FR 2021-01287

The document from the Federal Register, issued by the U.S. Census Bureau under the Department of Commerce, is a formal notice inviting public comments on planned modifications to the State and Local Government Finance Collections and Public Employment and Payroll Collections. This initiative, conducted in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) of 1995, is pivotal in assessing the information collection processes to minimize unnecessary public burdens while ensuring data accuracy and utility. By incorporating revenues from cannabis sales, license taxes, and sports betting into their surveys, the Census Bureau aims to modernize its data collection methods. The public is encouraged to submit comments until March 29, 2021, which will aid in refining the collection process and enhance data quality.

Significant Issues and Concerns

Several notable issues and concerns arise from the document:

1. Cost Implications: The document lists the estimated total annual cost to the public as $0. However, this might be misleading as it neglects indirect expenses like purchasing specialized software or accounting services necessary for compliance with the reporting requirements. This oversight could downplay the financial impact on respondents.

2. Privacy of Personal Information: While the solicitation of public comments is encouraged, the document does not elaborate on measures to protect personal information of those who comment. Even though it mentions that personal information might be publicly accessible, there is no assurance of safeguarding individual privacy during the consultation phase.

3. Evaluation of Public Comments: The document lacks clarity about the criteria and processes through which the collected public comments will be evaluated or how they will influence the decision-making process. This could potentially discourage public engagement, as citizens may feel their input will not be meaningfully considered.

4. Complex Legal References: References to legal provisions, such as Title 13 U.S.C. Sections 161 and 182, are cited without explanation. This might be inaccessible to the general public, especially those without a legal background, hindering their understanding of the legal framework supporting this initiative.

5. Complexity in Data Presentation: The presentation of estimated response times and total burden hours is complex, using multiple figures that could be simplified for clarity. A clearer presentation would facilitate a better understanding of the document for stakeholders.

Impact on the Public

The document has broad implications for the public. On the positive side, updating data collections to include contemporary sources like cannabis and sports betting taxes ensures the government has relevant information to support economic decisions. Enhancing data quality and reducing the burden of reporting can benefit public efficiency and the delivery of government services.

On the downside, the unaccounted costs associated with compliance might pose challenges for smaller state and local entities with limited budgets, leading to financial strain.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

For state and local governments, the document impacts their reporting obligations to the Federal government. While streamlined processes through central collection agreements could reduce the reporting burden, the need for additional resources to comply with new data requirements may present a challenge.

For the general public and private sector entities, accurate data collection can foster informed policy development, beneficially impacting areas like infrastructure, public services, and economic development. However, if the collection process remains overly burdensome or costly, it could indirectly affect public service quality.

In conclusion, while the document outlines necessary steps to modernize data collection and invites public participation, attention to the concerns highlighted could enhance its effectiveness and public reception. Improved transparency and cost accounting can bolster confidence among stakeholders and foster a more cooperative approach to data collection reforms.

The document in question addresses proposed revisions for State and Local Government Finance Collections, and Public Employment and Payroll Collections, and invites public comments on these revisions. While there is an emphasis on the collection and processing of statistical data, it is crucial to consider how financial aspects are represented.

The document specifies the Estimated Total Annual Cost to Public as $0. This figure suggests that the collection of information itself does not have direct financial costs to the respondents involved. However, this assertion might be misleading. It is essential to understand that while there are no direct charges for participation, indirect costs are likely incurred by those who respond to the survey. For example, respondents might need to purchase specialized software or maintain specific accounting services to comply with the information collection requirements. These indirect expenses can accumulate, making the declaration of zero cost potentially understated and inaccurate.

This financial representation ties into the identified issues in the document. Labeling the annual cost as $0 might not fully disclose the associated out-of-pocket expenses participants bear, particularly in areas requiring technological upgrades or additional administrative support. Therefore, the document could improve by clarifying these indirect costs to provide a more transparent overview of the financial implications for respondents.

Furthermore, the document outlines the Estimated Time per Response and Total Annual Burden Hours, allocating specific hours for completing the forms. Although not directly financial, these time commitments indirectly translate into costs, as time spent on compliance could otherwise be utilized for productive activities within the respective governments or agencies. Hence, while not quantified in monetary terms, these time burdens should be considered part of the overall cost of participation and appropriately communicated in the report.

In conclusion, while the document maintains that no direct financial burden is imposed, a more thorough exploration of indirect costs and time implications could offer a clearer, more comprehensive picture of the financial commitments expected from participating entities.