Filing Your 2026 Tax Return? The Stakes Just Got Higher

Filing Your 2026 Tax ReturnPicture two things happening at the same time. The agency responsible for reviewing your tax return is understaffed and buried under a backlog, and the software that the agency uses to catch filing errors just keeps getting better.

That combination should give any taxpayer pause this season. Not because an audit is necessarily coming, but because if something does go wrong, the window for getting it resolved quickly has shrunk considerably.

The IRS Is Running Lean, But It’s Technology Isn’t

The agency lost more than a quarter of its workforce in 2025. The National Taxpayer Advocate’s most recent annual report to Congress documented the drop: from roughly 102,000 employees to about 74,000. Those departures, through a mix of voluntary exits and layoffs, spread across nearly every division.

Funding took a hit at the same time. Congress reversed a significant portion of the IRS budget boost approved through the Inflation Reduction Act, pulling back billions earmarked for enforcement and technology investment. A government shutdown that stretched across October and November of last year piled further delays onto an already strained system. The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration confirmed in a January report what tax practitioners were already seeing firsthand: a serious backlog in the processing of amended returns and taxpayer correspondence.

Here’s the part that catches people off guard. None of that has slowed the IRS’s ability to spot problems on your return. The agency’s systems cross-reference what you report against data received independently from employers, brokers, and financial institutions. Artificial intelligence and expanded automation have made error detection faster and more precise, staffing levels notwithstanding.

Fewer people are available to handle problems once they surface. But the technology responsible for finding those problems is running better than ever.

What This Looks Like in Practice

Tax professionals working with real clients are the best window into what this means day to day. Advisors report receiving IRS notices today that are resolving matters dating back to 2023, showing a multi-year lag on what should be routine correspondence. The practical response among preparers has been to tighten processes and leave less to chance.

Some advisors have added specific safeguards, such as obtaining power of attorney to monitor clients’ IRS online accounts directly rather than waiting for slow paper notices. Others describe the current environment plainly: the cost of needing to amend a return has gone up, not necessarily in dollars, but in time and uncertainty.

A poll of tax and financial advisors conducted during a recent industry webinar found that every respondent is maintaining at least the same level of care they applied when IRS staffing was at full strength. Nearly half said they are actively raising the bar this season.

What You Should Do Differently

Here are a few practical steps worth taking seriously this year:

  • Give your preparer complete and accurate information. Incomplete or inconsistent reporting is where most errors begin, and those errors are exactly what the IRS’ matching systems are built to catch.
  • If you are claiming something new on your return, ask your preparer to walk you through the basis for it. Understanding what you are filing and why is reasonable.
  • Set up an IRS online account at IRS.gov if you haven’t already. You can monitor your filing status, review transcripts, and spot potential issues before they become formal notices.
  • And if something does go sideways, respond early. Letting a notice sit without a response doesn’t slow the IRS down. It just costs you time you don’t have.

Conclusion

The agency may be a smaller operation than it was a few years ago. But the part of it designed to find mistakes on your return is still very much running.

Understanding the Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC)

What is Customer Acquisition Cost CAC?The Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC) measures how much a company spends to obtain new, additional customers. Oftentimes, this calculation is used with the customer lifetime value (LTV) metric, that also projects the customer’s profitability to calculate the newly acquired customer’s value.

It’s primarily used to measure a business’ sales and marketing departments to figure out their profitability, profit margin and return on investment figures.

How to Calculate

CAC = Sales and Marketing Expense / Number of New Customers

Examples of the expenses include product and service promotion expenditures, special compensation and commissions, regular wage payments, and operating expenses.

The tally of newly acquired customers is simply how many new, unique contracts the business acquired. It’s important to keep the expenses and customer acquisition numbers consistent over the same periods.

Why It’s Important

Business owners and their managers, along with investors, can look at sales and marketing efforts from the return on investment of their expenditures and outcomes. For example, there could be multiple channels that sales and marketing took to obtain new customers over a quarter, half-year or 12-month period (such as email marketing, social media marketing, conferences, etc.). Based upon each channel, the customer acquisition cost is determined by dividing the financial outlay per customer acquired.

From there, each channel can be analyzed to see which one works well and, equally important, which ones don’t work well and should either be discontinued or modified. Internal stakeholders and external investors (both existing and potential) can look at trends to see how ongoing efforts may be working and if existing management is productive or needs to be replaced with more competent individuals.

Accounting Considerations

Based on FASB’s Accounting Standards Codification 340-40, businesses are required to document and capitalize incremental costs of securing new customer business if the related expenses are projected to be recouped.

An incremental cost in the scope of obtaining a contract is a cost an entity incurs to obtain a contract that wouldn’t have been incurred if the contract hadn’t been obtained.

While a sales commission (be it fixed or a percentage of a new contract) may be considered an eligible incremental cost to one of its employees, it’s not necessarily always the case. Rather, the true test of whether an incremental cost is capitalizable depends on the subjective interpretation of if a mandated financial expenditure for an incremental cost is attributed to signing a contract with a new customer.

The following sample situations often require more investigation to determine whether the capitalization of costs is applicable:

  • Equity issuances based upon meeting production and essential function goals
  • Employee compensation according to previous years’ executed contracts
  • Sales commissions allocated over multiple timeframes and/or to more than one employee for a single contract

ASC 340-40 also stipulates the amortization schedule of capitalization costs of obtaining a customer contract on a scheduled timeline that follows the delivery to the customer of the contracted goods or services.

Conclusion

While the customer acquisition cost may be straightforward, when it comes to subjective cases, businesses that have experience with murkier situations are able to make the most of their subjective sales and marketing expenses when navigating the tax and accounting landscape. 

Facilitating Access to Housing and In-State Tuition, Sanctioning Iran and the Battle Over DHS Funding

21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (HR 6644) – As many local governments face the problem of rising affordability and severe housing shortages, this bipartisan bill would update existing housing programs to increase the housing supply, as well as streamline federal regulations that slow construction. Among its provisions, the legislation would authorize a pilot program designed to convert vacant or underused buildings into residential housing, issue grants for infrastructure improvements for utilities and transportation, and include construction of new housing units for low- and moderate-income residents. The legislation was introduced on Dec. 11, 2025, by Rep. French Hill (R-AR). It originally passed in the House on Feb. 9, but the Senate made changes before passing it on March 12. It has returned to the House for a final vote.

Territorial Student Access to Higher Education Act (HR 6472) – This act would amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to provide for in-state tuition rates for certain residents of Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, and the United States Virgin Islands. The bill would help offset the high cost of attending college on the U.S. mainland, which prohibitively adds thousands of dollars to airfare, housing, and basic living expenses incurred by citizens of U.S. territories. The legislation was introduced by Rep. James Moylan (R-Guam) on Dec. 4, 2025. It passed the House on March 7 and is currently under consideration in the Senate.

Enhanced Iran Sanctions Act of 2025 (HR 1422) – On Feb. 8, 2025, Rep. Michael Lawler (R-NY) introduced this bill to strengthen secondary sanctions on foreign entities (e.g., banks, insurers, pipeline construction and operation facilities) that help process, export, or sell illicit Iranian oil, including for liquified natural gas. The bill lay dormant in the House until late February, when the U.S. launched its attack on Iran. On March 10, the bill was updated to include an interagency work group to develop more sanctions related to Iran and a multinational effort to enforce sanctions. The latest version of the act was passed in the House on March 16; its fate currently lies in the Senate.

Servicemembers’ Credit Monitoring Enhancement Act (S 2074) – The purpose of this bill is to provide free credit monitoring for veterans. Presently, only active duty members can take advantage of this service. The bill was introduced by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) on June 12, 2025. It passed unanimously in the Senate on March 5 and is currently under consideration in the House.

Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2026 (HR 7744) – This is the bill that is currently holding up appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30. The bill was introduced by Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) on March 2 and passed in the House on March 5. However, it has triggered a partial government shutdown and is under heated debate in the Senate. Republicans insist on passing the complete bill with increased funding for national security and border protection. The legislation also includes provisions prohibiting funds for Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and Critical Race Theory programs, as well as abortions and gender-affirming care for ICE detainees. Senate Democrats are seeking to include guardrails that would prohibit ICE agents from wearing masks or entering homes, schools, hospitals, etc., without a judicial warrant.

PAY TSA Act of 2026 – Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY) introduced a carve-out bill for DHS on March 16, authorizing specific fees already collected to fund the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) during shutdowns. The bill would direct the Aviation Passenger Security Fee (initiated after the 9/11 terror attacks) to be used to pay TSA agents during any period that TSA appropriations lapse. Airlines currently charge this passenger fee ($5.60 for a one-way trip and up to $11.20 for a round-trip) for flights that originate in the United States. The bill is not expected to pass due to Republican opposition to carving out funding from the general DHS appropriations bill.

End Special Treatment for Congress at Airports Act of 2026 (S 4123) – Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) introduced this bill on March 17 as a companion bill reflecting stalled appropriations for DHS – and for TSA workers specifically. The bill calls for a ban on Congressional lawmakers’ current preferential status that enables them to sidestep security checkpoint lines at U.S. airports. The ban would require members of Congress to wait in TSA lines along with other passengers. The bill passed in the Senate on March 19, and its fate now lies with the House.

Version 2