Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions - 2008.01.17 - 9447REPORT (misc. #07275) January 17, 2008 BY: General Government Committee, Christine Long, Chairperson IN RE: MR #07275 — Board of Commissioners — Support for Federal Tax Intercept Proposal for Collection of Court Ordered Fines, Fees and Victim Restitution To: The Oakland County Board of Commissioners Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen: The General Government Committee, having reviewed the above-referenced resolution on January 7, 2008, reports with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted. Chairperson, on behalf of the General Government Committee, I move acceptance of the foregoing report. GENERAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE General Government Committee: Motion carried unanimously on a roll call vote with Suarez and Greimel absent. Miscellaneous Resolution #07275 BY: Commissioners Eileen T. KowaII and Mike Rogers RE: Board of Commissioners — Support for Federal Tax Intercept Proposal for Collection of Court Ordered Fines, Fees and Victim Restitution TO: Oakland County Board of Commissioners Chairperson, Ladies and Gentlemen: WHEREAS many states and localities carry substantial court-ordered fines owed to them in the form of unpaid fines, fees and other obligations; and WHEREAS collection of a portion of these unpaid debts nationwide could result in millions of dollars going to state and local coffers, as well as, provide restitution to victims; and WHEREAS under current law, the U.S. Department of Treasury is authorized to intercept tax refunds for child support debt, state/federal tax debt and federal agency debt, but not for the collection of court-ordered fines, fees and restitution; and WHEREAS the collection of such debts through a tax refund offset would be among the most accurate, least intrusive and least burdensome methods to satisfy these obligations ordered by state courts; and WHEREAS such a tax intercept program would be revenue generating mechanism that is not a tax increase. The mechanisms are already in place to establish the program, so there would be no need to install new, expensive equipment or protocols; and WHEREAS the Conference of Chief Justices and Conference of State Court Administrators recognize that allowing court-ordered penalties, fines, fees and restitution surcharges to be willfully ignored diminishes public respect for the rule of law, and recognizes that it is in the interests of the courts that their orders be honored; and WHEREAS payment of unpaid court debt would promote the public trust and confidence in the judicial system; and WHEREAS victims would benefit, in that, 50% of any restitution goes to the victims and 50% goes to the court; and WHEREAS federal legislation has been introduced, S. 1287, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, to allow an offset against income tax refunds to pay for State judicial debts that are past- due; and WHEREAS this legislative proposal has received support from a broad-based coalition of public interest groups, including the National Association for Court management, National Association of Counties, Government Finance Officers Association, Conference of Chief Justices, Conference of State Court Administrators, National Conference of State Legislators and the American Probation and Parole Association. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners hereby supports federal legislation to provide federal authorization for the U.S. Department of Treasury to intercept tax refunds to pay overdue court-ordered financial obligations. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Oakland County Board of Commissioners urges passage of S. 1287 allow for increasing the enforcement of court orders, and by doing so increasing the collection of court-ordered fines, fees and victim restitution. District #/ Commissiorrm /1/1"'Ulie issioner MikldftgeTS ri ctrit 5- ndY Indy iz /C ---AF Commissioner District,# 22_ • Cb missioner District # Commissioner District # I ommission District # 'Commis§foner District # er District Cohrrhissioner Eileen INKowall Distshtt #6 1114 Commissioner District # 13 NI T. owall CommOioner p t .&# Q 44 Commissioner Commission District # I - Commissioner Diyict # 4at „1k..eS, -Commissioner District #( 2- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Oakland County Clerk is requested to forward copies of this adopted resolution to Senator Carl Levin, Senator Debbie Stabenow, the Michigan delegation to the United States Senate, the United States Senate Committee on Finance, the Michigan Association of Counties, the Michigan State Court Administrator's Office; Oakland County Chief Circuit Court Judge Wendy Potts and Oakland County's legislative lobbyists. Chairperson, we move the adoption of the foregoing Resolution. Commisgio r District # Lihif 1111,_<\ Commissioner District #-7 guS12,1.4 Commissioner District,# Commissioner District it W Commissioner District, # n4110.1r Commissioner District # 110TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION S. 1287 II To amend ti-w Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow an offset against income tax refunds to pay for State judicial debts that are pas -due. IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES MAY 3. 2007 Mr. SMITH (for himself an Mr. KENNEDY) introduced the following bill ; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance A BILL To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow an offset against, income tax refunds to pay for State judi- cial debts that are past-due. 1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Represent a- 2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 3 SECTION 1. OFFSET OF STATE JUDICIAL DEBTS AGAINST 4 INCOME TAX REFUND. 5 (a) IN GENERIL.—Section 6402 of the Internal Rev- 6 critic Code of 1986 (relating to authority to make credits 7 or refunds) is amended by redesignating subsections (f) 8 through (10 as subsections (g) through (1), respectively, 9 and by inserting after subsection (e) the following: 3 1 names, taxpayer identification numbers, and ad- 2 dresses of each person filing such return. 3 "(2) PRIORITIES FOR OFFSET,--Any overpay- 4 ment by a person shall be reduced pursuant to this 5 subsection- 6 "(A) after such overpayment is reduced 7 pursuant to- 8 "(i) subsection (a) with respect to any 9 liability for any internal revenue tax on the 10 part of the person who made the overpay- ii ment: "(ii) subsection (e) with respect to 13 ia st -due support: 14 "(iii) subsection (d) with respect to 15 any past-due, legally enforceable debt owed 16 to a Federal agency; and 17 ''(iv) subsection ( e) with respect to 18 any past-due, legally enforceable State in- 19 come tax obligations; and 20 "(B) before such overpayment is credited 21 to the future liability for any Federal internal 22 revenue tax of such person pursuant to sub- 23 section (b). 24 If the SecretaiT receives notice from 1 or more State 25 agencies, or from 1 or more State agencies and the .S 1287 IS debt' includes court costs, fees, fines, assess- 2 ments, restitution to victims of crime, and other 3 monies resulting from a judgment or sentence 4 rendered by any court or tribunal of competent 5 jurisdiction handling criminal or traffic cases in 6 the State. 7 "(5) REGTTLATioNs.—The Secretary shall issue 8 regulations prescribing the time and manner in 9 which State judicial branches and State agencies 10 must submit notices of past-due, legally enforceable 11 State judicial debts and the necessary information that must be contained in or accompany such no- 1 3 tices. The regulations shall specify the types of State 14 judicial monies and the minimum amount of debt to 15 which the reduction procedure established by para- 16 graph (1) may be applied. The regulations may re- 17 quire State judicial branches and State agencies to 18 pay a fee to reimburse the Secretary for the cost of 19 applying such procedure. Any fee paid to the See- 20 retarT pursuant to the preceding sentence shall be 21 used to reimburse appropriations which bore all or 22 part of the cost of applying such procedure. 23 `'(6) ERRoNEOTTS PAYMENT Ti) ST ATE 24 State judicial branch or State agency receiving no- 25 lice from the Secretary that an erroneous payment *S 1287 IS 7 1 "(B) before such overpayment is- 2 "(i) reduced pursuant to subsection 3 (f) with respect to past-due, legally en- 4 forceable State judicial debts. and 5 "(ii) credited to the thture liability for 6 any Federal internal revenue tax of such 7 person pursuant to subsection (b).". 8 (4) Section 6402(g) of such Code, as so redesig- 9 nated, is amended by striking "or (e)" and inserting 10 "(e), or (f)". 11 (5) Section 6402(i) of such Code, as so redesig- 12 nated, is amended by striking "OT (e)" and inserting. 13 ", (e), Or (f)". 14 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The ame -ndineub; made by 15 this Act shall apply to refunds payable for taxable years 16 beginning after December 31, 2006, cm •S 1287 18 Sponsored hy the Legal Aid Association of California and the Administrative Office of the Courtc eve w . Dctoher 26-27, 2006 San Francii.io Two full days of substantive training specifically for family law practioners serving low-income and modest-means clients. including sessions on: • The role of the California Department of Child Support Services. including its state disbursement unit and new calculatte • Order-to-show, cause hearings and evidentiary issues. with nrescntation et a mock hearing How to handle move-away custody cases • immigratine ne the new bankruntey rules Inc treatment or Dampier, property in dissolution cases • Enforcement in tiomestic violence cases. including contempt issuet-, • The ethics of unoundling legal services jeinuers and eensierm military issues, and much more! Don't miss ttw LMC Family Law Awards of Merit presentation and networking reception. Registration materials are available at www.calegalaam:ate5.orp"; ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS Cr-NTH FOR FAMILIES. CHILDREN & THE col:r:1-5; • Court-owed debts would be last in line after child support interception and other current debt priorities. The new category would not affect other recipients now intercepting refunds. • This tax intercept proposal would be a revenue-generating instrument that is not a tax increase. • Enactment of this law would allevi- ate or lessen the budget problems faced by many courts. • The mechanisms are already in place to establish this program. There would be no need to install new, expensive protocols to implement the proposal. • Payment of unpaid court debt would promote public trust and confidence in the nation's judicial system. This legislation has the support of a broad-based coalition including the Conference of Chief Justices, Confer- ence of State Court Administrators, National Association for Court Man- agement, National Conference of State Legislatures, National Association of Counties, Government Finance Offi- cers Association, and American Proba- tion and Parole Association. The hill has been referred to the Senate Finance Committee. Ill Jose Dimas is a government relations associate with the National Center for State Courts in Washington., D.C. FALL 2006 25 Resolutions Page 1 of 1 Policy Statements & Resolutions Resolution 15 Tax Refund Offset Proposal to Further Compliance with Court Orders WHEREAS, the Conference of Chief Justices recognizes that allowing court-ordered penalties, fines, fees and restitution surcharges to be willfully ignored diminishes public respect for the rule of law, and recognizes that it is in the interest of the courts that their orders be honored; and WHEREAS, significant dollars in court-imposed penalties, fines, fees and restitution surcharges are willfully ignored; and WHEREAS, a United States Treasury Offset Program allows for the Federal income tax refund interception of Federal tax debt, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) child support debt, Federal agency non-tax debt, non-TANF child support debt and State tax debt (other than child support); and WHEREAS, collection of debt through a tax refund offset would be among the most accurate, least intrusive, least burdensome ways available to satisfy a debt owed to State courts; and WHEREAS, collection of debt through a tax refund offset mechanism would contribute to public trust and confidence in the courts; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Conference of Chief Justices supports legislation to add conforming language to Federal statutes that will enable the States to intercept Federal tax refunds for legally enforceable orders that are willfully ignored. Adopted as proposed by the Public Trust and Confidence Committee of the Conference of Chief Justices at its 26th Midyear Meeting on January 30, 2003. Bylaws 1 Mission 1 Polccy Statements & Resolutions 1 History MemOer Roster Reports 1 Search Home littp://cci.nese.dni.us/reso:15TaxRefundPronosai.htm: 12/18.'2007 Resolution #07275 November 29, 2007 The Chairperson referred the resolution to the General Government Committee, There were no objections. Ruth Johng n, County Clerk Resolution #07275 January 17, 2008 Moved by Rogers supported by Gershenson the resolutions (with fiscal notes attached) on the Consent Agenda be adopted (with accompanying reports being accepted). AYES: Burns, Coleman, Coulter, Crawford, Douglas, Gershenson, Gingell, Gosselin, Gregory, Greimel, Jacobsen, KowaII, Long, Middleton, Nash, Potter, Potts, Rogers, Scott, Spector, Woodward, Zack, Bullard. (23) NAYS: None. (0) A sufficient majority having voted in favor, the resolutions (with fiscal notes attached) on the Consent Agenda were adopted (with accompanying reports being accepted). 9 I HEREBY APPROVE THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION ACTING PURSUANT TO 1973 PA 139 STATE OF MICHIGAN) COUNTY OF OAKLAND) I, Ruth Johnson, Clerk of the County of Oakland, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution is a true and accurate copy of a resolution adopted by the Oakland County Board of Commissioners on January 17, 2008, with the original record thereof now remaining in my office. In Testimony Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the County of Oakland at Pontiac, Michigan this 17th day of January, 2008.