share with appropriate staff business rules information, along with related results of periodic evaluations of the business rules for the four highest-volume collection notices. In February 2018, IRS officials said that conducting the evaluations will depend on resources being available from the multiple functions involved. As of December 2019, IRS had not provided GAO with documentation of time frames for regularly sharing business rules information. We will update the status when IRS provides supporting documentation on actions taken, as we requested in December 2019.

Recommendation: To better ensure the notice phase is achieving desired results at the lowest costs, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue should periodically and regularly evaluate the business rules in terms of efficiency and effectiveness or other results and ensure the results are available to managers so the data and methodologies can be used or considered in future evaluations.

Agency: Department of the Treasury: Internal Revenue Service
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2017, IRS provided documentation of plans to periodically evaluate the business rules for the four highest-volume collection notices and share evaluation results with appropriate staff. In February 2018, IRS officials said that conducting the evaluations will depend on resources being available from the multiple functions involved. As of December 2019, IRS had not provided GAO with documentation of any evaluation results or a date when IRS expects to complete the first such evaluation. Nor had IRS provided time frames for regularly conducting and sharing business rules evaluation results. We will update the status when IRS provides supporting documentation on actions taken, as we requested in December 2019.