By SOO EWE JIN For a long time, the Inland Revenue Board was seen as quick to collect payments but slow to refund any excess. However, its CEO Puan Hasmah Abdullah has changed that by getting tax-payers to e-mail her their problems and attending to them immediately.

Hasmah: Plans to get all refunds settled by the end of this year

IT is not easy to be happy with the Taxman, or the Taxwoman, but since Puan Hasmah Abdullah took over as director-general and chief executive officer of the Inland Revenue Board in October last year, she has been getting more bouquets than brickbats from the public.

Her efforts to smoothen the delivery system, get more people to do e-filing, and also expedite tax refunds, have gone down well with the tax-payers. Recently, she even asked tax-payers to e-mail her personally if they had problems. And from the letters published in various newspapers, Hasmah is definitely one CEO who checks her e-mail.

In an e-mail interview, the IRD chief reiterates her commitment to ensuring that taxpayers do not feel short-changed when the Government’s tax coffers are filled.

Q: So how many e-mail did you receive after you revealed your e-mail address to the public? 

A: On the day my e-mail address was published in the media, I received more than 500 e-mail, and before the week was over, I had more than 2,000. Most of the e-mail were, however, requests for refunds for the current year (i.e. Year of Assessment 2006) when it was intended, among others, to draw my attention to outstanding refunds prior to 2006.

This misrepresentation is sometimes due to the way our press release is interpreted or edited and highlighted in the media. However, after the initial excitement, the number of e-mail over the following weeks has gone down to an average of 50 per day.

Q. On average, how fast do tax-payers get their problems sorted out? 

A: Due to the volume of e-mail received, I have two officers to help out. Straightforward requests for 2006 refunds are handled by my officers on my behalf, which are then forwarded to the respective branches to be processed. Complaints or frustration over unresolved issues will get my personal attention and response. Despite the number of e-mail, I believe they are attended to and resolved within two weeks.

Q: I am sure other than what has been published in ‘The Star’, for example, you must also get feedback directly sent to you. Can you share with us the percentage of good mail and not-so-good mail? 

A: I would categorise the majority of the e-mail I received as ordinary requests for refunds. The public sees this as a direct channel to get faster refunds. There is a small percentage of e-mail complaining about long delays in the previous years’ requests for refund, confusion over debit balances and, in a few instances, the run-around experienced by a small number of tax-payers.

I personally respond to these e-mail to ensure their problems are immediately resolved and that they are not repeated in the future. I also need to highlight the fact that apart from the positive and happy responses from tax-payers in the media through their letters to the editors, we also received a good number of e-mail from satisfied tax-payers. This strengthens our conviction to continue our present approach to expedite refunds.

I may not be able to achieve 100% improvement to the system but I sincerely believe we have made significant progress towards faster refunds and we can only move forward with this improvement.

On average, we have successfully processed about 70% of the current year refunds with about 60% of those processed being actual refunds while the remaining 40% has some tax owing. Still, we have yet to meet our pledge in the Client Charter, that is, to refund within three months.

For this year, we are also processing refunds for previous years, and we also have to deal with the increased volume caused by last-minute filings. In addition, there are adjustments to tax set off on dividends which are a mix of 28% and 27% due to the reduction in the corporate tax rate of 27% in 2007. Some dividends declared for 2006 within the accounting period ending 2007 were deducted at the lower rate.

Having said that, I am targeting that all refund cases for 2006 and previous years are finalised before the end of the year, save for late and new submissions, and that there are no backlog of cases carried over to next year.

Q: At such a senior level, you are setting a good example by connecting with the public via e-mail. Is this taking up too much of your time? What kind of assistance do you get from your staff? 

A: Due to modern technology, I am able to respond to my e-mail at any time of the day or night, and usually I do it while travelling home or to meetings. I am also grateful to all my officers and staff who have given me their full support in our mission to improve our delivery system.

I would also like to believe that our dealings with tax-payers are on a more pleasant footing with fewer angry and dissatisfied tax-payers, and the positive response that we noted in the letters to the editor and those we received through e-mail.

I hope this has led to a more positive perception of LHDNM that we are now as equally effective and fast in refunding as in collecting tax. Previously, there was the perception that we seem to collect fast but were slow in refunds.

Q: Do you have any advice on how the people should e-mail you so that their problems can be attended to faster? 

A: If there are still unhappy and dissatisfied tax-payers, I would like them to e-mail me so that we can make improvements to our service. We would like to make the paying of tax less painful and, in this regard, we seek the tax-payers’ support to keep to their scheduled tax payments to prevent tax arrears which will hurt the pocket more.