Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Congressional research reportJun 28, 2013
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
Financial Services and General Government:
FY2013 Appropriations
-name redacted-, Coordinator
Specialist in American National Government
June 28, 2013
Congressional Research Service
7-....
www.crs.gov
R42730
CRS Report for Congress
Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Summary
The Financial Services and General Government appropriations bill provides funding for the
Department of the Treasury, the Executive Office of the President (EOP), the judiciary, the
District of Columbia, and more than two dozen independent agencies. Among those independent
agencies are the General Services Administration (GSA), the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM), the Small Business Administration (SBA), the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC), and the United States Postal Service (USPS). The Commodity Futures Trading
Commission (CFTC) is funded in the House through the Agriculture appropriations bill and in the
Senate through the FSGG bill. CFTC funding is included in all FSGG funding tables in this
report.
On February 13, 2012, President Obama submitted his FY2013 budget request. The request
included a total of $44.6 billion for agencies funded through the FSGG appropriations bill,
including $308 million for the CFTC. The President’s request would increase funding $1.5 billion
above FY2012 enacted amounts.
On June 20, 2012, the House Appropriations Committee reported H.R. 6020, the Financial
Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2013. H.R. 6020 would provide $42.4
billion for agencies funded through the House FSGG Appropriations Subcommittee. In addition,
the CFTC would receive $180 million through the FY2013 agriculture appropriations bill. Total
FY2013 funding provided by the House would be $42.5 billion, about $2.1 billion below the
President’s FY2013 request and $560 million less than FY2012 enacted amounts.
On June 14, 2012, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported its FY2013 financial services
bill, S. 3301. The Senate committee’s bill would provide $44.3 billion for FSGG agencies,
including $308 million for the CFTC, for FY2013, which would be $337 million below the
President’s FY2013 request and $1.2 billion more than FY2012 enacted amounts.
Because no regular FY2013 FSGG appropriations bill was enacted before October 1, 2012,
Congress included funds for FSGG agencies in a continuing resolution (CR) for FY2013 (P.L.
112-175). For FSGG accounts, the CR generally continued funding through March 27, 2013, at a
level that is .612% higher than the FY2012 enacted level.
P.L. 112-175 was superseded by a second law, the Consolidated and Further Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-6). Enacted on March 26, 2013, the law provided full-year
continuing appropriations through September 30, 2013. Appropriations in the law will be reduced
under the sequester order of the President, issued on March 1, 2013. That order implemented an
across-the-board cut for (non-exempt, nondefense) discretionary funding, which was calculated
based on a reduction of each account of about 5.0%; the accompanying report indicated a dollar
amount of budget authority to be canceled from each account pursuant to that across-the-board
cut. The effect of these reductions on budgetary resources of FSGG agencies, accounts, and
programs remains unclear, pending further guidance from the Office of Management and Budget
as to how they will be applied.
This report will be updated as needed.
Congressional Research Service
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Contents
Most Recent Developments ............................................................................................................. 1
Introduction...................................................................................................................................... 2
Overview.......................................................................................................................................... 3
Budget Control Act.............................................................................................................. 3
Continuing Resolution......................................................................................................... 4
FY2013 Appropriations by Title ...................................................................................................... 5
Title I: The Department of the Treasury .................................................................................... 5
Brief Summary of FY2012 Appropriations for Treasury Offices and Bureaus ................... 8
FY2013 Appropriations for Treasury Offices and Bureaus: President’s Budget
Request, Required Assessments, and Congressional Action ............................................ 8
President’s Budget Request ................................................................................................. 8
Required Assessments of the Administration’s FY2013 Budget Request for the
IRS ................................................................................................................................. 13
Congressional Action ........................................................................................................ 14
Title II: Executive Office of the President ............................................................................... 26
President’s Budget Request and Key Issues ...................................................................... 27
House Action ..................................................................................................................... 29
Senate Action .................................................................................................................... 33
Title III: The Judiciary ............................................................................................................. 36
The Judiciary Budget and Key Issues...................................................................................... 37
Judicial Security ................................................................................................................ 39
Supreme Court .................................................................................................................. 39
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ................................................................... 40
U.S. Court of International Trade ...................................................................................... 40
Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services....................................... 40
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts .......................................................................... 41
Federal Judicial Center ...................................................................................................... 42
United States Sentencing Commission.............................................................................. 42
Judiciary Retirement Funds ............................................................................................... 42
Administrative Provisions ................................................................................................. 42
Title IV: District of Columbia.................................................................................................. 44
The District of Columbia Budget and General Provisions ...................................................... 45
The President’s Budget Request ........................................................................................ 45
District’s Budget ...................................................................................................................... 45
Congressional Action............................................................................................................... 46
Senate Bill, S. 3301 ........................................................................................................... 46
House Bill H.R. 6020 ........................................................................................................ 47
Title V: Independent Agencies ................................................................................................. 48
Civilian Property Realignment Board ............................................................................... 50
Commodity Futures Trading Commission ........................................................................ 50
Consumer Product Safety Commission............................................................................. 51
Election Assistance Commission....................................................................................... 53
Federal Communications Commission ............................................................................. 53
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation: Office of the Inspector General ......................... 55
Federal Election Commission ........................................................................................... 55
Federal Trade Commission................................................................................................ 56
Congressional Research Service
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
General Services Administration ....................................................................................... 59
Independent Agencies Related to Personnel Management Appropriations ....................... 62
Federal Labor Relations Authority .................................................................................... 64
Merit Systems Protection Board ....................................................................................... 65
Office of Personnel Management ...................................................................................... 65
Office of Special Counsel.................................................................................................. 66
National Archives and Records Administration ................................................................ 67
National Credit Union Administration .............................................................................. 69
Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board .................................................................... 69
Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board ........................................................... 70
Securities and Exchange Commission .............................................................................. 70
Selective Service System .................................................................................................. 71
Small Business Administration ......................................................................................... 71
United States Postal Service .............................................................................................. 73
United States Tax Court..................................................................................................... 75
General Provisions Government-Wide .................................................................................... 76
Government Procurement ........................................................................................................ 77
Tables
Table 1. Status of FY2013 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations ............... 2
Table 2. Financial Services and General Government Appropriations, FY2012-FY2013............... 3
Table 3. Department of the Treasury Appropriations, FY2012 and FY2013 ................................... 5
Table 4. Executive Office of the President, FY2012-FY2013 ....................................................... 26
Table 5. The Judiciary Appropriations, FY2012-FY2013 ............................................................. 37
Table 6. District of Columbia Special Federal Payments, FY2012-FY2013 ................................. 44
Table 7. Independent Agencies Appropriations, FY2012-FY2013 ................................................ 49
Table 8. General Services Administration Appropriations, FY2012-FY2013 ............................... 60
Table 9. Independent Agencies Related to Personnel Management Appropriations,
FY2012-FY2013 ......................................................................................................................... 63
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 78
Key Policy Staff ............................................................................................................................. 79
Congressional Research Service
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Most Recent Developments
On February 13, 2012, President Obama submitted his FY2013 budget request. The request
included a total of $44.6 billion for agencies funded through the Financial Services and General
Government (FSGG) appropriations bill, including $308 million for the Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (CFTC). The President’s request would increase funding $1.5 billion above
FY2012 enacted amounts.
On June 20, 2012, the House Appropriations Committee reported H.R. 6020, the Financial
Services and General Government Appropriations Act, 2013. H.R. 6020 would provide $42.4
billion for agencies funded through the House FSGG Appropriations Subcommittee. In addition,
the CFTC would receive $180 million through the FY2013 agriculture appropriations bill. Total
FY2013 funding provided by the House would be $42.5 billion, about $2.1 billion below the
President’s FY2013 request and $560 million less than FY2012 enacted amounts.
On June 14, 2012, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported its FY2013 financial services
bill, S. 3301. The Senate committee’s bill would provide $44.3 billion for FSGG agencies,
including $308 million for the CFTC, for FY2013, which would be $337 million below the
President’s FY2013 request and $1.2 billion more than FY2012 enacted amounts. Table 1 reflects
the status of FSGG appropriations legislation at key points in the appropriations process.
Because no regular FY2013 FSGG appropriations bill was enacted before October 1, 2012,
Congress included funds for FSGG agencies in a continuing resolution (CR) for FY2013 (P.L.
112-175). For FSGG accounts, the CR generally continued funding through March 27, 2013, at a
level that is .612% higher than the FY2012 enacted level.
P.L. 112-175 was superseded by a second law, the Consolidated and Further Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-6). Enacted on March 26, 2013, the law provided full-year
continuing appropriations through September 30, 2013. Appropriations in the law will be reduced
under the sequester order of the President, issued on March 1, 2013. That order implemented an
across-the-board cut for (non-exempt, nondefense) discretionary funding, which was calculated
based on a reduction of each account of about 5.0%; the accompanying report indicated a dollar
amount of budget authority to be canceled from each account pursuant to that across-the-board
cut. The effect of these reductions on budgetary resources of FSGG agencies, accounts, and
programs remains unclear, pending further guidance from the Office of Management and Budget
as to how they will be applied.
Congressional Research Service
1
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Table 1. Status of FY2013 Financial Services and
General Government Appropriations
Subcommittee
Markup
House
Senate
06/20/12
06/14/12
Conference
Report Passed
House
Report
H.Rept.
112-550
House
Passage
Senate
Report
S.Rept.
112-177
Senate
Passage
Conference
Report
House
Senate
Public
Law
P.L.
113-6
Introduction
The House and Senate Committees on Appropriations reorganized their subcommittee structures
in early 2007. Each chamber created a new FSGG Subcommittee. In the House, the jurisdiction of
the FSGG Subcommittee was formed primarily of agencies that had been under the jurisdiction of
the Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary,
the District of Columbia, and Independent Agencies, commonly referred to as “TTHUD.”1 In
addition, the House FSGG Subcommittee was assigned four independent agencies that had been
under the jurisdiction of the Science, State, Justice, Commerce, and Related Agencies
Subcommittee.2
In the Senate, the jurisdiction of the new FSGG Subcommittee was a combination of agencies
from the jurisdiction of three previously existing subcommittees. The District of Columbia, which
had its own subcommittee in the 109th Congress, was placed under the purview of the FSGG
Subcommittee, as were four independent agencies that had been under the jurisdiction of the
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Subcommittee.3 Additionally, most of the
agencies that had been under the jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury,
the Judiciary, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies were assigned to the
FSGG Subcommittee.4 As a result of this reorganization, the House and Senate FSGG
Subcommittees have nearly identical jurisdictions.5
1
The agencies previously under the jurisdiction of the TTHUD Subcommittee that did not become part of the FSGG
subcommittee were the Department of Transportation, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the
Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, the Federal Maritime Commission, the National
Transportation Safety Board, the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, and the United States Interagency Council
on Homelessness.
2
The agencies are the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the Small Business Administration (SBA).
3
The agencies are the FCC, FTC, SEC, and SBA.
4
The agencies that did not transfer from TTHUD to FSGG were Transportation, HUD, the Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, the Federal Maritime Commission, the National Transportation Safety
Board, the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation, and the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness.
5
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is under the jurisdiction of the FSGG Subcommittee in the Senate but
not in the House.
Congressional Research Service
2
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Overview
The FSGG appropriations bill includes funding for the Department of the Treasury, the Executive
Office of the President (EOP), the judiciary, the District of Columbia, and more than two dozen
independent agencies. For each title of the regular FSGG appropriations bill, Table 2 lists the
enacted amounts for FY2012, the President’s FY2013 request, and amounts recommended by the
House and Senate appropriations committees for FY2013.
Table 2. Financial Services and General Government Appropriations,
FY2012-FY2013
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
Enacted
FY2013
Request
FY2013
House
Committee
FY2013
Senate
Committee
$12,215
$13,244
$12,292
$12,904
Title II: Executive Office of the
President
659
649
650
698
Title III: The Judiciary
6,970
7,189
6,979
7,164
Title IV: District of Columbia
665
678
667
676
Title V: Independent Agencies
22,581
22,864
21,955
22,844
Total
$43,091
$44,623
$42,531
$44,287
Title
Title I: Department of the
Treasury
FY2013
Enacted
Sources: H.R. 6020; H.Rept. 112-550; S. 3301, S.Rept. 112-177.
Notes: Totals include funding for the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The CFTC is funded in
the House through the Agriculture appropriations bill and in the Senate through the Financial Services and
General Government bill. Figures include rescissions and offsetting collections. Totals may not add due to
rounding.
Budget Control Act
FY2013 discretionary appropriations were considered in the context of the Budget Control Act of
2011 (BCA, P.L. 112-25), which established discretionary spending limits for FY2012-FY2021.
The BCA also tasked a Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to develop a federal deficit
reduction plan for Congress and the President to enact by January 15, 2012. Because deficit
reduction legislation was not enacted by that date, an automatic spending reduction process
established by the BCA was triggered; this process consists of a combination of sequestration and
lower discretionary spending caps, initially scheduled to begin on January 2, 2013. The “joint
committee” sequestration process for FY2013 requires the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) to implement across-the-board spending cuts at the account and program level to achieve
equal budget reductions from both defense and nondefense funding at a percentage to be
determined, under terms specified in the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985, as amended by the BCA.
The American Taxpayer Relief Act (ATRA, P.L. 112-240), enacted on January 2, 2013, made a
number of significant changes to the procedures in the BCA that will take place in FY2013. First,
the date for the joint committee sequester to be implemented was delayed for two months, until
Congressional Research Service
3
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
March 1, 2013. Second, the dollar amount of the joint committee sequester was reduced by $24
billion. Third, statutory caps on discretionary spending for FY2013 (and FY2014) were lowered.
Pursuant to the BCA, as amended by ATRA, President Obama ordered that the joint committee
sequester be implemented on March 1, 2013. The accompanying OMB report indicated a dollar
amount of budget authority to be canceled from each account containing non-exempt funds. The
sequester will ultimately be applied at the program, project, and activity (PPA) level within each
account. Because the sequester was implemented at the time that a temporary continuing
resolution was in force, the reductions were calculated on an annualized basis and will be
apportioned throughout the remainder of the fiscal year. Although full year FY2013 funding has
been enacted, the effect of these reductions on the budgetary resources that are available to
Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies at the account and PPA level remains unclear, until
further guidance is provided by OMB as to how these reductions should be applied.
Continuing Resolution
Under P.L. 113-6, most FSGG accounts were funded at the FY2012 level, under the terms and
conditions in the FY2012 appropriations law. However, there were exceptions to this general
approach, which are often referred to as “anomalies.” Eight anomalies were identified in P.L.
113-6.
•
Section 1302 provides $24.7 million to the District of Columbia for its
“Emergency Planning and Security Costs” account.
•
Section 1303 provides $98.7 million to the Federal Communications Commission
for its “Salaries and Expenses” account.
•
Section 1305 provides $18.7 million to the Office of Government Ethics for its
“Salaries and Expenses” account.
•
Section 1306 provides $333.6 million to the Small Business Administration for
its “Business Loan Program” account.
•
Section 1307 rescinds $950.0 million from the Department of the Treasury’s
“Treasury Forfeiture Fund” account.
•
Section 1308 permits the Department of Treasury to subsidize up to $500 million
in total loan principal through its “Community Development Financial
Institutions Fund” account.
•
Section 1310 specifies that no funds are provided to the Executive Office of the
President for its “Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation” account.
•
Section 1311 provides $1.040 billion to the Judiciary for its “Defender Services”
account.
Congressional Research Service
4
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
FY2013 Appropriations by Title
Title I: The Department of the Treasury6
This section examines FY2013 appropriations for the Treasury Department and its operating
bureaus, including the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Table 3 shows the enacted amounts for
FY2012, the President’s FY2013 request, the amounts recommended by the House and Senate
appropriations committees for FY2012, and enacted amounts for FY2013.
Table 3. Department of the Treasury Appropriations, FY2012 and FY2013
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
Enacted
FY2013
Request
FY2013
House
Committee
FY2013
Senate
Committee
$308
$301
$203
$301
Department-wide Systems and Capital
Investments
0
7
0
7
Terrorism and Financial Intelligence
—
—
102
—
Office of Inspector General
30
29
29
30
Treasury Inspector General for Tax
Administration
152
154
153
154
Special Inspector General for TARP
42
40
35
40
Community Development Financial
Institutions Fund
221
221
221
233
Financial Crimes Enforcement
Network
111
102
111
108
Financial Management Service
218
—
208
—
Fiscal Servicea
—
360
─
360
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade
Bureau
100
97
95
100
Bureau of the Public Debt
166
—
147
—
Payment for Losses in Shipment
2
2
2
2
Internal Revenue Service (total)
11,817
12,761
11,817
12,519
Taxpayer Services
2,240
2,253
2,240
2,253
Enforcement
5,299
5,425
5,299
5,611
Enhanced Tax Enforcement
0
691
0
0
Operations Support Activities
3,947
4,062
3,947
4,324
Business Systems Modernization
330
330
330
330
Rescissions: Treasury Forfeiture Fund
(-950)
(-830)
(-830)
(-950)
Departmental Offices
6
FY2013
Enacted
This section was authored by (name redacted) (x7-....).
Congressional Research Service
5
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Total
FY2012
Enacted
FY2013
Request
FY2013
House
Committee
FY2013
Senate
Committee
$12,215
$13,244
$12,292
$12,904
FY2013
Enacted
Sources: Appendix, Budget of the U.S. Government, FY2013, H.Rept. 112-550; and S.Rept. 112-177.
a.
The Obama Administration’s budget request for FY2013 calls for consolidating the accounts for the
Financial Management Service and the Bureau of Public Debt. While the Senate Appropriations Committee
endorses the change, the House Appropriations Committee does not.
The Treasury Department performs a variety of critical governmental functions. They include
protecting the nation’s financial system against a host of illicit activities (particularly money
laundering and terrorist financing), collecting tax revenue and enforcing tax laws, managing and
accounting for federal debt, administering the federal government’s finances, regulating financial
institutions, and producing and distributing coins and currency.
At its most basic level of organization, Treasury consists of departmental offices and operating
bureaus. In general, the offices are responsible for formulating and implementing policy
initiatives and managing Treasury’s operations, while the bureaus undertake specific tasks
assigned to Treasury, mainly through statutory mandates. In the past decade or so, the bureaus
have accounted for more than 95% of the agency’s funding and work force.
With one exception, the bureaus and offices can be divided into those engaged in financial
management and regulation and those engaged in law enforcement. In recent decades, the
Comptroller of the Currency, U.S. Mint, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, Financial
Management Service (FMS), Bureau of the Public Debt (BPD), Community Development
Financial Institutions Fund (CDFIF), and Office of Thrift Supervision have taken on
responsibilities related to the management of the federal government’s finances or the supervision
and regulation of the U.S. financial system. In contrast, law enforcement arguably has been
central to the responsibilities handled by the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (ATTB),
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), and the Treasury Forfeiture Fund (TFF). With
the advent of the Department of Homeland Security in 2002, Treasury’s direct involvement in law
enforcement has shrunk considerably. The exception to this dichotomy is the IRS, whose main
responsibilities encompass both the collection of tax revenue and the enforcement of tax laws and
regulations.
The operating budget for most Treasury bureaus and offices comes largely from annual
appropriations. This is the case for the IRS, FMS, BPD, FinCEN, ATTB, Office of the Inspector
General (OIG), Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA), Special Inspector
General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program (SIGTARP), and CDFIF. By contrast, funding for
the Treasury Franchise Fund, the U.S. Mint, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, Office of the
Comptroller of the Treasury, and the Office of Thrift Supervision stems from the fees they receive
for the services and products they provide.
In FY2012, appropriations for the Treasury Department are distributed among 10 accounts, each
of which is described briefly below.
Departmental Offices: covers the salaries and other expenses of offices in the department that
formulate and implement policies in the areas of domestic and international finance, terrorist
financing and other financial crimes, taxation, international trade, and the domestic economy. It
Congressional Research Service
6
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
also provides funding for the department’s financial and personnel management, procurement
operations, and information and telecommunications systems.
Office of Inspector General: covers the salaries and other expenses related to the audits and
investigations conducted by OIG staff. These evaluations are intended to promote improved
efficiency and effectiveness and prevent waste, fraud, and abuse among departmental operations
and programs, as well as to inform the Treasury Secretary and Congress about problems or
shortcomings in those activities.
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration: covers salaries and other expenses related
to the audits and investigations conducted by TIGTA staff. These evaluations are intended to
promote greater efficiency and effectiveness in the administration of tax law, deter or prevent
fraud and abuse in IRS programs and operations, and recommend changes in those activities to
solve problems or remedy deficiencies.
Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program: covers salaries and other
expenses related to the audits and investigations into the management and effectiveness of TARP
conducted by SIGTARP staff. The office was established by the same law that created TARP: the
Emergency Economic Stabilization Act (P.L. 110-343).
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network: covers salaries and other expenses related to the
activities of FinCEN, whose main responsibility is to protect the domestic financial system from
illicit uses, such as money laundering and terrorist financing. The legal basis for this role is the
Bank Secrecy Act (BSA; P.L. 91-508). FinCEN administers the act by developing and
implementing regulations and other guidance and working with private financial institutions and
eight federal agencies to ensure that the financial sector complies with the BSA’s reporting
requirements.
Financial Management Service: covers salaries and other expenses related to the operations of
the FMS, which is responsible for developing and implementing payment policies and procedures
for federal agencies, collecting debts owed to those agencies and state governments, and
providing financial accounting, reporting, and financing services for the federal government and
its agents.
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau: covers salaries and other expenses related to the
activities of ATTB, which was established by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296).
The bureau is responsible for enforcing certain laws regarding the domestic sale and production
of alcohol and tobacco products and preventing harm to consumers by ensuring that the products
they regulate comply with federal consumer safety laws.
Bureau of the Public Debt: covers salaries and other expenses related to the conduct of public
debt operations and the promotion of U.S. bonds.
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund: provides funding for the activities of
the CDFIs, which make investments (in the form of loans, grants, and equity acquisitions) in
community development financial institutions. These institutions include community
development banks, credit unions, and venture capital funds. They in turn provide financing for
affordable housing projects, small businesses, and community development projects in eligible
areas. The CDFIF also administers the Black Enterprise Award program and the New Markets tax
credit.
Congressional Research Service
7
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Internal Revenue Service: covers salaries and other expenses related to the activities of the IRS,
whose main responsibilities are to administer federal tax laws and collect revenue. Two critical
components of IRS operations and programs are the services it offers taxpayers to help them
understand and meet their tax obligations and the enforcement tools it uses to improve voluntary
taxpayer compliance and punish those who violate the law. Some appropriated funds are used to
develop or upgrade business operations and information systems, as part of an ongoing effort to
improve the effectiveness and efficiency of taxpayer services and enforcement.
Brief Summary of FY2012 Appropriations for Treasury Offices and Bureaus
In FY2012, the Treasury Department was appropriated $12.215 billion, or 6.7% less than the
amount enacted for FY2011. As usual, the vast share (96.7%) of the funds were provided to
finance the operations of the IRS, which was provided $11.817 billion for FY2012, or 2.5% less
than the amount enacted for FY2011. The remaining $398 million is to be distributed among the
Treasury Department’s other appropriation accounts in the following amounts: DO (which
includes the Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (TFI) and the Office of Foreign Assets
Control), $308 million; OIG, $30 million; TIGTA, $152 million; SIGTARP, $42 million; CDFIF,
$221 million; FinCEN, $111 million; FMS, $218 million; ATTB, $100 million; and the BPD,
$166 million.
FY2013 Appropriations for Treasury Offices and Bureaus: President’s Budget
Request, Required Assessments, and Congressional Action
President’s Budget Request
The Obama Administration requested $13.244 billion (including the cancellation of $830 million
in unobligated balances from the Treasury Forfeiture Fund (TFF)) in appropriations for Treasury
in FY2013, or 8.4% more than the amount enacted for FY2012. Under the budget proposal, the
IRS would receive $12.761 billion, or 96.3% of the total amount. The remaining $483 million
would be split among Treasury’s nine other appropriation accounts in the following amounts: DO,
$301 million; Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments Program (DSCIP), $7 million;
OIG, $29 million; TIGTA, $154 million; SIGTARP, $40 million; CDFIF, $221 million; FinCEN,
$102 million; Fiscal Service Operations (FSO), $360 million (consolidates funding for FMS and
BPD); and ATTB, $97 million. Four of the accounts would be funded at or above the amounts
enacted for FY2012: IRS, DSCIP, TIGTA, FinCEN, and FMS/BPD via the FSO.
Relative to FY2012, funding for the IRS would rise by 8.0%, while combined appropriations for
the remaining Treasury accounts would fall by 2.7%.
Treasury’s FY2013 budget request is intended to promote the following strategic goals:
•
repair and reform the U.S. financial system;
•
support recovery in the housing market;
•
enhance U.S. competitiveness;
•
promote international financial stability and balanced global growth;
•
protect national security through targeted financial sanctions and enforcement of
laws again money laundering and terrorist financing;
Congressional Research Service
8
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
•
pursue comprehensive tax and fiscal reform; and
•
improve operational efficiency and efficacy in Treasury’s management of federal
finances.7
An explanation of the budget request for each Treasury appropriations account follows. The
details come from Treasury’s budget documents for FY2013.8
Departmental Offices
The Treasury Department requested $301.2 million in budget authority for DO in FY2013, or
2.3% less than the amount enacted for FY2012. Of that amount, $36.7 million would go to
executive direction, $55.9 million to international affairs and economic policy, $70.5 million to
domestic finance and tax policy, $100 million to TFI, and $38.1 million to Treasury management
and related programs. The proposed operating budget would be $308.4 million, which is $7.2
million more than the requested appropriation. This difference would be bridged by proposed
program decreases, non-recurring costs from FY2012, and a variety of efficiency savings. TFI’s
resources would be supplemented by $18.9 million in reimbursements from federal and state
government agencies for services rendered.
Department-wide Systems and Capital Investments
Treasury requested $7.1 million in budget authority for DSCIP in FY2013. Congress appropriated
no funds for the account in FY2012. Of that amount, $2.0 million would be used to bolster the
security of Treasury’s information systems, $883 million would fund a program (Enterprise
Content Management) aimed at standardizing the agency’s approach to reducing paper-based
processes and transactions, $3.0 million would go to the Office of Financial Innovation and
Transformation within Treasury for launching four initiatives begun in FY2011, and $1.2 million
would pay for needed repairs to the interior rain leaders of the Main Treasury Building.
Office of Inspector General
Treasury requested $28.6 million in appropriated funds for OIG in FY2013, or 3.5% less than the
amount enacted for FY2012. The funds would be used to conduct both mandated audits and
audits and investigations of Treasury’s more controversial programs and operations, including
material loss reviews, the new regulatory responsibilities taken on by the agency under the DoddFrank Act, Treasury’s funding of low-income housing projects and certain energy properties
under the Economic Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, and private-sector compliance with
requirements set by the Bank Secrecy Act and the USA Patriot Act. Included in the budget request
are $225,000 to maintain FY2012 operating levels, $60,000 to support the Council of Inspectors
General on Integrity and Efficiency, and decreases of $549,000 for reduced oversight of
mandatory and risky programs and $784,000 for reduced need for material loss reviews.
7
For more details on these goals and the ways in which the budget request would promote them, see
http://www.treasury.gov/about/budget-performance/Documents/
1.%20FY%202013%20Executive%20Summary%20final.pdf.
8
See http://www.treasury.gov/about/budget-performance/Pages/cj-index.aspx.
Congressional Research Service
9
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Office of the Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program
Treasury requested $40.2 million for SIGTARP in FY2013, or 3.8% less than the amount enacted
for FY2012. The funds would be used to support the Office’s main functions of promoting
transparency in Treasury’s management of TARP programs; advising Treasury managers on
matters related to compliance, internal financial controls, and fraud prevention; assessing the
effectiveness of TARP; and preventing, investigating, and referring for prosecution instances of
waste, fraud, and abuse in the program. Included in the budget request are $333,000 for
maintaining FY2012 levels of operation, $84,000 to support the Council of Inspectors General on
Integrity and Efficiency, and a decrease of $2.0 million from a reduction in general operating
costs from FY2012.
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
Treasury requested $153.4 million for TIGTA in FY2013, or 1.4% more than the amount enacted
for FY2012. The funds would be used to finance the audits, investigations, and evaluations of IRS
operations that TIGTA conducts as part of its mission. Among its priorities in FY2013 are
overseeing IRS’s efforts to administer the tax provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable
Care Act (P.L. 111-148) and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (P.L. 111152),9 and the challenges facing the IRS as it tries to improve voluntary tax compliance. Included
in the budget request are $1.5 million to maintain FY2012 operating levels, efficiency savings of
$3.8 million from program reductions and lower administrative costs, a $56,000 reduction in
TIGTA’s contribution to the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, and
$4.5 million to oversee IRS’s implementation of the tax provisions in ACA.
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund
Treasury requested $221.0 million for CDFIF in FY2013, or the same amount that was enacted
for FY2012. The Fund is intended to expand opportunities for economic development and
promote community development investments in economically distressed communities that are
underserved by banks and other financial institutions. Since its creation in 1994, CDFIF has
awarded over $1.4 billion to community development financial institutions, community
development entities (CDEs), and depository institutions insured by the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation through the CDFI Program, the Native American CDFI Assistance
Program, and the Bank Enterprise Award Program. In addition, the Fund has allocated $29.5
billion in New Markets Tax Credits to CDEs. Included in the budget request are $269,000 to
maintain FY2012 operating levels, $780,000 in efficiency savings from lower lease and
procurement costs, $300,000 in other savings from non-recurring costs, $22.2 million in program
decreases (including $18.1 million less for the CDFI Program and $3.0 million less for the Bank
Enterprise Award Program) and $23.0 million in program increases ($20.0 million for the Bank
on USA Program and $3 million for the Healthy Food Financing Initiative).
9
Because the two laws were passed as tandem pieces of legislation to make certain changes in the U.S. health
insurance system, they will henceforth be referred to jointly in this section of the report as ACA.
Congressional Research Service
10
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
Treasury requested $102.4 million for FinCEN in FY2013, or 7.6% less than the amount enacted
for FY2012. The funds would be used to support the bureau’s mission, which is to ensure secure,
more transparent financial transactions through administration of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA); to
provide analytical and other support for investigations and prosecutions of money laundering and
other financial crimes; and to serve as the nation’s financial intelligence unit (FIU) by collecting,
analyzing, disseminating, and exchanging information on the nation’s laws and regulations
concerning money laundering and terrorist financing.
Among FinCEN’s priorities in FY2013 are strengthening relationships with state regulatory
agencies to enhance BSA compliance and enforcement, expanding the flow of financial
intelligence to law enforcement officials and individuals in the private sector in areas where there
is a relatively high risk of money laundering and other financial crimes, increasing the number of
analytical projects undertaken with foreign FIUs, and refining and utilizing the new information
technology (IT) capabilities that are becoming available through the BSA IT modernization
project.
Included in the budget request are $930,000 for maintaining current levels of operation, $6.2
million in efficiency savings, $9.9 million in program decreases (including $5.9 million less in
reimbursements to the IRS for BS compliance), and $6.8 million in reinvestments (including $2.7
million for continuing the transfer of BSA collection and processing activities from the IRS to
FinCEN as a result of the modernization project).
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
Treasury requested $96.8 million for ATTB in FY2013, or 3.1% less than the amount enacted for
FY2012. The Bureau has two responsibilities: (1) collecting federal excise taxes on the sale of
alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and ammunition; and (2) administering and enforcing the provisions
of the Federal Alcohol Administration Act dealing with permits, labeling, and marketing for
tobacco and alcohol products made and sold domestically. Included in the budget request are
$987,000 to maintain current operating levels, $3.1 million in savings from non-recurring costs
and improved operating efficiencies, and $1.0 million in program decreases from a repeal of the
current bond requirement for alcoholic beverage producers that typically have an annual alcohol
excise tax liability of less than $50,000.
Fiscal Service
Treasury requested that the budgets for FMS and BPD be consolidated into a single appropriation
account called Fiscal Service (FS) beginning in FY2013. Under the proposal, FS would receive
$360.5 million that year, or 7.9% less than the combined amount enacted for FMS and BPD in
FY2012. FS’s main responsibilities would be to improve financial management within the federal
government by offering central payment services to federal agencies, manage the federal
government’s revenue collections and deposits, deliver accounting and financial reporting
services to federal agencies, oversee the collection of delinquent federal government debt, borrow
the money needed to finance government operations, and provide reimbursable services to other
federal agencies.
Congressional Research Service
11
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Its priorities in FY2013 include continuing the consolidation of the two bureaus by exploiting
economies of scale and eliminating overlapping or duplicative operations, supporting Treasury’s
paperless initiative through FS’s Payments Program, and improving the collection of delinquent
federal debt.
Included in the budget request are $3.5 million for maintaining FY2012 operations, $25.7 million
in savings from non-recurring costs and improved operating efficiencies, $10.3 million in
program decreases (including $5.0 million less from eliminating fees paid to agents who redeem
paper savings bonds and $4.0 million less from reductions in administrative services), $1.5
million for a reorganization of FS’s payment management system, and a decrease of $1.0 million
from a decline in Legacy Treasury Direct user fees.
Treasury Forfeiture Fund
Treasury proposed to cancel permanently $830 million in unobligated balances from the TFF in
FY2013. This would come on top of a rescission of $950 million in such balances in FY2012.
The Fund serves as a receipt account for the deposit of non-tax forfeitures made by the bureaus
participating in the TFF. These include the IRS’s Criminal Investigation unit, the U.S. Secret
Service, the Bureau of Customs and Border Patrol, and the Bureau of Immigration and Customs
Enforcement. The Treasury Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture (TEOAF) manages the Fund,
whose main purpose is to disrupt and dismantle criminal enterprises operating within the United
States through the sanction of asset seizure. Money in the Fund covers the operating expenses of
TEOAF and supports the enforcement activities of the participating bureaus related to the
National Money Laundering Strategy, the Southwest Border Strategy, and federal efforts to
counter terrorist financing. TEOAF estimates that $553,000 will be deposited in the Fund from
asset forfeitures in FY2013, leaving $1.6 billion in resources available for use, or 0.3% more than
the amount expected to be available at the end of FY2012. After allowing for $706,762 in
administrative expenses and obligatory costs and the proposed cancellation of $830 million in
unobligated balances, the net result at the end of FY2013 would be $100 million in such balances,
or 3.7% less than the estimated result for FY2012.
Internal Revenue Service
Treasury requested $12.7 billion for the IRS in FY2013, or 8.0% more than the amount enacted
for FY2012. Of this amount, $2.2 billion would be used for taxpayer services, $5.7 billion for
enforcement, $4.5 billion for operations support, and $330 million for the ongoing Business
System Modernization program. Included in the budget request are $108.4 million to maintain
current operations; $70.9 million in savings from increased electronic filing, reduced travel, and
certain program reductions; $200.3 million to restore funding for individual audits and tax
collection that was lost as part of the enacted appropriation for FY2012; and $706.4 million in
increases for a variety of programs, including improving offshore tax compliance, implementing
legislative changes such as the tax provisions in ACA, implementing a strategy to prevent
erroneous refund payments, expanding the Tax Return Preparer Program, expanding the
workforce for Appeals, and building an IT and operational infrastructure to deliver the health
insurance premium assistance credit that is scheduled to become available at the beginning of
2014. The budget request also proposes to amend the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit
Control Act of 1985 in order to raise discretionary budget caps and provide the IRS with an
additional $350 million for new tax enforcement initiatives in each fiscal year through 2017; IRS
estimates that the initiatives would generate $44 billion in additional tax revenue through 2021.
Congressional Research Service
12
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Required Assessments of the Administration’s FY2013 Budget Request for the
IRS
IRS Oversight Board
The IRS Oversight Board was established by the IRS Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 to
oversee the IRS’s performance in administering the tax laws, managing its operations, and
accomplishing its strategic goals. Section 7802(d) of the federal tax code requires the Board to
review and approve the annual budget proposal submitted by the IRS to the Treasury Department.
A key element of the Board’s assessment is the extent to which the proposal supports the annual
and long-term strategic objectives of the agency. The same tax provision requires the President to
submit the Board’s budget recommendation to Congress along with his budget request for the
IRS.
For FY2013, the Board recommended that the IRS receive $13.034 billion in appropriated funds,
or 10.3% more than the amount enacted for FY2012 and 2.1% more than the budget request.10 In
the Board’s view, the recommendation would counter a recent trend of reduced funding for the
IRS, which it deemed “harmful to the long-term national interest.” Of the recommended amount,
$2.355 billion would go to taxpayer services, $5.702 billion to enforcement, $4.647 billion to
operations support, and $330 million to the BSM. These amounts are consistent with the budget
request, for the most part. The main difference between the two proposals is that the Board
favored putting more resources into improving taxpayer service for the purpose of arresting the
recent decline in the level of toll-free telephone assistance, enhancing the physical security of IRS
employees, and upgrading the agency’s workforce development program.
Among its funding recommendations, the Board assigned the top priority to restoring the $200
million for enforcement that was lost in the enacted appropriation for FY2012. Doing so,
according to the Board’s report, would allow the IRS to “increase its field exam and collection
workload to previous levels and … result in a gain of approximately $1.15 billion in direct
revenue.”11 Results like these, the Board argued, would bolster public confidence in the fairness
of the federal tax system and send a strong message to those who cheat or are tempted to cheat on
their tax returns that non-compliance “is unacceptable” and tax laws will be strictly enforced.
Achieving an 80% level of service for IRS’s toll-free telephone lines during FY2013 was the
Board’s second-highest priority. The level of service (LOS), measures the percentage of taxpayer
calls that go through to an IRS customer service representative out of all incoming calls in a
period. In FY2008, the LOS dropped to 53%, but it has been rising ever since and stood at 70%
according to the IRS, in FY2011. Under the President’s budget proposal for FY2013, the level
would drop to 63%. The Board deemed such a prospect unacceptable. To avoid such a result, the
Board recommended an appropriation of $100 million to raise the level to 80% in FY2013. Tens
of millions of taxpayers depend on the toll-free telephone service to understand their tax
obligations and their eligibility for tax credits and other tax preferences, and to resolve their
account balances. Recent changes to the tax laws have boosted demand for this service, a trend
10
IRS Oversight Board, FY2013 IRS Budget Recommendation: Special Report (Washington: April 2012), p. 3.
Available at http://www.treasury.gov/irsob/reports/2012/IRSOB%20FY13%20BUDGET%20REPORT.pdf.
11
Ibid., p. 6.
Congressional Research Service
13
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
that is likely to continue in the next few years, as the IRS continues to implement the remaining
tax provisions in the ACA.
The third priority is appropriating $346 million for new enforcement initiatives. In the Board’s
view, they should target offshore tax evasion and international tax compliance, take advantage of
the new tax return preparer program and new information requirements for merchant payment
cards and reporting basis in stock transactions to increase overall compliance, and address the
growing problem of tax refund fraud through identity theft. According to estimates by the IRS,
initiatives such as these could bring in $1.48 billion in additional enforcement revenue.12
A fourth priority cited by the Board in its report involved investing $71 million to lay a technical
foundation for substantial improvements in future taxpayer service capabilities. The objective is
to shift taxpayer requests for assistance from toll-free telephone calls to more cost-effective
electronic media, such as the IRS website.
Congressional Action
House
The House Appropriations Committee (hereinafter referred to as the Committee) reported a bill
(H.R. 6020) on June 26, 2012, to fund financial services and general government accounts in
FY2013. H.R. 6020 would provide $12.292 billion in appropriations (including $830 million in
rescissions) for the Treasury Department, or $77 million more than the amount enacted for
FY2012 and $952 million less than the budget request. Details on recommended funding for each
account and selected issues the Committee addresses in its report (H.Rept. 112-550) on the bill
follow.13
Departmental Offices
In its report on H.R. 6020, the Committee recommends that DO receive $202.5 million in
appropriated funds in FY2013, or $106 million less than the amount enacted for FY2012 and $99
million less than the budget request.
The Committee notes that it is creating an appropriation account TFI that is separate from the DO
account beginning in FY2013, although the report gives no explanation for the change. The
Committee report also directs Treasury to submit an operating plan for the resources it receives
for FY2013 no later than 30 days after the enactment of the bill. The plan should cover all offices
and bureaus and include details on planned “program changes and major procurements.” The
Committee also directs Treasury’s Office of Tax Policy and the IRS to provide within 30 days of
the bill’s enactment a “detailed analysis” of the question of whether the IRS has the statutory
authority to require individuals filing tax returns under an individual tax identification number
and claiming the Additional Child Tax Credit to provide documentary proof that the child in
question meets the eligibility criteria for the credit.
12
13
Ibid., p. 7.
For access to the report, see http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-112hrpt550/pdf/CRPT-112hrpt550.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
14
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Another issue addressed in the report is funding in FY2013 for the operations of the Office of
Financial Research (OFR), which was created by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (P.L. 111-203, hereinafter referred to as the Dodd-Frank Act) to collect
financial data and analyze financial market activities in support of the work of the Financial
Stability Oversight Council, which was also created by the act. While OFR’s start-up costs in
FY2011 and FY2012 were defrayed by transfers of funds from the Federal Reserve, the Office
has the authority to finance its operating expenses through assessments on bank holding
companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more and non-bank financial
companies supervised by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve. The Committee
believes OFR should not have unlimited power to charge fees and obligate funds for
administrative costs. Thus, language is included in H.R. 6020 requiring OFR and the Office of
Financial Stability Oversight (OFSO) to submit quarterly reports on their activities; OFSO is also
funded through mandatory sources outside the regular appropriation process.
Office of Terrorism and Financial Intelligence
The Committee recommended $102.1 million for TFI in FY2013, or $2.1 million more than the
amount specified for that purpose within the DO account for FY2012.
Office of Inspector General
The Committee recommended that the OIG receive $28.5 million in appropriations in FY2013, or
$1.1 million less than the amount enacted for FY2012 and $81,000 less than the budget request.
In its report on H.R. 6020, the Committee commended OIG for the audit it is conducting of
Treasury’s “capital planning and investment control program.” In addition, it urged the Office to
issue a report on the proposed merger of FMS and BPD that addresses how current
responsibilities for the two would be divided or shared, how their customers would be affected,
and how staffing and the management structure for each bureau would change. Within 90 days of
the enactment of the bill, OIG would be required to issue a report on the separation of funds and
activities between “mandatory-funded offices, such as OFR, and discretionary-funded offices that
carry out related or overlapping work, such as the Office of Domestic policy.”
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
The Committee recommended $153.4 million for TIGTA in FY2013, or $1.7 million more than
the amount enacted for FY2012 and $430,000 less than the budget request.
In its report on H.R. 6020, the Committee expressed support for the investigations of the links
between identity theft and tax fraud that TIGTA has undertaken and recommended that it continue
to monitor the issue until the IRS “significantly reduces the incidence of tax fraud through
identity theft and significantly improves the quality of assistance it provide to victims” of such
theft. The Committee also directed TIGTA to submit a report no later than 90 days after the bill’s
enactment examining the extent to which proposed tax enforcement initiatives that end up being
implemented collect the revenue the IRS says they will in budget requests.
Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program
The Committee recommended that SIGTARP receive $35 million funds for FY2013, or $6.8
million less than the amount enacted for FY2012 and $5.2 million less than the budget request. In
its report on H.R. 6020, the Committee noted that initial funding for the program was included in
Congressional Research Service
15
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
the legislation creating but the funds were limited and have decreased over time. To sustain
SIGTARP’s required oversight of the remaining TARP amounts, discretionary appropriations
have had increasingly to fill the gap between the mandatory appropriations and the operating
expenses of the program. As TARP winds down in the next few years, the Committee expects that
the requests for discretionary appropriations will also decrease.
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
The Committee recommended $110.8 million for FinCEN in FY2013, or the same amount
enacted for FY2012 and $8.4 million more than the budget request. In its report on H.R. 6020, the
Committee wrote that the funding was intended to continue the agency’s multi-year effort to
modernize its information systems; to ensure that FinCEN’s information is readily accessible to
state and local law enforcement personnel, field representatives, and the intelligence community;
and to enable FinCEN to respond to expected increases in requests for assistance from law
enforcement agencies once the BSA Modernization system begins to operate in FY2013. The
Committee rejected a proposal by Treasury to reduce funding by $1.6 million for access to BSA
information by state and local intelligence agencies. It commended FinCEN for the support it has
provided in recent years for efforts by law enforcement agencies at all governmental levels to
combat human trafficking and urges it, “whenever possible,” to apply its expertise in analyzing
financial crimes to such efforts in the context of “ongoing strategic operations.”
Treasury Forfeiture Fund
The Committee recommended a rescission of $830 million in unobligated balances in the Fund,
or $120 million less than the amount that was rescinded in FY2012 and the same as the budget
request. Of the amount to be rescinded, $38 million would be rescinded permanently.
In its report on H.R. 6020, the Committee pointed out that the TFF is intended to ensure adequate
resources are available to cover the costs of an “effective asset seizure and forfeiture program.”
Those costs include expenses related to seizing, evaluating, maintaining, protecting, advertising,
forfeiting, and disposing of property. The Committee noted that balances in the Fund should not
be used to boost the funds available to participating agencies outside the appropriations process.
Nor should the balances in the Fund be considered a “bounty” for participating agencies that
should be distributed in proportion to an agency’s seizures of assets or forfeitures or some other
formulaic approach. Current law allows surpluses in the TFF to be used to enhance forfeiture
capabilities, to be held in reserve, or to be rescinded temporarily or permanently. Proposed
rescissions and so-called “super surplus” spending requests, says the Committee, should be based
on “programmatic need and funding priorities, not a predetermined formula.” The Committee
directed Treasury to submit each month a table showing earned interest, forfeiture revenue,
unobligated balances, recoveries, expenses to date, and estimated expenses for the remainder of
the fiscal year.
Financial Management Service
The Committee recommended $208.2 million for FMS in FY2013, or $9.6 million less than the
amount enacted for FY2012 and $2.2 million less than the budget request. Of the recommended
amount, $4.2 million would be available until September 30, 2015, for modernizing the agency’s
information systems.
Congressional Research Service
16
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
In its report on H.R. 6020, the Committee acknowledged both the cost savings that FMS has
achieved through sharing certain services with BPD and the projected cost savings that could
result from the proposed merger of the two agencies called for in the budget request. But because
sufficient details on the merger have not been released, the Committee cannot endorse it at the
present time. It pledges to continue to monitor the consolidation plan as it emerges and may be
willing to back it if “additional information justifying the change is provided.” As noted earlier,
the Committee has instructed TIGTA to conduct a study in FY2013 of the costs and benefits of
the proposed merger.
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
The Committee recommended that ATTB receive $95 million in FY2013, or $4.9 million less
than the amount enacted for FY2012 and $1.8 million less than the budget request. The
Committee report specified that none of the recommended funding may be used to cover the cost
of hiring special law enforcement agents.
Bureau of the Public Debt
The Committee recommended $147.9 million for BPD in FY2013, or $25.7 million less than the
amount enacted for FY2012 and $2.2 million less than the budget request. H.R. 6020 contains
language that would reduce appropriations by up to $1 million as BDP collects fees for definitive
security issues and Treasury Direct Investor Account Maintenance, resulting in a net
appropriation of $146.9 million.
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund
The Committee recommended that CDFIF receive $221 million in FY2013, or the same amount
enacted for FY2012 and the same as the budget request. Of that amount, $12 million would be
reserved for grants, loans, technical assistance, and job training for Native American, Alaskan,
and Hawaiian communities; another $20.5 million would be set aside for the administrative
expenses for CDFIF programs. No funds were provided for the Bank on USA program, the
Health Food Financing Initiative, and the Bond Guarantee program. In its report on H.R. 6020,
the Committee noted that though the CDFIF is supposed to serve the development needs of
territories and rural communities, the existing process for setting goals for the Fund does not
necessarily take those needs into account. To remedy this shortcoming, the Committee directed
the Fund to reserve at least 20% of the assistance it provides for financial institutions located in
counties where 20% or more of the population lived in poverty during the previous 30 years. It
also directed the Fund to submit a report within 60 days of the bill’s enactment detailing the steps
it is taking to clarify the certification process for financial institutions located in territories and
rural communities and to make existing certified financial institutions aware of the “unmet capital
and financial services needs” of these areas.
Internal Revenue Service
The Committee recommended that the IRS receive $11.817 billion in FY2013, or the same as the
amount enacted for FY2012 and $944.5 million less than the budget request. Funding for the IRS
was spread among four accounts: taxpayer services, enforcement, operations support, and BSM.
The recommended appropriation for each is discussed below.
Congressional Research Service
17
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Taxpayer Services: Of the recommended appropriations for the IRS, $2.240 billion would be used
for taxpayer services, or the same as the amount enacted for FY2012 and $13.4 million less than
the budget request. Several taxpayer service grant programs are funded through this account.
According to the report on H.R. 6020, the recommended funding for the programs in FY2013 was
the same as the amounts enacted for FY2012 and as the budget request: “not less than” $5.6
million for the Tax Counseling for the Elderly program, at least $9.75 million for grants for lowincome taxpayer clinics, and a minimum of $12 million for grants for Volunteer Income Tax
Assistance (VITA). In addition, the Committee recommended that not less than $205 million be
used for the operating costs of the Taxpayer Advocate Service. Funds were also provided to
continue efforts to improve more efficient and effective toll-free telephone service for taxpayers.
The Committee commended the IRS for deciding not to develop a pre-filled or simple tax return
and wrote that the Committee expected the IRS to seek authority and appropriations from
Congress before embarking on the development of a simple tax return pilot program. Another
issue addressed by the Committee in its report on the bill concerned the growing number of cases
of tax fraud stemming from identity theft. It directed the IRS to submit a report by January 31,
2013, on (1) the number of taxpayers whose tax returns have been rejected because someone stole
their Social Security numbers; (2) the average time required to resolve the problem and provide
tax refunds when they were owed, the number of cases that were not resolved within 45 days; (3)
the number of cases involving the theft of individual taxpayer identification numbers of residents
of the territories; and (4) the actions the IRS is planning to take to expedite the resolution of these
cases and to prevent similar incidents of identity theft in the future. The Committee also directed
the IRS to continue a program to train employees in taxpayer rights, how to deal courteously with
taxpayers, and multicultural relations.
Enforcement: As reported by the Committee, H.R. 6020 would provide an appropriation of $5.299
billion for tax law enforcement in FY2013, or the same amount that was enacted for FY2012 and
$402.3 million less than the budget request. Of that amount, at least $60.3 million would be used
to support IRS’s involvement in the Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement program. The bill
specified that none of the recommended funding could be used to implement tax provisions in the
ACA. In its report on the bill, the Committee urged the IRS to revise regulations that apply to
interest payments made to non-resident aliens after December 31, 2012. The final regulations
include a list of countries with which the United States has a tax treaty or information exchange
agreement. Every country on the list qualifies for automatic information reporting unless the
United States determined that a country should not receive the information because of concerns
that it would be misused. To address this concern, the Committee recommended that the IRS
publish on its public website a list of countries with which it is actively and automatically
exchanging information about interest payments to non-resident aliens living there. In addition,
the Committee noted that the IRS received $20 million in FY2010 from the Department of Health
and Human Services to implement tax provisions in the ACA, another $168 million in FY2011,
and as much as $332 million in FY2012. It recommended that no such transfers be permitted in
FY2013.
Operations Support: The Committee recommended that the IRS receive an appropriation of
$3.947 billion for operations support in FY2013, or the same amount enacted for FY2012 and
$528.8 million less than the budget request. Of that amount, at least $2 million was to cover the
operating expenses of the IRS Oversight Board. None of the funds could be used to implement
tax provisions in the ACA.
Congressional Research Service
18
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
BSM: H.R. 6020 would provide $330.2 million for the BSM program in FY2013, or the same
amount that was enacted for FY2012 and the same as the budget request. The Committee
commended the IRS for the progress that has been made in the past few years with the Customer
Account Data Engine 2 (CADE2) program, which was launched in January 2012 and used during
the 2012 filing season. As a result, records for 140 million individual taxpayer accounts are now
stored in a single, modern database; the records can be updated daily, which makes it possible to
issue refunds and communicate with taxpayers about issues with their accounts faster. In its report
on the bill, the Committee pointed out that though not all development work on CADE2 is
completed, it expects BSM funding requests will begin to decline soon as the “IRS realizes
savings from retiring legacy systems.”
Senate
In a bill (S. 3301) it reported on June 14, 2012, the Senate Appropriations Committee (hereinafter
referred to as the Committee) recommended a total appropriation of $12.904 billion for the
Treasury Department in FY2013. This amount was $689.0 million more than the amount enacted
for FY2012 but $339.6 million less than the budget request. More than 70% of the difference
between the requested funding and the Committee’s recommendation was due to the Committee
providing a smaller budget for the IRS. Details on the recommended funding for each Treasury
account follow. They stem mostly from the Committee’s report (S.Rept. 112-177) on S. 3301.14
Departmental Offices
The Committee recommended that DO receive an appropriation of $301.2 million in FY2013, or
$7.1 million less than the amount enacted for FY2012 and the same as the budget request.
The Committee encouraged Treasury’s Office of Financial Education to assess the effectiveness
of current financial literacy programs and develop a set of objectives that the Financial Literacy
and Education Commission can use to better serve the needs of U.S. adults, particularly given the
low rate of financial literacy among this population.
In addition, in its report on S. 3301, the Committee commended Treasury for the improvements it
made to the Home Affordable Mortgage Program (HAMP) and the 1.1 million homeowners who
were able to remain in their homes because of the program, as of April 2012. It directed the
agency to continue its efforts to persuade mortgage servicers and investors (include Fannie Mae
and Freddie Mac) to allow principal reductions that could save federal funds, enable more
homeowners to remain in their homes, and lower the number of neighborhoods harmed by vacant
“real-estate owned properties.” As part of those efforts, the Committee wrote that Treasury should
ensure that mortgage servicers comply with their HAMP agreements and inform servicers about
their responsibilities under the program. Also on the topic of housing, the Committee urged
Treasury to maintain the Group Home Mortgage Program, which provides financing for the
creation of affordable small, community-based group homes for individuals unable to live
independently.
At the same time, the Committee directed the agency to fully implement all sanctions and
divestment measures imposed on North Korea, Belarus, Burma, Iran, Sudan, and Zimbabwe, and
to notify it if a lack of resources is impeding this process.
14
For access to the report, see http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-112srpt177/pdf/CRPT-112srpt177.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
19
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
To improve Treasury’s management of its capital investments, the Committee directed it to
prepare an annual Capital Investment Plan to be submitted to the House and Senate
Appropriations Committees within 30 days of the release of the President’s annual budget
request. The Plan should include estimates of the funding needed over the lifetime of the current
and planned capital projects and a summary of the projects by type. It would be the responsibility
of Treasury’s Office of the Chief Information Officer to determine if adequate resources are being
channeled into the projects listed in the plan and the maintenance and modernization of existing
systems, and to ensure that all projects are “properly tracked and completely described” in the
plan.
Department-Wide Systems and Capital Investments Programs
The Committee recommended that DSCIP receive and appropriation of $7.1 million in FY2013,
or the same amount as the budget request. There was no funding for the account in FY2012.
Office of Inspector General
The Committee recommended $29.6 million for OIG in FY2013, or the same amount that was
enacted for FY2012 and $1.0 million more than the budget request. In its report on S. 3301, the
Committee directs the office to undertake, “when practical,” an audit of the Bank Secrecy Act
Information Technology Modernization project being managed by FinCEN. OIG should submit a
written report to the Committee by March 31, 2013, addressing the extent to which contractors
for the project have been adhering to its budget and production schedule. The Committee also
urges the Office to perform audits, as its resources permit, of Treasury’s efforts to combat money
laundering and terrorist financing, its management of capital investments, the investments of the
CDFIF, and “areas identified by the Inspector General as presenting a high risk to taxpayerfunded spending.”
Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration
The Committee recommended that TIGTA receive $153.8 million for FY2013, or the $2.1 million
above the amount enacted for FY2012 and the same amount as the budget request. In its report on
S. 3301, it commended the office for its ongoing reviews of IRS’s BSM program and other IT
projects. The Committee also encouraged TIGTA, if resources and time permit, to undertake
evaluations in FY2013 of the newly created Return Preparer Program; the capability of the IRS to
detect fraudulent tax returns, resolve the claims of innocent taxpayers in a timely manner, and
reduce the incidence of erroneous refunds; and the security of IRS employees and its databases
and facilities.
Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program
The Committee commended SIGTARP for the “quality of its audits and investigations” as well as
the written material it has provided to the general public and Congress, and recommended that the
office receive $40.2 million in FY2013, or $1.6 million below the amount enacted for FY2012
but $20 above the budget request. A portion of FY2013 spending would be covered by funds
carried over from the current fiscal year.
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
The Committee recommended $108.3 million for FINCen for FY2013, or $2.5 million less than
the amount enacted for FY2012 but $5.9 million above the budget request. In its report on S.
Congressional Research Service
20
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
3301, the Committee that the added funds would allow the bureau to continue to offer “full
intelligence support” to federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies and federal intelligence
agencies involved in combating serious financial crimes, including money laundering, mortgage
fraud, drug trafficking, and terrorist financing.
Section 608 of the bill would require all agencies funded under it to obtain the approval of the
House and Senate Appropriations Committees before using appropriated funds to create or
reorganize offices, programs, or other activities. The Committee reminded Treasury that any
“reimbursable agreements and other similar funding mechanisms” used to reallocate approved
funding are considered a “reprogramming” of funds under the section and thus subject to the
prior-approval rule.
In addition, the Committee expressed support for FinCEN’s ongoing effort to modernize the IT
infrastructure for administering the BSA. The effort entails a re-design of the BSA data
architecture, an update of the IT needed to acquire and disseminate data, and the addition of
innovative web services, enhanced electronic filing, and improved analytical tools. Banks,
federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies, and federal intelligence agencies use the
system to report, gather, and analyze data to identify financial crimes. The Committee directed
FinCEN to take the following steps in FY2013: (1) map BSA data in a way that meshes with the
data system used by the IRS; (2) continue to submit semi-annual reports to the Committee
summarizing the bureau’s progress in implementing the modernization project; and (3) improve
the accuracy, reliability, and timeliness of BSA data in accordance with the recommendations
made by TIGTA and GAO in recent reports.
Treasury Forfeiture Fund
The Committee recommended a rescission of $950 million in unobligated balances in the fund for
FY2013, or the same amount that was rescinded for FY2012 and $120 million more than the
budget request.
Financial Management Service
The Committee endorsed a proposal by Treasury that the appropriations for FMS and BPD be
combined into a single appropriation account entitled “Fiscal Service” (FS). It also recommended
that FS receive $360.5 million in appropriated funds for FY2013, or the same as the budget
request. Compared to the combined appropriations for FMS and BPD in FY2012, the
recommended funding represents a decrease of $30.9 million.
In its report on S. 3301, the Committee commended Treasury for planning to consolidate the
functions of the two bureaus. Both bureaus provide financial management services for federal
agencies, and in recent years they have collaborated on several cost-saving projects, including a
shared data center and shared human resource services. According to an estimate by Treasury, the
proposed merger would result in a savings of $36 million over five years. The Committee
directed FS to keep it informed about developments in the consolidation process.
Section 111 of the bill would authorize Treasury to transfer funds from the salaries and expenses
account for FS to the Debt Collection Fund to cover expenses related to debt collection. Any such
transfer would be reimbursed to account from debt payments deposited in the Fund.
Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
Congressional Research Service
21
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
The Committee recommended that ATTB receive an appropriation of $100.4 million in FY2013,
or $500,000 above the amount enacted for FY2012 and $3.6 million above the budget request.
Contrary to the recommendation of the House Appropriations Committee in its report on H.R.
6020, the recommended funding included $2 million for the cost of hiring special law
enforcement agents to combat tobacco smuggling and other criminal activities within the
jurisdiction of ATTB. In addition, the Committee rejected Treasury’s proposal to transfer the
enforcement of federal excise taxes on alcohol and tobacco products to the IRS on the grounds
that ATTB has sole jurisdiction over the enforcement of laws governing the production and
distribution across state lines of those products.
Bureau of the Public Debt
See the entry below for Financial Management Service.
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund
The Committee recommended $233.0 million in appropriations for the CDFIF in FY2013, or
$12.0 million more than the amount enacted for FY2012 and the same as the budget request. In
its report on S. 3301, the Committee expressed support for the basic aims of the Fund, especially
its role in both leveraging private investment in community development projects such as
affordable housing, community centers, and retail development and expanding lending to small
firms in areas underserved by banks and other financial institutions.
Of the recommended funding, $20 million would be used for the Bank on USA program, which
promotes improved access to financial services and consumer credit by lower-income
households; this amount is consistent with the budget request. The Committee directed CDFIF to
submit a detailed spending plan for the program within 120 days of enactment of the bill and to
assign a greater priority to distributing funding to underserved rural areas.
Another $25 million would be used to support the Healthy Food Financing Initiative, which is
intended to increase the supply of affordable, wholesome foods in urban and rural communities
that currently have no or limited access to such foods. In the Committee’s view, the recommended
funding should increase the availability of financing for the construction of grocery stores,
supplies and equipment for qualified food production, and improvements to the food distribution
network in affected communities.
In addition, consistent with the budget request, the Committee recommended that $12 million be
set aside for grants, loans, and technical assistance and training programs for Native American,
Alaskan, and Hawaiian communities. The funds are intended to increase access to equity capital
and loans for development activities in those communities.
S. 3301 also included a provision allowing the Treasury Secretary to guarantee up to $1 billion in
bonds in FY2013 to support lending and investments by CDFIs in underserved communities. The
bond guarantees, which are authorized under the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-240),
would be intended to open up new sources of long-term capital. Funds raised through the bonds
could be used to back new loans or refinance existing ones.
And the recommended funding for CDFIF included $2 million for the purpose of enhancing the
ability of CDFIs to support the development of “entrepreneurial” businesses.
Internal Revenue Service
Congressional Research Service
22
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
The Committee recommended that the IRS receive an appropriation of $12.519 billion in
FY2013, or $702.4 million above the amount enacted for FY2012 and $242.1 million less than
the budget request. In its report on S. 3301, the Committee expressed support for a variety of
approaches to reducing the federal tax gap, including improved information reporting and
taxpayer assistance. It also commended the research on taxpayer compliance that is being done by
the National Taxpayer Advocate and the IRS Office of Research. Furthermore, the Committee
directed the IRS to include details on planned reorganizations, job cuts or increases, and changes
to current service and enforcement activities in the operating plan the agency is required to
submit along with its annual budget request. The submission should include comments on the
plan from the IRS Oversight Board.
Taxpayer Services: The Committee recommended that the IRS receive an appropriation of $2.253
billion in FY2013, or $13.4 million above the amount enacted for FY2012 and the same as the
budget request. Of the recommended funding, “not less than” $5.6 million should be used for the
tax-counseling for the elderly program, $10 million for low-income taxpayer clinic grants, and
$12 million (available for two consecutive fiscal years) for the community volunteer income tax
assistance (VITA) matching grant program. The Committee urged the IRS to “make every effort”
to increase the number and size of VITA grants to local non-profit organizations offering tax
preparation services to disabled individuals. Among the options for doing so cited by the
Committee is to allow national coalitions that coordinate the activities of such organizations to
apply for VITA matching grants. Another $209.5 million of the recommended appropriation
would fund the operations of the Taxpayer Advocate Service (TAS).
In its report on S. 3301, the Committee commended the IRS for the steady rise in the number of
taxpayers filing their returns electronically with no additional costs. For the 2011 tax years, 67%
of so-called major returns were e-filed, up from 59% for 2010. There are considerable cost
savings from e-filing: according to an IRS estimate, the cost of processing an electronic return is
one-twentieth the cost for a paper return. At the same time, the Committee “strongly urges” the
IRS to update its measure of refund timeliness using recommendations from the GAO and the
IRS Oversight Board.
The Committee also directed the IRS, IRS Oversight Board, and National Taxpayer Advocate to
continue to submit annual updates to the Taxpayer Assistance Blueprint that was first issued in
FY2006. The updates should identify any changes to the five-year strategic plan for taxpayer
services, discuss the findings of any new research, and point out any “open issues requiring
additional research.”
Section 104 of the bill specified that funding is available in FY2013 for improving the toll-free
telephone assistance the IRS offers to taxpayers. Among the recommended improvements was
speeding up correspondence with “victims of tax crimes.”
Expressing concern about the availability of satisfactory taxpayer service in Alaska and Hawaii,
the Committee directed the IRS to ensure that Taxpayer Advocate Service Centers in those states
are fully staffed (including a collection technical advisor and an examination technical advisor at
each Center) and able to resolve even the most complex of taxpayer problems.
Enforcement: The largest Treasury account, and one of the largest accounts among all the
appropriation accounts for financial services and general government, covers tax enforcement
activities. For FY2013, the Committee recommended the IRS receive $5.611 billion for such
activities, or $312.2 million above the amount enacted for FY2012 but $90.1 million less than the
Congressional Research Service
23
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
budget request. Of the recommended funding, “not less than” $60.3 million would be available
for use in the Interagency Crime and Drug Enforcement program.
In its report on S. 3301, the Committee noted that the recommended funding for FY2013 was
intended to restore the resources for audits and collection work that were lost in the appropriation
for FY2012. It was also intended to enable the IRS to undertake the new enforcement initiatives it
calls for in the budget request. According to the IRS, every dollar spent on these initiatives in
FY2013 is expected to yield an estimated $4.90 in new revenue by the time those hired to work
on them reach their “full potential” in FY2015.
In addition, the Committee supported recent measures adopted by the IRS to combat offshore tax
evasion and recommends the IRS undertake more frequent studies of the tax gap, particularly the
portion of the gap that can be attributed to international financial transactions. At the same time,
the Committee would like to see the agency develop new measures of the effectiveness of several
enforcement programs, including tax preparer regulation, information reports for merchant
payment cards and the basis of stock in transactions involving capital gains and losses, and the
Compliance Assurance Process and the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure programs.
Another enforcement issue addressed by the Committee in its report was the misclassification of
workers as independent contractors. Such an error usually leads to the underreporting and
underpayment of employment and payroll taxes by employers and workers. To get a better grasp
of the extent of the problem, the IRS is undertaking a three-year study of worker classification
and other employment tax issues. It has also formed a team to assist taxpayers on tax issues
related to the classification of workers. Underscoring its concern about the revenue losses from
the misclassification of workers, the Committee urged the IRS to maintain adequate staffing in a
program (SS-8) designed to assist employers in determining a worker’s employment tax status.
According to the report on S. 3301, staffing in the program has failed to grow at the same pace as
SS-8 filings in the past three filing seasons. To bolster its influence over IRS’s SS-8 staffing
decisions, the Committee directed the agency to submit a report that examines staffing levels,
employee productivity, and SS-8 receipts and explains the rationale for any proposed staff
changes, before reducing staffing at any SS-8 processing office.
On the matter of collecting overdue individual tax debt, Section 105 of the bill would extend
through FY2013 a ban on using appropriated funds to “enter into, renew, extend, administer,
implement, enforce, provide oversight of, or make any payment related to” a debt collection
program involving the use of private debt collectors. The ban was first imposed on FY2010
appropriations for the IRS; it was intended to reinforce a decision announced by the IRS in March
2009 to terminate a controversial private tax debt collection program that began three years
earlier.
Operations Support: For FY2013, the Committee recommended that the IRS receive an
appropriation of $4.324 billion for operations support, or $376.8 million above the amount
enacted for FY2012 but $152.0 million less than the budget request. Up to $250 million of the
recommended funds would be available for IT support through the end of FY2014; another $1
million would be available for research through the end of FY2015; and at least $2 million would
be used to cover the expenses of the IRS Oversight Board.
In its report on S. 3301, the Committee noted that the recommended funding was intended to
support ongoing, multi-year initiatives to upgrade the IT infrastructure in order to implement
recent changes in tax law, especially the tax provisions in the ACA. It directed the IRS to keep the
Congressional Research Service
24
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Committee informed of any updated cost estimates for the initiatives, and to ensure that the
estimates adhere to the guidelines for best practices in GAO’s Cost Estimating and Assessment
Guide so they can be regarded as “comprehensive, well-documented, accurate, and credible.”15
On a related matter, the Committee directed the IRS to submit within 30 days of the enactment of
the bill a “table and explanatory information” regarding the amounts, uses, and dates of receipt of
funds transferred to the IRS from the Health Insurance Reform Implementation Fund established
by the ACA to cover administrative expenses incurred by federal agencies involved in
implementing the act.
Another issue addressed in the report on S. 3301 related to IRS’s management and oversight of its
non-BSM information technology projects. The Committee agreed with the concern expressed in
recent reports by TIGTA and GAO that the IRS lacks the data needed to evaluate the
performance, productivity, and costs of its IT programs. Of particular concern is the lack of a
quantitative measure for determining the functional gains made during each stage of a project’s
development. As a result, the Committee “strongly encourages” the IRS to develop such a
measure and to apply it to all of its major non-BSM information systems so “key stakeholders”
can get a more accurate picture of the extent to which the investments are generating the desired
results. Moreover, the security of IRS’s information systems remains a serious problem,
according to recent reports by TIGTA and GAO. To address the problem, the Committee urged
the IRS to continue its efforts to eliminate vulnerabilities in its security system in accordance with
recommendations made by TIGTA and GAO.
To bolster its oversight of non-BSM information technology improvement projects, the
Committee directed the IRS to include in its budget request for FY2014 a multi-year strategy and
timetable within the Operations Support account for modernizing IRS’s aging “legacy” IT
infrastructure. The agency must also submit to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees
and GAO quarterly reports on certain major projects that discuss the costs and schedules for the
previous three months and the anticipated costs and schedules for the next three months. The
projects include IRS.gov, Returns Remittance Processing, EDAS/IPM, and E-services.
Business Systems Modernization
A separate account is maintained for funding BSM. The Committee recommended that the IRS
receive $330.2 million for the program in FY2013, or the same amount enacted for FY2012 and
the same as the budget request. To augment these funds, the Committee encouraged the agency to
draw upon user fees collected by the IRS from services it provides to taxpayers and federal
agencies. Of the recommended funding, $252.3 million was designated for supporting two
important capital investments: (1) the CADE 2 Transition State 2 project, which is focused on
developing a single information system for managing individual taxpayer accounts that has
applications for financial management and the security of IRS’s IT systems; and (2)
improvements to the Modernized e-File platform (MeF) that will allow it to handle the Form 94X
family of tax forms for employment taxes and Form 1041 for estates and trusts, as well as
additional unspecified forms in the future.
The Committee wrote that it expects the IRS to continue to submit quarterly BSM reports during
FY2013; GAO should receive a copy of each. The reports should explain in “plain English” the
15
U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide: Best Practices for Estimating
and Management Costs, GAO-09-3SP, March 2009, at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d093sp.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
25
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
costs and schedules for CADE2 and MeF in the previous three months and their anticipated costs
in the next three months.
Title II: Executive Office of the President16
The FSGG appropriations bill provides funding for all but three offices under the EOP.17 The
White House, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Office of National Drug Control
Policy are among the EOP offices funded through FSGG appropriations. Table 4 lists the enacted
amounts for FY2012, the President’s FY2013 request, and amounts recommended by the House
and Senate appropriations committees for FY2013.
Table 4. Executive Office of the President, FY2012-FY2013
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
Enacted
FY2013
Request
FY2013
House
Committee
FY2013
Senate
Committee
$202
$204
$192
$204
Compensation of the President
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
The White House Office (salaries
and expenses)
60
57
54
57
Executive Residence, White
House (operating expenses)
13
13
13
13
White House Repair and
Restoration
1
1
1
1
Council of Economic Advisers
4
4
4
4
National Security Council and
Homeland Security Council
13
13
13
13
Office of Administration
113
115
107
115
Office of Management and Budget
89
92
81
92
Federal Drug Control Programs
(total)
357
342
368
392
Office of National Drug Control
Policy (net of rescissions)
13
23
23
25
High Intensity Drug Trafficking
Areas Program
239
200
239
239
Other Federal Drug Control
Programs
106
119
106
129
Counterdrug Technology
Assessment Center
0
0
0
0
The White House (total)
FY2013
Enacted
16
This section was authored by Barbara Schwemle (x7-....).
Of the three exceptions, the Council on Environmental Quality and the Office of Environmental Quality are funded
in the House and Senate Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act. The Office of Science and
Technology Policy and the Office of the United States Trade Representative are funded in the House and Senate
Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act.
17
Congressional Research Service
26
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
FY2012
Enacted
FY2013
Request
FY2013
House
Committee
FY2013
Senate
Committee
Unanticipated Needs
1
1
0
1
Partnership Fund for Program
Integrity Innovation
0
1
0
1
Integrated, Efficient and Effective
Uses of Information Technology
5
5
5
5
Special Assistance to the President
(salaries and expenses)
4
4
4
4
Official Residence of the Vice
President (operating expenses)
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
Total: EOP and Funds
Appropriated to the President
$659
$649
$650
$698
FY2013
Enacted
Sources: Appendix, Budget of the U.S. Government, FY2013, H.Rept. 112-550; and S.Rept. 112-177.
Note: FY2012 rescission for both the President’s request and House committee approved amounts would apply
to the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
President’s Budget Request and Key Issues
The Administration’s FY2013 budget requested an appropriation (discretionary funds) of $649
million for the EOP and funds appropriated to the President, a decrease of more than $10 million
(-1.5%) from the $659.1 million (discretionary funds) enacted for FY2012. The budget requested
the same appropriation as that enacted for FY2012 for these accounts: White House Office, White
House Repair and Restoration, Council of Economic Advisers, National Security Council and
Homeland Security Council, Special Assistance to the President, Official Residence of the Vice
President, and Integrated, Efficient and Effective uses of Information Technology. For the
Unanticipated Needs account, an appropriation that was $12,000 more than the FY2012 enacted
amount was requested. Increased or decreased appropriations were requested for the following
accounts:
•
the Executive Residence (-$225,000 or -1.7%);
•
the Office of Administration (+$2 million or +1.8%); and
•
the Office of Management and Budget (+$2.1 million or +2.3%).
The justification that accompanied the EOP’s budget submission noted that the increase requested
for the Office of Administration would fund salaries and benefits resulting from “the conversion
of cybersecurity information technology contractors to full-time government staff” and
“improvements to information technology services,” including “Ensuring the full-time Operation
of the Disaster Recovery Data Center and Continuity of Operations Center” and “Improving the
stability and reliability of messaging systems through the proactive management of e-mail
systems, handheld devices, and electronic records archiving systems.”18 According to the
justification, the requested increase for the Office of Management and Budget would fund the
anticipated January 2013 pay adjustment ($380,000), health benefit costs ($206,000), an increase
18
U.S. Executive Office of the President, Fiscal Year 2013 Congressional Budget Submission (Washington: February
2012), pp. OA-4 - OA-5.
Congressional Research Service
27
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
of six full-time equivalent employees ($775,000), an increase for rent payments to the General
Services Administration ($202,000), costs of information technology contractors ($343,000), and
partial restoration of budget reductions for staff travel ($80,000) and training ($100,000).19 The
reduction in the appropriation requested for the Executive Residence resulted from decreases for
personnel compensation and benefits and supplies and materials.20
The President’s budget request proposed an administrative provision for the EOP and funds
appropriated to the President at Section 201 that would continue to authorize the OMB Director
(or other official designated by the President) to transfer up to 10% of appropriations between the
White House, Executive Residence at the White House, White House Repair and Restoration,
Council of Economic Advisers, National Security Council and Homeland Security Council,
Office of Administration, Special Assistance to the President, and Official Residence of the Vice
President accounts, provided the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations are notified at
least 15 days in advance. An appropriation could not be increased by more than 50% by such
transfers. The Vice President would approve transfers from the Special Assistance to the President
or Official Residence of the Vice President accounts.21
Federal Drug Control Programs
For the accounts under the Federal Drug Control Programs account, the President’s FY2013
budget requested a total appropriation of $342 million, a decrease of more than $15 million or
4.3% below the $357.2 million (after the rescissions of $11.3 million were applied) enacted for
FY2012. Increased or decreased appropriations were requested for each of the following
accounts:
•
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP, +$10.2 million or +77% more
than the FY2012 enacted amount, after the rescissions of $11.3 million were
applied);22
•
High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas Program (HIDTAP, -$38.5 million or
-16.2%);
•
Other Federal Drug Control Programs (OFDCP, +$13 million or +12.4%); and
•
Counterdrug Technology Assessment Center (CTAC, no funding was requested).
The FY2013 budget justification stated that the ONDCP funding would enable the agency “to
continue to pursue” the National Drug Control Strategy’s “goals of reducing drug use and its
consequences and ensuring improvements in fostering healthier individuals and safe
communities.” The requested reduction in the HIDTAP appropriation would occur in the grants to
state, local, and tribal agencies, and transfers to federal agencies participating in the 28 HIDTAs.
The OFDCP appropriation would be allocated to the Youth Drug Prevention Media Program ($20
19
Ibid., p. OMB-6.
Ibid., p. EXR-5.
21
FY2013 Budget, Appendix, p. 1217.
22
Calculated as $24.5 million (FY2012 enacted) minus $11.3 million (FY2012 rescission) equals $13.2 million
(FY2012 appropriation after rescission); $23.4 million (FY2013 request) minus $13.2 million (FY2012 appropriation
after rescission) equals $10.2 million, divided by $13.2 million (FY2012 appropriation after rescission) equals 77%
difference.
20
Congressional Research Service
28
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
million), Drug Free Communities Support Program ($88.6 million), Anti-Doping activities ($8.1
million), and World Anti-Doping Agency membership dues ($1.9 million).23
House Action
H.R. 6020, as reported by the House Committee on Appropriations would provide an
appropriation of $650 million for the EOP, which is some $9 million (-1.4%) less than the
FY2012 enacted appropriation and almost $1 million (+0.14%) more than the President’s request.
The House report stated that “all of the salaries and expenses accounts within the Executive
Office of the President” were reduced to pay for the funding priorities of the House committee.24
The appropriations for each of the EOP accounts, as recommended by the House Appropriations
Committee, were as follows:
•
The White House Office: $54.1 million; $2.8 million (-5%) less than the FY2012
enacted amount and the President’s request. The House committee report states
that this amount includes “sufficient funds” for the Office of National AIDS
Policy.
•
Executive Residence, White House: $12.8 million; $671,000 (-5.0%) less than
the FY2012 enacted amount and $446,000 (-3.4%) less than the President’s
request.
•
White House Repair and Restoration: $713,000; $37,000 (-4.9%) less than the
FY2012 enacted amount and the President’s request.
•
Council of Economic Advisers: $4.1 million; $42,000 (-1.0%) less than the
FY2012 enacted amount and the President’s request.
•
National Security Council and Homeland Security Council: $12.9 million;
$65,000 (-0.5%) less than the FY2012 enacted amount and the President’s
request.
•
Office of Administration: $107.3 million; $5.6 million (-5%) less than the
FY2012 enacted amount and $7.6 million (-6.6) less than the President’s request.
Of the total, up to $10.4 million would remain available until expended for
continued modernization of the information technology infrastructure within the
EOP. The office is directed to report annually to the House Committee on
Appropriations, at the same time that the President’s budget is submitted, on
progress on modernization of information technology, including the amounts
obligated and expended and for what purposes, specific milestones achieved, and
requirements and specific plans for further investment.
•
Office of Management and Budget: $80.5 million; $8.9 million (-10%) less than
the FY2012 enacted amount and $11 million (-12%) less than the President’s
request. The report stated that the House committee looks forward to the
submission of the examination of Circular A-94 on “government-wide
efficiencies and proper anticipation of the cost of major infrastructure projects.”
23
U.S. Executive Office of the President, Fiscal Year 2013 Congressional Budget Submission Executive Office of the
President Office of National Drug Control Policy (Washington: February 2012), pp. 12, 50, 53, and 27.
24
H.Rept. 112-550, p. 3.
Congressional Research Service
29
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
OMB is directed “to continue the effort to improve cost-benefit analyses and
practices government-wide by incorporating life-cycle cost analysis,” and report
to Congress “on the status of further development of tools and materials” for
implementing this cost analysis in federal department and agencies, within 180
days after the act’s enactment. The report directed OMB to report to the
committee on how the agency will ensure that all executive branch agencies are
in compliance with laws and regulations on travel, conferences, and employee
awards.
•
Unanticipated Needs: No funding for FY2013, $988,000 (-100%) less than the
FY2012 enacted amount and $1 million (-100%) less than the President’s request.
•
Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation: No funding for FY2013, the
same as the FY2012 enacted amount and $1 million less than the President’s
request.
•
Integrated, Efficient and Effective Uses of Information Technology: $5.0 million,
the same as the FY2012 enacted amount and the President’s request. The OMB
Director could transfer the funds to one or more agencies to carry out projects
and would submit quarterly reports, not later than 30 days after the end of each
quarter, to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations identifying the
savings achieved by the government-wide information technology reform efforts
by fiscal year, agency, and appropriation.
•
Special Assistance to the President: $4.1 million; $216,000 (-5%) less than the
FY2012 enacted amount and the President’s request.
•
Official Residence of the Vice President: $292,000; $15,000 (-4.9%) less than the
FY2012 enacted amount and the President’s request.
H.R. 6020, as reported, would fund the federal drug control accounts at the following levels:
•
ONDCP: $23.3 million; $10.1 million (+76.5%) more than the FY2012 enacted
amount of $13.2 million, after the rescissions of $11.3 million were applied, and
$117,000 (-0.5%) less than the President’s request. The agency is expected “to
focus resources on the counter-drug policy development, coordination and
evaluation functions which are the primary mission of the Office and the original
reason for its existence.”
•
HIDTAP: $238.5 million; the same as the FY2012 enacted amount and $38.5
million (+19.3%) more than the President’s request. Not less than 51% of the
funds would be transferred to State and local entities for drug control activities
and would be obligated within 120 days after the act’s enactment. Up to 49% of
the funds could be transferred to federal agencies and departments as determined
by the ONDCP Director, of which up to $2.7 million could be used for auditing
services and associated activities (including up to $500,000 for the continued
operation and maintenance of the Performance Management System). The
ONDCP Director would notify the House and Senate Committees on
Appropriations of the initial allocation of FY2013 funding among HIDTAs
within 45 days after the act’s enactment and of planned uses of discretionary
HIDTA funding, determined in consultation with the HIDTA Directors, within 90
days after the act’s enactment.
Congressional Research Service
30
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
•
OFDCP: $105.9 million; $350,000 (+0.3%) more than the FY2012 enacted
amount and $12.7 million (-10.7%) less than the President’s request. The
appropriation would be allocated as follows: $92 million for the Drug-Free
Communities Program, $1.3 million for drug court training and technical
assistance, $9.5 million for anti-doping activities, $1.9 million for the United
States membership dues to the World Anti-Doping Agency, and $1.2 million for
competitive discretionary grants. An appropriation is not provided for the antidrug media campaign.
Section 626(a)(1) of H.R. 6020, as reported, would provide the mandatory appropriation for the
compensation of the President ($450,000, including $50,000 for expenses). According to the
House Committee on Appropriations report, this is an account “where authorizing language
requires the payment of funds.”25
The House Appropriations Committee print included the following EOP administrative
provisions:
25
•
Section 201 would continue to authorize the OMB Director (or other official
designated by the President) to transfer up to 10% of appropriations between the
White House, Executive Residence at the White House, White House Repair and
Restoration, Council of Economic Advisers, National Security Council and
Homeland Security Council, Office of Administration, Special Assistance to the
President, and Official Residence of the Vice President accounts, provided the
House and Senate Committees on Appropriations are notified at least 15 days in
advance. An appropriation could not be increased by more than 50% by such
transfers. The Vice President would approve transfers from the Special
Assistance to the President or Official Residence of the Vice President accounts.
•
Section 202 would require the OMB Director to submit a report by April 1, 2013,
to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, on the implementation
of Executive Order 13563 relating to Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review and Executive Order 13610 relating to Identifying and Reducing
Regulatory Burdens. The reports would include information on increasing public
participation in the rulemaking process and reducing uncertainty; improving
coordination across federal agencies to eliminate redundant, inconsistent, and
overlapping regulations; and identifying existing regulations that have been
reviewed and determined to be outmoded, ineffective, or excessively
burdensome.
•
Section 203 would require the OMB Director to report to the House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations, within 60 days after the act’s enactment, on the
costs of implementing the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (P.L. 111-203). The report would include the estimated mandatory
and discretionary obligations of funds through FY2017, by federal agency and by
fiscal year, including (1) the estimated obligations by cost inputs such as rent,
information technology, contracts, and personnel; the methodology and data
sources used to calculate such estimated obligations; and the specific section of
such act that requires the obligation of funds; and (2) the estimated receipts
H.Rept. 112-550, p. 83.
Congressional Research Service
31
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
through FY2017 from assessments, user fees, and other fees by the federal
agency making the collections, by fiscal year, including the methodology and
data sources used to calculate such estimated collections; and the specific section
of such act that authorizes the collection of funds.
•
Section 204 would prohibit the use of funds to pay the salaries and expenses of
any EOP officer or employee to prepare, sign, or approve statements abrogating
legislation passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate and signed by
the President.
•
Section 205 would require the OMB Director to submit a report to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations and the Budget on a sequestration under
Section 251(a) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985. The report would list each account that would be subject to such a
sequestration, each account that would be subject to such a sequestration but
subject to a special rule under Section 255 or 256 of such act (and the citation to
such rule), and each account that would be exempt from such a sequestration.
The report would categorize and group the listed accounts by the appropriations
act covering such accounts. Within the OMB salaries and expenses account, $5.0
million could not be obligated until the OMB Director submits the report which
is due within 60 days after the act’s enactment date.
•
Section 206 would require the President to submit a detailed report to Congress
on the sequestration required by Section 251A of the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 for January 2, 2013. For discretionary
appropriations, the report would include an estimate for each category of the
sequestration percentages and amounts necessary to achieve the required
reduction and an identification of each account to be sequestered. It would also
include estimates of the level of budgetary resources covered by sequestration
and resulting outlays and the amount of budgetary resources to be sequestered
and resulting outlay reductions at the program, project, and activity level.
Enacted levels of appropriations would be used for accounts funded pursuant to
an enacted regular appropriations bill for FY2013, and estimates pursuant to a
current rate continuing resolution would be used for accounts not funded through
an enacted appropriations measure for FY2013. For direct spending, the report
would include an estimate for the defense and nondefense functions based on
current law of the sequestration percentages and amount necessary to achieve the
required reduction; a specific identification of the reductions required for each
nonexempt direct spending account at the program, project, and activity level;
and a specific identification of exempt direct spending accounts at the program,
project, and activity level. It would also include any other data and explanations
that enhance public understanding of the sequester and actions to be taken under
it. The report would be submitted within 30 days after the act’s enactment date.
Section 622 of H.R. 6020, as reported, would continue the provision prohibiting the use of funds
to pay the salaries and expenses for the Director of the White House Office of Health Reform, the
Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change, the Senior Advisor to the Secretary of
the Treasury assigned to the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry and Senior Counselor
for Manufacturing Policy, and the White House Director of Urban Affairs, or any substantially
similar positions.
Congressional Research Service
32
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
The House committee continued the provision at Section 610 that would prohibit the EOP from
using funds to request an FBI official background investigation report on any individual except
with the express written consent of the individual involved, within six months prior to the date of
such request and during the same presidential administration, or when required because of
extraordinary circumstances involving national security.
Senate Action
S. 3301, as reported by the Senate Committee on Appropriations, would provide an appropriation
of $698.3 million for the EOP, which is $39.2 million (+5.9%) more than the FY2012 enacted
appropriation and $49.6 million (+7.6%) more than the President’s request.
The appropriations for each of the EOP accounts, as recommended by the Senate Appropriations
Committee, were as follows:
•
The White House Office: almost $57.0 million; the same as the FY2012 enacted
amount and the President’s request. The Senate committee report directed the
EOP “to allocate sufficient resources to continue the robust operation of the
Office of National AIDS Policy” and “the administration to continue to
coordinate a Government-wide effort to develop and implement a domestic AIDS
strategy, including the development of targets for improved prevention and
treatment outcomes.”
•
Executive Residence, White House: $13.2 million; $225,000 (-1.7%) less than
the FY2012 enacted amount and the same as the President’s request.
•
White House Repair and Restoration: $750,000; the same as the FY2012 enacted
amount and the President’s request.
•
Council of Economic Advisers: almost $4.2 million; the same as the FY2012
enacted amount and the President’s request.
•
National Security Council and Homeland Security Council: $13.0 million; the
same as the FY2012 enacted amount and the President’s request.
•
Office of Administration: almost $115.0 million; $2.0 million (+1.8%) more than
the FY2012 enacted amount and the same as the President’s request. Of the total,
$10.4 million would remain available until expended for continued
modernization of the information technology infrastructure within the EOP.
According to the Senate report, the continuation of this initiative will “refresh the
aging information technology infrastructure, strengthen disaster recovery and
information security capabilities, and transition the EOP’s communications
architecture to integrate mobile devices while complying with security and
records management requirements.” The office is directed “to place a top priority
on the implementation of comprehensive policies and procedures for the
preservation of all records, including electronic records such as emails, videos,
and social networking communication, consistent with” laws, including the
Presidential Records Act and the Federal Records Act. The office is to work
closely with the National Archives and Records Administration, and fully apprise
the committee of funding needed to preserve and retain records.
•
Office of Management and Budget: $91.5 million; $2.1 million (+2.3%) more
than the FY2012 enacted amount and the same as the President’s request. The
Congressional Research Service
33
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Senate report directed OMB to continue to enhance the federal government’s
core budgeting system “within current resources and to notify the Committee” of
opportunities that are cost-effective to further improve the system. OMB is
reminded “of its duty to honor the terms and conditions of appropriations acts by
... reviewing reprogramming requests submitted to the” House and Senate
Committees on Appropriations and “reviewing agency activities for compliance
with reprogramming conditions.” OMB and agencies are to consult with the
committees in “determining the applicability of Section 608” of this act which
provides reprogramming authority. A reprogramming of funds under the section
includes “reimbursable agreements and other similar funding mechanisms” used
to reallocate funds.
•
Unanticipated Needs: $1.0 million; $12,000 (-1.2%) less than the FY2012
enacted amount and the same as the President’s request.
•
Partnership Fund for Program Integrity Innovation: $1.0 million; $1.0 million
(+100%) more than the FY2012 enacted amount and the same as the President’s
request. The Administration is directed to continue to leverage the FY2010
funding to continue the initiative. The Senate report reminded the interagency
council that semiannual reports must be submitted to the Senate and House
Committees on Appropriations, directed that the council “be the exclusive
decisionmaking body” for “designing pilot programs, developing performance
measures, and allocating funds,” and directed the OMB director, as the council
chair, “to seek consensus and input to the maximum extent possible from council
members and participating Federal and State agencies.”
•
Integrated, Efficient and Effective Uses of Information Technology: $5.0 million;
the same as the FY2012 enacted amount and the President’s request. The Senate
report reminded the Administration to regularly apprise the committee “of how
Government-wide IT reform efforts affect agency-specific projects and missions
on a case-by-case basis,” and to immediately notify the committee of changes in
agency spending plans for IT projects. The report directed that “IT reform
initiatives shall not be a substitute for the Committee’s routine consideration of
agency needs” under the budget process.
•
Special Assistance to the President: more than $4.3 million; the same as the
FY2012 enacted amount and the President’s request.
•
Official Residence of the Vice President: $307,000; the same as the FY2012
enacted amount and the President’s request.
S. 3301, as reported, would fund the federal drug control accounts at the following levels:
•
ONDCP: $24.5 million; $11.3 million (+86%) more than the FY2012 enacted
amount of $13.2 million, after the rescissions of $11.3 million were applied, and
$1.0 million (+4.6%) more than the President’s request. Policy research was not
funded.
•
HIDTAP: $238.5 million; the same as the FY2012 enacted amount and $38.5
million (+19.3%) more than the President’s request. The office was directed to
provide funding for the existing HIDTA’s at not less than the FY2012 level and to
consult with the HIDTA’s prior to allocating funds. Of the total, up to $2.7
million could be used for auditing services and associated activities. HIDTA
Congressional Research Service
34
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
funds are to be expeditiously transferred to the appropriate drug control agencies
and are to be withheld from a State “until such time as a State or locality has met
its financial obligation.”
•
OFDCP: $128.6 million; $23.0 million (+21.8%) more than the FY2012 enacted
amount and almost $10.0 million (+8.4%) more than the President’s request. The
appropriation would be allocated as follows: $20 million for the Youth Drug
Prevention Media Program, $95.1 million for the Drug-Free Communities
Support Program (DFCSP), including $2.0 million for National Community AntiDrug Coalition training; $9.0 million for anti-doping activities; $1.9 million for
the United States membership dues to the World Anti-Doping Agency; $1.1
million for activities related to model State drug laws; and $1.4 million for drug
court training and technical assistance. Funding is not provided for Performance
Measures Development.
Administrative provisions under the appropriation for the EOP and funds appropriated to the
President, included in the Senate report, were the following:
•
Section 201 would continue to authorize the OMB Director (or other official
designated by the President) to transfer up to 10% of appropriations between the
White House, Executive Residence at the White House, White House Repair and
Restoration, Council of Economic Advisers, National Security Council and
Homeland Security Council, Office of Administration, Special Assistance to the
President, and Official Residence of the Vice President accounts, after the House
and Senate Committees on Appropriations are notified at least 15 days in
advance. An appropriation could not be increased by more than 50% by such
transfers. The Vice President would approve transfers from the Special
Assistance to the President or Official Residence of the Vice President accounts.
•
Section 202 would require the ONDCP Director to submit to the Senate and
House Appropriations Committees, within 60 days after the act’s enactment, and
prior to initially obligating more than 20% of the ONDCP funds, “a detailed
narrative and financial plan on the proposed uses of all funds under the account
by program, project, and activity.” The reports must be updated every six months
and include any changes in the estimates and assumptions of the previous reports.
New projects and changes in the funding for ongoing projects would require
advance approval by the committees.
•
Section 203 would provide that up to 2% of ONDCP appropriations could be
transferred between appropriated programs within ONDCP with advance
approval by the Senate and House Committees on Appropriations, but such
transfer could not increase or decrease an appropriation by more than 3%.
•
Section 204 would provide that up to $1.0 million of ONDCP appropriations
could be reprogrammed within a program, project, or activity with advance
approval by the Senate and House Appropriations committees.
•
Section 205 would require the OMB Director to submit a report to the House and
Senate Committees on Appropriations and the Budget on a sequestration under
Section 251(a) of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of
1985. The report would list each account that would be subject to such a
sequestration, each account that would be subject to such a sequestration but
subject to a special rule under Section 255 or 256 of such act (and the citation to
Congressional Research Service
35
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
such rule), and each account that would be exempt from such a sequestration.
The report would categorize and group the listed accounts by the appropriations
act covering such accounts. Within the OMB salaries and expenses account, $5.0
million could not be obligated until the OMB Director submits the report which
is due within 60 days after the act’s enactment date.
•
Section 206 would require the President to submit a detailed report to Congress
on the sequestration required by Section 251A of the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 for January 2, 2013. For discretionary
appropriations, the report would include an estimate for each category of the
sequestration percentages and amounts necessary to achieve the required
reduction and an identification of each account to be sequestered. It would also
include estimates of the level of budgetary resources covered by sequestration
and resulting outlays and the amount of budgetary resources to be sequestered
and resulting outlay reductions at the program, project, and activity level.
Enacted levels of appropriations would be used for accounts funded pursuant to
an enacted regular appropriations bill for FY2013, and estimates pursuant to a
current rate continuing resolution would be used for accounts not funded through
an enacted appropriations measure for FY2013. For direct spending, the report
would include an estimate for the defense and nondefense functions based on
current law of the sequestration percentages and amount necessary to achieve the
required reduction; a specific identification of the reductions required for each
nonexempt direct spending account at the program, project, and activity level;
and a specific identification of exempt direct spending accounts at the program,
project, and activity level. It would also include any other data and explanations
that enhance public understanding of the sequester and actions to be taken under
it. The report would be submitted within 30 days after the act’s enactment date.
The Senate committee continued the provision at Section 610 that would prohibit the EOP from
using funds to request an FBI official background investigation report on any individual except
with the express written consent of the individual involved, within six months prior to the date of
such request and during the same presidential administration, or when required because of
extraordinary circumstances involving national security.
Title III: The Judiciary26
As a co-equal branch of government, the judiciary presents its budget to the President, who
transmits it to Congress unaltered. The President’s FY2013 budget request for $7.29 billion is
$423 million more than appropriated for FY2012 and $387 million above FY2011 enacted
amounts. Table 5 lists the enacted amounts for FY2012, the President’s FY2013 request, and
amounts recommended by the House and Senate appropriations committees for FY2013.
26
This section was authored by Lorraine Tong (x7-....).
Congressional Research Service
36
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Table 5. The Judiciary Appropriations, FY2012-FY2013
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
Enacted
FY2013
Request
FY2013
House
Committee
FY2013
Senate
Committee
Total: Supreme Court (total)
$83
$89
$84
$89
Salaries and Expenses
75
77
75
77
Building and Grounds
8
12
9
12
U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Federal Circuit
33
34
33
34
U.S. Court of International Trade
21
23
21
23
Courts of Appeals, District
Courts, and Other Judicial
Services (Subtotal)
6,603
6,787
6,590
6,763
Salaries and Expenses
5,015
5,149
4,989
5,142
Defender Services
1,031
1,064
1,031
1,049
Fees of Jurors and
Commissioners
52
55
55
55
Court Security
500
515
510
513
Vaccine Injury Trust Fund
5
5
5
5
Administrative Office of the U.S.
Courts
83
85
83
85
Federal Judicial Center
27
28
27
28
United States Sentencing
Commission
17
17
16
17
Judicial Retirement Funds
104
125
125
125
Total: The Judiciary
$6,970
$7,189
$6,979
$7,164
FY2013
Enacted
Sources: H.R. 6020; H.Rept. 112-550; S. 3301, S.Rept. 112-177.
The Judiciary Budget and Key Issues
Appropriations for the judiciary comprise approximately (0.2%) of total budget authority.27
Two accounts that fund the Supreme Court (including the salaries and expenses of the Court and
the expenditures for the care of its building and grounds, which are the responsibility of the
Architect of the Capitol) together total approximately 1% of the total judiciary budget. The rest of
the judiciary’s budget provides funding for the “lower” federal courts and related judicial
services.
27
Calculations by CRS with data from Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Historical Tables, Budget of the
United States Government, FY2013, Table 5.2—Budget Authority By Agency: 1976–2017; available at
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals.
Congressional Research Service
37
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
The largest account, approximately 72% of the total FY2012 budget—the Salaries and Expenses
account for the U.S. Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services—covers the
“salaries of circuit and district judges (including judges of the territorial courts of the United
States), justices and judges retired from office or from regular active service, judges of the U.S.
Court of Federal Claims, bankruptcy judges, magistrate judges, and all other officers and
employees of the federal judiciary not otherwise specifically provided for,” and “necessary
expenses of the courts.”
The remaining judiciary budget is divided among the: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit (0.5% in FY2012), U.S. Court of International Trade (0.3%), Administrative Office of the
U.S. Courts (1.2%), Federal Judicial Center (0.4%), U.S. Sentencing Commission (0.2%), and
Judicial Retirement Funds (1.5%). The House report (H.Rept. 112-550) requires the Judicial
Conference to report on the steps necessary to merge the appropriations for the United States
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and United States Court of International Trade into the
U.S. Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services appropriation.
The judiciary budget does not fund three “special courts” in the U.S. court system: the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Armed Forces (funded in the Department of Defense appropriations bill), the
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (funded in the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs,
and Related Agencies appropriations bill), and the U.S. Tax Court (funded under Independent
Agencies, Title V, of the FSGG bill). Federal courthouse construction is funded within the
General Services account under Independent Agencies, Title V, of the FSGG bill.
The judiciary also uses non-appropriated funds to offset its appropriations requirement. The
majority of these non-appropriated funds are from fee collections, primarily from court filing
fees. These monies are used to offset expenses within the Salaries and Expenses account. Some
of these funds may be carried forward from one year to the next. These funds are considered
“unencumbered” because they result from savings from the judiciary’s financial plan in areas
where budgeted costs did not materialize. According to the judiciary, such savings are usually not
under its control (e.g., the judiciary has no control over the confirmation rate of Article III judges
and must make its best estimate on the needed funds to budget for judgeships, rent costs based on
delivery dates, and technology funding for certain programs). The judiciary also has
“encumbered” funds—no-year authority funds for specific purposes, which are used when
planned expenses are delayed, from one year to the next (e.g., costs associated with space
delivery, and certain technology needs and projects).28
At a March 28, 2012, House hearing, Judge Julia S. Gibbons, chair of the Budget Committee of
the Judicial Conference of the United States,29 addressed funding constraints and efforts to cut
costs, and stated that the 3.1% overall increase is the “lowest requested increase on record.”30 She
also discussed the potential impact of a sequester pursuant to the Budget Control Act, workload
projections, and staffing formulas. She stated that “the courts have already downsized by nearly
28
U.S. Congress, House Appropriations Committee, hearings, Financial Services and General Government
Appropriations for 2013, part 2, budget justifications, pp. 302-303.
29
The Judicial Conference of the United States is the principal policymaking body for the federal courts system. The
Chief Justice is the presiding officer of the conference, which comprises the chief judges of the 13 courts of appeals, a
district judge from each of the 12 geographic circuits, and the chief judge of the Court of International Trade.
30
Statement of Honorable Julia S. Gibbons, Chair, Committee on the Budget of the Judicial Conference of the United
States, U.S. House, Committee on Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government,
March 28, 2012, p. 5.
Congressional Research Service
38
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
1,100 employees since July 2011” and that “without a significant reduction in workload, which is
unlikely, we are facing the possibility of delays in processing cases and a reduction in the
supervision of felons on post-conviction release in the community.”31
Judicial Security32
The safe conduct of court proceedings and security of judges in courtrooms and off-site has been
a concern in recent years. The Chicago murders of family members of a federal judge, and the
Atlanta killings of a state judge, a court reporter, and a sheriff’s deputy at a courthouse in 2005;
the sniper shooting of a state judge in his Reno office in 2006; and the wounding of a deputy U.S.
marshal and killing of a court security officer at the Lloyd D. George U.S. Courthouse and
Federal Building in Las Vegas in 2010 spurred efforts to improve judicial security.33 An FY2005
supplemental appropriations act (P.L. 109-13) included a provision that provided intrusion
detection systems for judges in their homes, and the Court Security Improvement Act of 2007
(P.L. 110-177) aimed to enhance security for judges and court personnel as well as courtroom
safety for the public.
The judiciary has been working closely with the U.S. Marshals (USMS) to ensure that adequate
protective policies, procedures, and practices are in place. The FY2013 budget request would
continue a pilot program for the USMS to assume responsibility for perimeter security at selected
courthouses that were previously the responsibility of the Federal Protective Service (FPS). This
pilot was first authorized in FY2009 as a result of the judiciary’s stated concerns that FPS was not
providing adequate perimeter security. After the initial planning phase, USMS implemented the
pilot program on January 5, 2009, and assumed primary responsibility for security functions at
seven courthouses located in Chicago, Detroit, Phoenix, New York, Tucson, and two in Baton
Rouge. The judiciary and USMS have been evaluating the program and identifying areas for
improvement. The judiciary reimburses USMS for the protective services.
Supreme Court
The total FY2013 request for the Supreme Court, $89.1 million, was contained in two accounts:
(1) Salaries and Expenses: $77.2 million was requested, a $2.3 million (3.1%) increase over
FY2012; and (2) Care of the Building and Grounds: $11.96 million was requested, a $3.8 million
(46.6%) increase. The requested increase for the buildings and grounds would support the
Supreme Court Police radio infrastructure upgrade and the restoration of the Supreme Court
building façade.
The House-reported level of $74.99 million for the Salaries and Expenses account (an increase of
$173,000, or 0.2%), and $9.3 million for the Care of Building and Grounds account (an increase
of $1.1 million, or 13.5%), total $84.3 million (an increase of $1.3 million, or 1.5%). The House
report indicated that funding was provided for the radio upgrade but not the façade restoration.
The Senate-reported level of $77.2 million for the Salaries and Expenses account (an increase of
31
Ibid., pp. 1-2.
For an analysis of court security and federal building security in general, see CRS Report R41138, Federal Building,
Courthouse, and Facility Security, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).
33
Steve Friess, “Two Killed in Las Vegas Courthouse,” New York Times, January 4, 2010, available at
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/05/us/05vegas.html.
32
Congressional Research Service
39
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
$2.3, or 3.1%), and $11.96 million for the Care of Building and Grounds account (an increase of
$3.8 million, or 46.6%, the same as the request), total $89.1 million (an increase of $6.2 million,
or 7.4%). The Senate report requires quarterly reports on the Supreme Court modernization
project.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
This court, consisting of 12 judges, has jurisdiction and reviews, among other things, certain
lower court rulings on patents and trademarks, international trade, and federal claims cases. The
FY2013 budget request is $34.3 million, which is $1.8 million (5.6%) more than the FY2012
appropriation of $32.5 million.
The House-reported bill would provide $32.5 million, equivalent to the FY2012 level. The
Senate-reported bill would provide $33.7 million (an increase of $1.2 million, or 3.7%).
U.S. Court of International Trade
This court has exclusive jurisdiction nationwide over the civil actions against the United States,
its agencies and officers, and certain civil actions brought by the United States arising out of
import transactions and the administration as well as enforcement of federal customs and
international trade laws.
The FY2013 request is $22.9 million, a $1.4 million (6.7%) increase over the FY2012
appropriation of $21.4 million. The House-reported level is $21.4 million, equivalent to the
FY2012 level. The Senate-reported level is $22.9 million, equivalent to the request.
Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judicial Services
The FY2013 funding request of $6,787.9 million covers 12 of the 13 courts of appeals and 94
district judicial courts located in the 50 states, District of Columbia, Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, territories of Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands. The FY2013 request represents a $184.1million (2.8%) increase over the
FY2012 appropriation of $6,602.9 million. The House-reported level is $6,589.9 million (a
decrease of $13.1 million, -0.2%). The Senate-reported level is $6,763.2 million (an increase of
$160.3 million, 2.4%).
The account is divided among salaries and expenses, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust
Fund, court security, defender services, and fees of jurors and commissioners.
Salaries and Expenses
The FY2013 request for this account is $5,148.8 million, an increase of $133.8 million (2.7%)
over the FY2012 appropriation of $5,015.0 million. The House-reported level is $4,989.1 million
(a decrease of $25.9 million, -0.5%). The Senate-reported level is $5,142.0 million (an increase of
$127.0 million, 2.5%).
Congressional Research Service
40
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Vaccine Injury Compensation Trust Fund
Established to address a perceived crisis in vaccine tort liability claims, the Vaccine Injury
Compensation Program funds a federal no-fault program that protects the availability of vaccines
in the nation by diverting substantial number of claims from the tort arena. The FY2013 request
was $5.4 million, a $354,000 (7.1%) increase from the FY2012 appropriation of $5.0 million. The
House-reported level is $5.1 million (an increase of $100,000, 2.0%). The Senate-reported level is
$5.4 million, equivalent to the request.
Court Security
This account provides for protective guard services, security systems, and equipment needs in
courthouses and other federal facilities to ensure the safety of judicial officers, employees, and
visitors. Under this account, the majority of funding for court security is transferred to the U.S.
Marshals Service to pay for court security officers under the Judicial Facility Security Program.
The FY2013 request was $514.7 million, a $14.7 million (2.9%) increase over the FY2012
appropriation of $500.0 million. The House-reported bill would provide $510.0 million (an
increase of $10.0 million, 2.0%). The Senate-reported bill would provide $512.7 million (an
increase of $12.7 million, 2.5%). The Senate report also contains language encouraging the
judiciary to consider opportunities to expand a pilot perimeter security project following the
completion of a review.
Defender Services
This account funds the operations of the federal public defender and community defender
organizations, and compensation, reimbursements, and expenses of private practice panel
attorneys appointed by federal courts to serve as defense counsel to indigent individuals. The cost
for this account is driven by the number and type of prosecutions brought by U.S. Attorneys. The
FY2013 request for these services was $1,063.5 million, a $32.5 million (3.2%) increase over the
FY2012 appropriation of $1,031.0 million. The House-reported bill would continue funding at the
FY2012 level. The Senate-reported bill would provide $1,048.5 million (an increase of $17.5
million, 1.7%). The House report stated that funding was not provided for an increase in the
hourly panel attorney rate, while the Senate, in its report, indicated that its bill contained this
increase. The House report also contains language related to increased cost containment scrutiny
for this account.
Fees of Jurors and Commissioners
This account funds the fees and allowances provided to grand and petit jurors, and compensation
for jury and land commissioners. The FY2013 request was $54.6 million, a $2.7 million (5.3%)
increase over the FY2012 appropriation of $51.9 million. The House- and Senate-reported bills
would provide funding at the requested level.
Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
As the central support entity for the judiciary, the AOUSC provides a wide range of
administrative, management, program, and information technology services to the U.S. courts.
AOUSC also provides support to the Judicial Conference of the United States, and implements
Congressional Research Service
41
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
conference policies and applicable federal statutes and regulations. The FY2013 request for
AOUSC was $85.1 million, a $2.2 million (2.7%) increase over the FY2012 appropriation of
$82.9 million. The House-reported bill would continue funding at the FY2012 level. The Senatereported bill would provide funding at the requested level.
Federal Judicial Center
As the judiciary’s research and education entity, the Federal Judicial Center undertakes research
and evaluation of judicial operations for the Judicial Conference committees and the courts. In
addition, the center provides judges, court staff, and others with orientation and continuing
education and training. The center’s FY2013 request was $27.7 million, a $729,000 (2.7%)
increase over the FY2012 appropriation of $27.0 million. The House-reported bill would continue
funding at the FY2012 level. The Senate-reported bill would provide $27.5 million (an increase
of $519,000, 1.9%).
United States Sentencing Commission
The commission promulgates sentencing policies, practices, and guidelines for the federal
criminal justice system. The FY2013 request was $17.1 million, a $561,000 (3.4%) increase over
the FY2012 appropriation of $16.5 million. The House-reported bill would provide $16.0 million
(a decrease of $500,000, -3.0%). The Senate-reported bill would provide the requested level.
Judiciary Retirement Funds
This mandatory account provides for three trust funds that finance payments to retired bankruptcy
and magistrate judges, retired Court of Federal Claims judges, and the spouses and dependent
children of deceased judicial officers. The FY2013 request would provide $125.5 million (an
increase of $21.7 million, 20.9%). Both the House and Senate would provide funding at the
requested level. The House-reported bill provides for these funds in Title VI (General Provisions)
of the FSGG bill, rather than in Title III (the Judiciary). The Senate-reported bill provides these
funds in Title III of the bill.
Administrative Provisions
The House- and Senate-reported FSGG bills each contained new and continuing administrative
provision language.
House Language Continued from FY2012
•
Section 301, which would continue language to permit funds for salaries and
expenses to be available for employment of experts and consultant services (as
authorized by 5 U.S.C. 3109). (The judiciary also proposed this section.)
•
Section 302, which would continue language to permit up to 5% of any
appropriation made available for FY2013 to be transferred between judiciary
appropriations accounts, provided that no appropriation shall be decreased by
more than 5% or increased by more than 10% by any such transfer except in
certain circumstances. In addition, the language would provide that any such
transfer shall be treated as a reprogramming of funds under Sections 604 and 608
Congressional Research Service
42
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
of the bill and shall not be available for obligation or expenditure except in
compliance with the procedures set forth in those sections. (The judiciary also
proposed this section.)
•
Section 303, which would continue language authorizing not to exceed $11,000
to be used for official reception and representation expenses incurred by the
Judicial Conference of the United States. (The judiciary also proposed this
section.)
•
Section 304, which would continue language to authorize a court security pilot
program. (The judiciary also proposed this section.)
House Proposed New Language
•
Section 305, which would extend temporary judgeships. One of these, in Kansas,
was previously extended in the FY2012 act.
•
Section 306, which would require a plan for freezing the number of square feet
covered by certain appropriations and reducing the number of square feet
occupied by the judiciary overall by at least 1% in each of the next four fiscal
years. The House report also indicated a continued concern with the cost and
amount of space occupied by the judicial branch, and it estimated that the amount
of space would increase by 728,000 square feet in FY2013.
•
Section 307, which would address boundaries between the eastern district of
Missouri and the northern district of Mississippi.
•
Section 308, which would prohibit the use of funds for circuit judicial
conferences in FY2013, and requiring future budget justification to contain an
explanation of the costs of proposed conferences. On July 13, 2012, the Ninth
Circuit Public Information Office announced that it “will reschedule its 2013
Circuit Conference to 2014” due to “current budget constraints facing the federal
judiciary and the federal government in general.”34
Senate Language Continued from FY2012
The Senate committee recommended the language continued from FY2012 listed above.
Senate Proposed New Language
•
Senate Section 304, which would grant the judicial branch the same tenant
alteration authorities as the executive branch. The Senate included this language
in FY2012.
•
Senate Section 306 extends temporary judgeships.
Senate Section 307 authorizes four additional district judgeships in response to increased
caseloads and converts two temporary judgeships, in California and Arizona, to permanent status.
34
“Ninth Circuit to Reschedule 2013 Circuit Conference,” Ninth Circuit Public Information Office, July 13, 2012,
available at http://www.ce9.uscourts.gov/absolutenm/templates/template_ce9.aspx?articleid=487&zoneid=1
Congressional Research Service
43
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
Title IV: District of Columbia35
The authority for congressional review and approval of the District of Columbia’s budget is
derived from the Constitution and the District of Columbia Self-Government and Government
Reorganization Act of 1973 (Home Rule Act).36 The Constitution gives Congress the power to
“exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever” pertaining to the District of Columbia. In
1973, Congress granted the city limited home rule authority and empowered citizens of the
District to elect a mayor and city council. However, Congress retained the authority to review and
approve all District laws, including the District’s annual budget. As required by the Home Rule
Act, the city council must approve a budget within 56 days after receiving a budget proposal from
the mayor.37 The approved budget must then be transmitted to the President, who forwards it to
Congress for its review, modification, and approval.38
Both the President and Congress may propose financial assistance to the District in the form of
special federal payments in support of specific activities or priorities. Table 6 lists the enacted
amounts for FY2012, the President’s FY2013 request, and amounts recommended by the House
and Senate appropriations committees for FY2013.
Table 6. District of Columbia Special Federal Payments, FY2012-FY2013
(in millions of dollars)
FY2012
Enacted
FY2013
Request
FY2013
House
Committee
FY2013
Senate
Committee
Resident Tuition Support
$30
$35
$30
$35
Emergency Planning and
Security
15
25
25
25
District of Columbia Courts
233
220
232
225
Defender Services
55
50
50
50
Court Services and Offender
Supervision Agency
213
216
214
215
Public Defender Service
37
39
38
39
Criminal Justice Coordinating
Council
2
2
2
2
Judicial Commissions
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
St. Elizabeth Hospital Campus
—
10
10
10
HIV/AIDS Prevention
5
5
5
5
Water and Sewer Authority
15
12
—
15
School Improvement
60
60
60
54
D.C. National Guard
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.5
FY2013
Enacted
35
This section was authored by (name redacted) (x7-....).
See Article I, §8, clause 17 of the U.S. Constitution and Section 446 of P.L. 93-198, 87 Stat. 801.
37
120 Stat. 2028.
38
87 Stat. 801.
36
Congressional Research Service
44
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
FY2012
Enacted
FY2013
Request
FY2013
House
Committee
FY2013
Senate
Committee
Job Training Pilot Program
—
2
—
—
Arts and Humanities
—
3
—
—
Total
$665
$678
$667
$676
FY2013
Enacted
Sources: H.R. 6020; H.Rept. 112-550; S. 3301, S.Rept. 112-177.
The District of Columbia Budget and General Provisions
The President’s Budget Request
On February 13, 2012, the Obama Administration released its detailed budget requests for
FY2013. The Administration’s proposed budget includes $677.8 million in special federal
payments to the District of Columbia, which is $2.2 million less than the District’s FY2012
appropriation of $665.6 million. Approximately 78% ($526.7 million) of the President’s proposed
budget request for the District would be targeted to the courts and criminal justice system. This
includes
•
$219.6 million in support of court operations;
•
$49.9 million for Defender Services;
•
$215.5 million for the Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency for
the District of Columbia, an independent federal agency responsible for the
District’s pretrial services, adult probation, and parole supervision functions;
•
$1.8 million for the Criminal Justice Coordinating Council;
•
$39.4 million for the public defender’s office; and
•
$500,000 to cover costs associated with investigating judicial misconduct
complaints and recommending candidates to the President for vacancies to the
District of Columbia Court of Appeals and the District of Columbia Superior
Court.39
The President’s budget request also includes $95.6 million in support of education initiatives,
including $60 million to support elementary and secondary education, $500,000 to support D.C.
National Guard college access program, and $35.1 million for college tuition assistance. This
represents 14% of the Administration’s federal payment budget request for the District of
Columbia.
District’s Budget
On March 23, 2012, the mayor of the District of Columbia submitted a proposed budget to the
District of Columbia Council. On May 15, 2012, the council approved an FY2013 budget that
39
This includes $295,000 to the Commission on Judicial Disabilities and Tenure and $205,000 to the Judicial
Nomination Commission.
Congressional Research Service
45
Financial Services and General Government: FY2013 Appropriations
included $11.4 billion in operating funds and $1.1 billion in capital outlays. The mayor signed the
measure (A19-0381) on June 15, 2012. Of the $11.4 billion budgeted for operating expenses,
$998.2 million is projected to be derived from federal grants and $1.672 billion from Medicaid
payments. Included in the act was a provision that would grant the District some level of budget
autonomy in the expenditure of local funds if Congress failed to pass and the President failed sign
a District of Columbia appropriations act before the beginning of the 2013 fiscal year. The
provision would allow the District to obligate and expend local funds at the rate set forth in the
act during the period in which there is an absence of a federal appropriations act authorizing the
expenditure of local funds. Similar language was included in the Senate bill, S. 3301, reported by
the Senate Appropriations Committee.40 The provision is also supported by the Administration.41
Both the House and Senate bills (H.R. 6020 and S. 3301) include language that references the
District’s FY2013 budget submission.
Congressional Action
Congress not only appropriates federal payments to the District to fund certain activities, but also
reviews, and may modify, the District’s entire budget, including the expenditure of local funds as
outlined in the District’s Home Rule Act.
Senate Bill, S. 3301
On June 14, 2012, the Senate Appropriations Committee reported S. 3301, its version of the
Financial Services and General Government Appropriations Act for FY2013, with an
accompanying report (S.Rept. 112-177). As reported, the bill recommended $676.2 million in
special federal payments to the District. This was $10.6 million more than appropriated for
FY2012, and $1.6 million more than requested by the Administration. The bill includes $5.7
million more in funding for court operations than requested by the Administration, but $7.4
million less than appropriated in FY2012. It would appropriate $6.5 million less for elementary
and secondary education initiatives. These funds would be allocated among three specific
initiatives: public school improvements, support for public charter schools, and funding a private
school voucher program. The Administration’s budget request did not including funding the
school voucher program. As noted above, S. 3301 includes the provision that would allow the
District to obligate and expend locally raised funds in the absence of
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.