TIGERS Update on State Efile Work in Progress - FTA Efile Symposium 2012 Terry Garber, TIGERS State Co Chair

TIGERS Update on State Efile
     Work in Progress
      FTA Efile Symposium 2012
 Terry Garber, TIGERS State Co‐Chair

MeF 1040 Changes Implemented
    in the 2012 Filing Season
• Changes to Return Header to make some
  elements optional
• Changes to FinancialTransaction to support
  529 (Educational Trust) accounts for refund
  deposit
  – Requires name of beneficiary
  – May not be a traditional financial institution
    account
• Changes to IRSForms state schemas to make
  some elements optional to align with IRS

Changes for 2012, continued
• Changes to IRSForms to adopt copies of IRS
  schemas available last fall with Release 7
• Correction to IRSW2 state and local structure
  – Missed W2G!
• Changes to align with IRS in use of TextType
  rather than StringType for names, addresses,
  and other elements where the use of special
  characters should be limited.

TIGERS Change Request for IRS
• Submitted July 2011 by TIGERS
• Unable to complete for 2012 season
• Submitted internally as 2013 requirements
• Improved handling of rejected state
  Acknowledgments, especially duplicates
• Flexible options for Reconciliation List
    – Not including addition of file size
• Allowing current tax year for submission of
  estimated payments

Remaining Major Issue: Web
   Services Gateway Performance
• Some states still experiencing timeouts and
  delayed receipt of returns
• Concern with performance – ability to handle
  peak volumes to and from states
• TIGERS has requested volume testing
  capability – will escalate due to sunsetting of
  Legacy Efile
• Joint request from states and industry for
  end‐to‐end volume testing

Reminder: State Schema Review
• All MeF schemas must be reviewed prior to
  implementation
• Submit new schemas to TIGERS for review
• Send email to statemef@rsimail.com & copy
  Terry Garber at garbert@sctax.org
• Schemas are reviewed based on TIGERS
  standards and best practices documents.
• If you do a major upgrade and haven’t been
  reviewed for a while, please re‐submit

States Schema Review Process
• Standards:
  http://www.statemef.com/projects/mef/TIGE
  RS_MeF_STANDARDS.pdf
• Best practices:
 http://www.statemef.com/projects/mef/Best_Practi
 ces_2008.pdf

State Schema Review Process
• Common schema review issues:
  – Packaging & versioning issues
  – Tag name includes line numbers from form
  – Tag names longer than 30 characters
  – State enumerations missing
  – Mandatory parent tag with no mandatory children
  – Not current with latest common TIGERS schema
    release

Reminder for States Implementing
             MeF 1040
• Use forward slashes in the path for include
  files.
  – Backslashes work on windows machine, but not
    Unix or Linux
• Change version number each time the schema
  is updated
  – Makes it easier to track changes
• Use same enumeration for ReturnType in
  header and SubmissionType in State Manifest

Focus on Non‐MeF XML Efile
•   Where the action is!
•   Long awaited TIGERS web services gateway
•   Extended Common for non‐MeF tax types
•   FSET updates
•   MFET updates
•   Tobacco under development
•   FER new direction

TIGERS Web Services Gateway
• Simplified version of IRS MeF gateway
• Supports Submissions, Receipts, and
  Acknowledgements (no Rec List yet)
• State is host, in role played by IRS
  – Different from state MeF role as client
• Transmitters have interface similar to MeF
• Early work by CA FTB; heavy lifting by Scott
  Mueller of WIDOR (retired)
• Ready for states to begin implementation

Extended Common Schema Folder
• Simplified versions of Return Header and
  Acknowledgement
• Standardized TransmissionHeader,
  Transmission schema structure, and Ack
  Transmission for states not ready to
  implement web services gateway
• Promotes greater standardization among non‐
  MeF tax types
• Still follows basic TIGERS architecture
  modeled after IRS

FSET Schemas Gaining Usage
• Fed/State Employment Taxes, including state
  Withholding and Unemployment Insurance
• More states adopting
• Listed as preferred format for payroll taxes by
  NACTP and NPRC
• New release utilizing Extended Common
• Relocation of SubmissionId for standalone
  payments
• Hoping that delay of MeF 94x to 2014 will
  allow us to build support for implementation
  of full Fed/State capabilities

New Motor Fuel (MFET) Schemas
• Motor Fuel Reporting includes “master
  schema” reports at a number of levels
  –   Supplier
  –   Terminal Operator
  –   Carrier
  –   Distributor
  –   Retailer
• New Position Holder report under
  development
• New release utilizing Extended Common with
  TIGERS standard packaging

New Motor Fuel Schema Set
• Schema set proposed to replace over time the
  EDI formats now widely used for Motor Fuel
  efile
• Initial schema set published last year
• New release will be presented to FTA Motor
  Fuel Uniformity Committee in June
• Major state tax system software vendor now
  working to support MFET with web services
  gateway

New PACT (Tobacco) Schema Set
• Federal Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act
  (PACT) became effective June 30, 2010
• Establishes monthly filings
• Like Motor Fuel, filings are at various levels,
  including suppliers, distributors, and carriers
• Two basic forms – one for cigarettes and
  second for other tobacco products
• New schema set utilizes Extended Common
  and TIGERS standards

State Tobacco Excise Tax Filing
• Separate from PACT – determined by state
  law
• FTA Tobacco section promotes uniformity
• WIDOR developed XML filing – other states
  now interested
• Goal to develop TIGERS standard schema set
  for state Tobacco efile
  – Quickly to meet state legislated deadlines!
• Please let us know if your state is interested

FER Schema Set
• The Full Electronic Return is a non‐
  streamlined schema set for Sales and Use Tax
  efile
• Challenge – and flexibility – in all of the tax
  types that make up the “Sales” family
• CO is first state using the FER in production
• NACTP starting a Sales committee interested
  in promoting standardization among state
  sales tax efile.

FER Schema Set Development
• Started as a “master” schema set similar to
  FSET, MFET, or PACT
• No real basis for uniformity
• Complex schema set required both states and
  software developers to map data from state
  forms into master schemas
• Decision to change to Forms‐based approach
• Development expected to go quickly

Questions????
• Terry Garber, South Carolina DOR
  – garbert@sctax.org
• Greg Martinez, Intuit
  – Greg_Martinez@intuit.com
• Jonathan Lyon, FTA
  – Jonathan.Lyon@taxadmin.org
• Donna Muccilli
  – Donna.Muccilli@taxadmin.org
• Website www.statemef.com