INSIGHTi
Audits of EITC Returns: By the Numbers
June 13, 2022
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) audits taxpayers to determine whether they are in compliance with
tax law and have accurately reported tax liability. Some policymakers are concerned that the IRS is
auditing low-income taxpayers—in particular taxpayers who claim the earned income tax credit (EITC)—
at disproportionately high rates compared to higher-income taxpayers. These higher audit rates may be in
response to the high improper payment rates associated with the EITC.
This Insight examines recent data related to audits of EITC returns. For the purposes of this Insight, an
EITC return is defined as a return which includes a claim of the EITC. For comparison, data on audits of
other individual income tax returns that do not include an EITC claim (non-EITC returns) are also
provided. These two types of taxpayers—taxpayers filing EITC returns and non-EITC returns—
represented about 90% of all audits of 2017 tax returns (see IRS Databook Table 17). The remaining 10%
includes corporations, estates, and employers and is not discussed in this Insight.
A Small Share of Taxpayers—Claiming the EITC or Not—Are Audited
Audits of individual returns, whether with or without an EITC claim, are relatively uncommon, as
illustrated using IRS data for 2017 tax returns below. (While the IRS has published data on 2018 and
2019 audits, the data are incomplete since returns filed for those years are within the statute of limitations
where examinations may be ongoing.)
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN11952
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
Congressional Research Service
2
Source: CRS calculations based on IRS Databook Table 17.
Congressional Research Service
3
Note: Audited returns include those closed and in-process.
A recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report indicates audit rates have declined over the
past decade: 2010 EITC returns were audited at a rate of 1.8%, compared to 0.7% of 2010 non-EITC
returns. Audit rates for non-EITC returns declined about 57% between 2010 and 2017. For EITC returns,
that decline was about 44%. These averages mask differences by income group. The GAO report
indicates that over the past decade, audit rates have fallen the fastest for higher-income taxpayers.
Among Audited Taxpayers, a Large Share Claim the EITC
Audit rates for EITC returns are disproportionately high compared to the share of taxpayers who claim the
credit, as illustrated below. These estimates are in line with trends over the past decade, where individual
taxpayers claiming the EITC represent about 2 out of 10 individual taxpayers and about 4 out of every 10
individual audits.
Source: CRS calculations based on IRS Data Book Table 17.
Note: Audited returns include those closed and in-process.
Because of the higher audit rate of EITC returns, areas of the country with a higher share of taxpayers
claiming the EITC—including southeastern states and some western states—would be expected to have a
larger share of their taxpayers audited (as discussed in a ProPublica investigation). In other words, a
taxpayer in Mississippi is more likely to be audited than a taxpayer in New Hampshire, in part because
they are more likely to be a taxpayer who claims the EITC.
Research also indicates that when looking exclusively at households that claim the EITC, audits of EITC
returns tend to be higher in certain southern states than in northern states (see Figure A.17 and Table 7). In
other words, an EITC claimant in Mississippi is more likely to be audited than an EITC claimant in New
Hampshire. A 2021 report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) notes that
the IRS states it does not select EITC returns for audit based on geographic location. Instead, the report
Congressional Research Service
4
suggests that EITC claimants from these states are more likely to be flagged as noncompliant (and hence
more likely to be audited) than EITC claimants in other areas, although the report provides no explanation
as to why.
Most Audits of EITC Returns Are Done via Paper Mail Correspondence
and Are Conducted Before a Refund is Issued
Audits can be conducted in one of three ways: by mail (correspondence audits); in person at IRS offices
(office audits); or in person at the taxpayer’s home or business (field audits). Virtually all audits of EITC
returns are conducted as correspondence audits, as illustrated below.
Source: CRS calculations based on IRS Data Book Table 18.
As the National Taxpayer Advocate (NTA) explains, generally during a correspondence audit of an EITC
return,
the IRS notifies a taxpayer of an audit by sending a notice, such as Notice CP 75 or 75A, by certified
mail. The first lines of the audit notice state that the IRS is auditing the income tax return for the
specified year, that the taxpayer needs to send supporting documentation, and that the IRS is holding
the EITC portion of any claimed refund (and the refundable portion of the Child Tax Credit, if it
was claimed) pending the results of the audit.
The majority of EITC audits are conducted before the EITC (and any other applicable tax benefits) are
issued (i.e., pre-refund audits). A 2019 NTA report found that 75% of EITC audits in FY2018 were pre-
refund audits.
Congressional Research Service
5
The Majority of EITC Audits Are Never Completed
An audit is ultimately closed as a result of
a complete interaction between the taxpayer and the IRS that leads to a resolution (either
no change in the original tax/refund calculation, an agreed-upon change, or an appeal);
an incomplete interaction between the taxpayer and the IRS whereby documentation is
exchanged initially between the two parties, but not to resolution (i.e., the taxpayer stops
responding to notices). This is sometimes called default; or
no response from the taxpayer to the initial IRS notice. This is called “non-response.”
Since EITC audits are generally conducted pre-refund, when the audit is closed due to non-response or
default, the IRS can retain the additional tax they recommend the taxpayer owes (the “recommended
additional tax”) using less personnel time than if the audit were closed due to a completed interaction with
the taxpayer.
Source: Figure 2 and Figure A.18 in Taxpayer Advocate Service Special Report to Congress, 2019 and CRS calculations of
audits of filed returns in Table 7 of GAO-14-479 (excluding test cases).
Audits of EITC Returns Result in More Recommended Additional Tax
per Audit Hour than Audits of Non-EITC Returns
EITC audits may be cost effective from the IRS’s perspective, as they lead on average to higher
recommended tax amounts per audit hour than non-EITC audits, as illustrated below.
Congressional Research Service
6
Source: CRS calculations based on GAO-22-104960 Table 1 and Appendix IV Tables 4, 5, and 6.
However, research indicates that audits can be particularly burdensome to lower-income families, who
may struggle to understand audit letters, including what documentation they need to provide to
substantiate a claim.
Author Information
Margot L. Crandall-Hollick
Specialist in Public Finance
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
Congressional Research Service
7
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN11952 · VERSION 1 · NEW