FR 2024-29213

Overview

Title

Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) Implementation Evaluation

Agencies

ELI5 AI

The government wants to hear what people think about how they're checking a special tax credit that helps companies who hire certain workers. They want to make sure collecting this information isn't too hard for people, and everyone has until January 13, 2025, to say what they think.

Summary AI

The Department of Labor (DOL) is seeking public comments on an information collection request regarding the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) Implementation Evaluation. This request has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. Comments are invited to consider the necessity and utility of the information collection, and to propose ways to enhance its quality and minimize respondent burden. Interested individuals have until January 13, 2025, to submit their feedback on the proposal.

Abstract

The Department of Labor (DOL) is submitting this Chief Evaluation Office (CEO)-sponsored information collection request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA). Public comments on the ICR are invited.

Type: Notice
Citation: 89 FR 100541
Document #: 2024-29213
Date:
Volume: 89
Pages: 100541-100541

AnalysisAI

The document titled "Agency Information Collection Activities; Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request; Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) Implementation Evaluation" is an official announcement by the Department of Labor (DOL). The notice seeks public comments on an information collection effort related to the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC), which the DOL plans to submit for approval to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This process is part of the compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

Summary and General Overview

In essence, the Department of Labor, via its Chief Evaluation Office, is requesting feedback from the public concerning the evaluation of the Work Opportunity Tax Credit implementation. This feedback will aid the DOL in determining the necessity and effectiveness of the information they plan to collect. The document invites the public to submit comments by January 13, 2025.

Significant Issues and Concerns

One of the major concerns in this document is its use of technical language and acronyms such as ICR (Information Collection Request), PRA (Paperwork Reduction Act), OMB (Office of Management and Budget), and DOL (Department of Labor). Such terminology may be unfamiliar or confusing to individuals who are not well-versed in governmental processes.

Additionally, the document briefly outlines the process for submitting comments but does not provide detailed instructions or guidance on the specific aspects that the comments should cover. This lack of specificity can potentially result in a lack of meaningful feedback from the public.

The document provides estimates on the annual burden of the information collection in terms of time and cost. However, it lacks a detailed breakdown or explanation of how these figures—505 hours for time and $0 for other costs—were calculated. Without clear details, stakeholders may question the accuracy and reliability of these estimates.

Broad Public Impact

This document primarily impacts individuals and households who might be involved or affected by the Work Opportunity Tax Credit program. The call for comments allows the public to influence how information is collected and evaluated, potentially affecting how this tax credit is implemented or modified in the future.

For the general public, understanding and engaging with such governmental processes can help ensure that policies are shaped in a way that reflects public interests and needs. However, due to the technical nature of the language and the procedural aspects, there may be barriers to participation for those unfamiliar with such processes.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

Specific groups, such as businesses that hire individuals eligible for the Work Opportunity Tax Credit, may have a vested interest in the outcome of this evaluation. Positive impacts may include refined and streamlined processes for claiming the credit, ultimately benefiting businesses financially. Conversely, without clarity and active engagement, businesses might face challenges adapting to any new procedures or requirements that result from this evaluation.

Similarly, policymakers and analysts who rely on accurate and efficient data collection processes might find improvements or refinements during this evaluation process beneficial for future planning and policy adjustments.

In summary, while the intent behind the document is to engage the public in a significant governmental procedure, the execution could benefit from clearer communication and transparency to maximize public engagement and understanding.

Financial Assessment

The document in question relates to the submission of an Information Collection Request (ICR) by the Department of Labor to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This request involves an evaluation of the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC). A critical aspect highlighted in the document is the financial implications of this data collection effort.

Financial References and Allocations

The document provides a Total Estimated Annual Time Burden of 505 hours and specifies the Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden at $0. These references indicate the expected costs in terms of labor and other potential financial burdens associated with the information collection process required for the WOTC evaluation.

Implications and Clarity Issues Relating to Financial References

One significant issue is the mention of the Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden being set to $0. This figure suggests that there are no additional costs anticipated with this information collection beyond the time burden. However, without further explanation, it may be unclear what the "Other Costs Burden" typically entails and why it is projected as zero in this instance. This could lead to misunderstandings regarding what costs, if any, might be involved indirectly or potentially overlooked.

Similarly, the estimate of a 505-hour time burden is given without an expansive breakdown or methodology explaining how this figure was calculated. This lack of detail raises questions about the accuracy and reliability of the estimate and whether it encompasses all necessary activities related to the information collection. Providing more clarity on this calculation would aid in understanding the financial and operational implications of the ICR.

Overall, these financial references are essential for evaluating the cost-effectiveness and resource allocation associated with the implementation evaluation of the WOTC. Addressing the identified issues would enhance transparency and enable a clearer understanding of the potential financial impacts.

Issues

  • • The document uses technical language and acronyms such as ICR, PRA, OMB, and DOL which might be unclear to individuals not familiar with these terms.

  • • The request for public comments is briefly outlined but lacks detailed instructions or guidelines on the specific format or sections that comments should address.

  • • The 'Total Estimated Annual Time Burden' and 'Total Estimated Annual Other Costs Burden' figures are provided, but there is no detailed breakdown or explanation of how these numbers were calculated, which may lead to questions regarding their accuracy.

  • • The term 'Other Costs Burden' is mentioned but set to $0 without an explanation, which may lead to confusion regarding what this category entails.

  • • The contact information and method of submitting comments are provided without any specific guidelines for ensuring comments reach the right department or individual.

  • • The authority citation '44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D)' is included without an explanation of its relevance or implications for the reader, potentially making it unclear why it is important.

Statistics

Size

Pages: 1
Words: 688
Sentences: 28
Entities: 56

Language

Nouns: 228
Verbs: 47
Adjectives: 24
Adverbs: 5
Numbers: 37

Complexity

Average Token Length:
5.30
Average Sentence Length:
24.57
Token Entropy:
5.05
Readability (ARI):
19.23

Reading Time

about 2 minutes