Findings From The 2003 Wa

Of The e-file Taxpayer Attitu

Tracking Study

Prepared For:

The Internal Revenue Service

and

FCB Advertising/NY

April 3, 2003 Publication 4209 (6-2003)

Catalog Number 36966V
Contents

Content Background, Objectives & Methodology................................................

Detailed Findings

The Technology Acceptance Segmentation.............................................The Return Type Segmentation...............................................................The e-file Attitudinal Segmentation.........................................................

The Filing Behavior Segmentation............................................................Other Special Segmentations

Spanish-Language Taxpayers.........................................................V-Coders..........................................................................................e-file Experience (Quitters and Lapsed Users).................................

Other Learning From The Study...............................................................

Summary & Conclusions..............................................................................

Appendix

Methodological Appendix...........................................................................

Support Data For Technology Acceptance Segmentation........................
Backgrou Background, Objec nd, Objectives 

Methodol Methodology
Background

 Since 1998, the IRS has conducted an annual attitud

update its understanding of Taxpayer attitudes and relate to Taxpayer acceptance of e-file products/prog

 The original premise behind this tracking study was t

 If the IRS can understand Taxpayers attitude

specifically...

 It can better understand attitudes toward e

Which is also a technology-based produ
Objectives

 The specific objectives of the Taxpayer Attitudinal Tr

1. To use learning about attitudes toward and usage of techno

into distinct, addressable Technology Acceptance Segmen

2. To determine year-to-year changes in the size and comp

including how they relate to the Return Type Segments f

(the Self-Simple, Self-Complex, Paid-Simple, and Paid-Complex 

3. And -- in a new objective added this year by FCB -- we exp

include other types of Taxpayer attitudes and behaviors -- spe

e-file; Filing Behavior (when they file returns and why), a

Spanish-Language Taxpayers, V-Coders, and e-file Laps

 All segmentations developed in this study are being applied to 

Taxpayers (e.g., the Customer Satisfaction Study and the Aallow the IRS to link the attitudinal learning here to its other re

4. The ultimate goal of the analysis of each of these segments is 

expansion of e-file usage.
Methodology

 This is the 6th wave of the Taxpayer Attitudinal Trackin

conducted...

 In the late-February-to-early-March period (this year, January 24 through  Each wave is conducted by telephone from RMR’s New Jersey research cen It consists of a nationally representative sample of 1,000 Taxpayers, with 

each of the IRS’s 7 Areas. In addition, in 2003, we augmented the Sparandom sample to bring this segment up to a readable level of 200 total. 

 Respondents in the study are drawn from a random digit sample of U.S. ho To qualify, Taxpayers have to be...

 Ages 18-64 Employed And must have filed taxes in the previous tax year (in this case, 200
Guide To Statistical Notation & Graphic H

 In the report of findings from the 2003 wave tha

significant differences have been highlighted as follo

 Indicates a significant difference between waves or between 

confidence level. 

 Indicates a directional difference between waves or between 

confidence level. 

In some tables/charts, to enhance readability, significant trend

indicated by color font, with annotation as follows:

Bold green = significantly higher at 95% confidence Bold blue = significantly lower at 95% confidence.

In addition, notable patterns in data are often highlighted usin

arrows, or other reporting graphics.
Roadmap To Findings

 Analysis and key findings have been divided into the 

each focusing on the attitudes of Taxpayers of behavior, or demographics:

 The Technology Acceptance Segmentation The Return Type Segmentation The e-file Attitudinal Segmentation The Filing Behavior Segmentation Other Special Segmentations --

Spanish-Language Taxpayers (compared to nV-Coders (compared to other types of filers)e-file Experience (where Lapsed Users and Qu

Current Users)

 Other Learning From The Study
Detailed F Detailed Findings
The 

Technology Acceptance

Segmentation
Taxpayer Attitudes Toward & Usage Of T

 When this study beg

an in 

1998, th

e intent was t

based o

n t

hei

r attitud

es to

w

ard a

nd usage of techn

could better unde

r

s

tand t

he relationship bet

wee

accep

tance of e-file.

 Each 

y

ear, w

e s

egment 

T

axpayer

s

...

 By asking them whi

ch techn

olo

gies they use.

 And by having them rate a serie

s of statements descri

technology...

Wit

h

h

alf of the s

t

a

tem

e

nts r

e

presen

tin

g acceptance of t

s

t

a

tements).

And half repr

e

senting resistance to or fear of technology (“
Taxpayer Attitudes Toward & Usage Of Tech

 While

t

h

e

s

e attit

u

dinal a

nd usage me

a

sures a

segmentatio

n, they 

a

re 

also analyzed 

o

n a sta

nd-alo

s

ee t

rends amo

ng all T

axpaye

r

s.

 The

se tren

d

s h

ave 

been con

sistent 

f

rom yea

r-to-y

ear

 A steady increase in Taxpayer ac

c

eptance 

o

f techn

ology -

incre

ase in “leader

” thinking and a -

7 point average decreas

 Complemented by a more rapid (+21 point) increas

e i

n cla

the technolo

gies measured since 1998.

 This suggests that peopl

e will adop

t speci

fic techn

ologies (

need, or other influen

ces) before moving to personal ac

gener

al.
Trend 1: A Steady Increase In Acceptance 

BASE: Kids handle new techn’gy; adOrder by phone, really taking Never put financial informatioCan’t keep up with all new teSomeday computers will contCan’t imagine filing taxes excComputers scare, so much caHave no luck programming a VCR Average Rating Across S

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

BASE: 1017 1005 1000 1000 1000 1000

% % % % % %

Have a good idea of what the WWW is 72 80 83 85 87 87Think most technology can be trusted 60 63 65 61 65 65Wish all govt. forms could be filed by PC 54 56 57 62 62 63Am one of the 1st to try new technology 48 49 52 51 52 49Need lots of phone technology 45 46 44 48 43 46Would do all financial dealings by PC 37 41 38 41 40 42Easiest way to bank is by PC 32 34 34 41 44 47Rather e-mail than talk on phone 19 23 25 29 29 28Average Rating Across Statements 46 53Green=Long-Term Increases; Blue=Long-Term Decreases

Q1 -- Agree Completely or Agree Somewhat With Each Statement

Technologica

Technological Leader Statements

(% Agree)
Trend 2: A More Rapid Increase In Usage 

Usage Of Technological Applications -- Tota

(% Use “Regularly” Or “Occasionally”)

1998 1999 2000 20

BASE: 1017 1005 1000 10

%%%%

Use of a telephone to order from a catalog 68 70 65 6Use of a PC for work 63 67 65 6Use of a PC for entertainment 52 60 58 6Use of the Internet to search for information 52 68 72 7Use of a Debit Card to pay for purchases 48 55 52 5Use of a telephone for doing personal banking 45 55 50 5Use of e-mail for personal correspondence 43 57 63 7Use of e-mail for business correspondence 38 45 49 5Use of the Internet to order products or services 24 36 42 5Use of a PC for doing personal banking 13 17 20 2Use of Government Websites NA NA NA 4Use of a Beeper/Pager NA NA NA 3Use of Broadband, DSL, or Cable Modems NA NA NA 3Use of a PDA, like a Palm Pilot NA NA NA 1Green=Long-Term Increases In Use Of This TechnologyQ3--% Use Each Technology Regularly/Occasionally

Avg. Point Gain In Usage O
Segmenting Taxpayers Based On Their Techn

 Each year, RMR analyzes Taxpayer attitudes to

technology using a multivariate statistical techniqAnalysis” -- which examines the level of commonalcharacteristics and then forms clusters, or “segmshare similar attitudes.

 These Technology Acceptance Segments are profiled demog

their responses to other non-tech related questions.

 While no single segment is ever completely homogeneous, 

share attitudes and/or behaviors and thus can be described geEach segment is labeled or given “names” which capture the this case, the essence of the segment’s approach to technology

 After segments have been formed using Cluster Ana

to classify Taxpayers into segments can be re-applusing a statistical post-classification technique knFunction Analysis”.
Segmenting Taxpayers By Tech Accepta

 For six years, Taxpayers have been segmented into the fol

label of each group and its share of last year’s Total Taxpay

Tech

Challenged

14%

Experimental

Hesitators

34%

Tech

Advanced

31%

Technology Acceptance 

Segments As Of 2002
Segmenting Taxpayers By Technology Acce

 These groups can be placed on a continuum of tech acce

tech-forward groups to the left below. Sizing these segmehave seen clear movement of Taxpayers from the least-tethe more tech-forward groups -- reflecting the increases earlier. 

27

17

20

29

25

22

18

25 

18

32

28

31

34

31

21

0%

500%

1000%1500%2000%2500%3000%3500%4000%

Tech Advanced Pressured Tech Users Experimental

Hesitators

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Segment Migration: 1998-2002
Segmenting Taxpayers By Technology Acc

 However, any segmentation model “ages” over time...

 As people and/or products evolve...

 And the typical “life” of a segmentation model is genera

between 3 and 5 years, though there are exceptions.

 In 2003, recognizing that statistical models age, RMR r

segmentation of Taxpayers in a step-by-step manner to detmodel is the best way to represent Taxpayers’ attitudes and 

 The first step was to again apply the Discriminant Functio

year’s respondents into the same 4-group model developed 
Segmenting Taxpayers Using The Original 4

 This analysis showed that the more tech-accepting segme

Pressured Tech Users) were stagnant-to-declining in size

Hesitators were growing and the Tech Challenged were stab

27

17

20

29

25

22

28

18

32

18

25 

31

34

21

31

38

18

29

0%

500%

1000%1500%2000%2500%3000%3500%4000%

Tech Advanced Pressured Tech Users Experimental

Hesitators

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 20
Segmenting Taxpayers By Technology Acc

 The finding of declines in those two more tech-ac

counter to what we would expect based upon the 

trend toward increasing acceptance and usage of tstand-alone analysis earlier.

 So, the next step was to re-segment this year’s 

Cluster Analysis. This analysis showed that the mos

model now consisted of 3 groups and not 4, as in the 

 RMR analyzed the 3 groups in the same manner 

found that they represented three distinct groups of Technology Acceptance...

Tech Leaders Tech Followers Tech L
Re-Segmenting Taxpayers Usi

ng A 3-Gr

The Siz

e Of Each Of The Thre

e New Segment

Te

c

h La

g

g

a

r

ds

31

%

Tech Follow

e

rs

25

%

Tech 
Re-Segmenting Taxpayers By Technology Ac

 After analysi

s o

f s

e

g

m

e

n

t size

s and 

pro

files, not o

nly did this n

e

sense

” than

t

he 

c

ount

er-intuitive 2

0

0

3 s

egm

e

nt siz

es that r

esult

e

d 

T

axpa

yers in

t

o the 

s

a

m

e old (

1

998) m

odel, i

t als

o align

e

d the T

axpa

y

gro

u

p segmentati

o

n dev

elop

e

d i

n 2002 for Tax Preparers (in the 

bo

t

h s

egm

e

nt names and sizes. 

 N

ote: we would e

x

p

ect Pre

parers (who are profe

s

sional

s) to

h

a

v

e m

Tax

pay

ers, and we m

a

y fin

d t

hat i

n th

e 200

3 Preparer Attitudinal r

esults

44

% 45

%

25

% 26

%

31

%

2

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

2003 Ta

x

p

a

y

ers 2002 Pre

p

are

Tech Leaders Tech Followers Tech Laggards
Re-Segmenting Taxpayers By Technology Ac

 The new segmentation als

o mad

e sense in terms of migra

t

he old 4-gro

up segment

ati

o

n to the new 3-gro

up s

olu

tio

n, a

Te

c

h

Ch

alle

n

g

e

d

Exp

e

rim

e

n

t

al

Hesitat

o

r

s

P

ressured

Te

c

h Us

e

r

s

Tech

Ad

v

a

n

c

e

d

19 % became...

Tech Leade

rs

48% became...

Tech

F

ollo

w

ers

33% became...

Tech Laggards

4 % became...

Tech L

ead

e

rs

9% became...

Tech

F

ollo

w

ers

87% became...

Tech Laggards

84 % be12% bec4% beca
So Who Are The People In These 3 New 

 Following are descriptions of each of the three segm In reading this and thinking about each group, ke

noted before --

 That, in any segmentation (and especially one involving 

behavior), the people in any one group are not homogeneo

 Instead, they are a “cluster” or collection of people sho

attitudes and usage which clearly sets them apart from oth
Tech Leaders -- 44% Of Taxpay

Tech 

Leaders

44%

 Tech Attitudes & Usage: The most tech-forwar

having been Tech Advanced or Pressured Tech Use

 71% say they are among the first to try ne

technology can be trusted. 9-in-10 wish all filed by computer, and 7-in-10 say they that i

of their financial dealings by computer. 

 Importantly, only 6% can’t imagine filing 

returns -- which indicates that they are a strong 

 Overall, they score highest on the technology 

on the tech “follower” attitudes. They are a

all of the different types of technology cove

 Psychographics: this group is the most financi

driven of the segments, and the most likely to 

leaders, outgoing, and comfortable with the p

 Demographics & Return Type: This group skew

better educated, and from IRS Area 2 (Mid-AtThey also skew Complex in return type and spli
Tech Followers -- 25% Of Taxpay

 Tech Attitudes: This is the next most tech-

consisting mainly of the old Experimental Hesitator 

 They score relatively high (60%) in saying most 

but only 28% say they’re one of the first to tr

say they want to do financial dealings by pershalf (44%) say they wish all government computer. In addition, 2/3rds say they cannotechnology and that you should never put fin

 Yet, just 31% of this group can’t imagine filin

returns -- which means that two-thirds of them 

 Overall, they are the middle group across the 

tech “follower” attitudes and they are #2 in u

 Psychographically: they’re more similar to Grou

not as stressed (either financially or in life/world vie

 Demographics & Return Type: They are the m

and education. Like the Tech Leaders, they skew C

are split on Self vs. Paid.

Tech 

Followers 

25%
Tech Laggards -- 31% Of Taxpay

Tech 

Laggards

31%

 Tech Attitudes: Dominated by the old Tech C

Hesitator groups, this segment is by far the least ac

 They are not eager to embrace technology -- o

be trusted and only 35-37% say that they are 

technology or that they wish all government 

75-81% say that they can’t keep up with tecnever put financial info on a PC. 62% say th

 57% say they can’t imagine filing taxes exce It’s not surprising that this group is highest in a

or that they are lowest in usage of technology

 Psychographically: this group carries the sa

uncertainty as the old Tech Challenged grou

paycheck to paycheck and worrying about moneworld is changing too fast for them. 

 Demographics & Return Type: they are the old

incomes and the lowest education levels. Unliskew Paid-Simple in return type.
Summarizing Differences Among The 

 The preceding segment summaries were based on a

that were found across a range of survey meagreement with the “tech leader” statements and statements, levels of usage of technology, 

demographics. The detailed data from each of th

found in the Appendix, where there is graphic notagroups are higher or lower on each statement/respo

 There is a simple, yet effective way to illustrate 

groups are on the key measures used to define theaverage ratings of “tech leader” statements, their avfollower” statements, and their average levels of u

technologies covered in the study. Those averages f
Summarizing Differences Among The Seg

 As shown in the average ratings below, the three groups 

leader” vs. “tech follower” ratings, with usage of technologileadership.

73%

24%

38%

40%

37%

69%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Avg. Tech Leader Ratings Avg. Tech Follower Ratings Avg

Tech Leaders Tech Followers Tech Laggard
Awareness & Disposition Toward e-file Amon

 We also looked at e-file awareness, claimed trial and 

and recommendation data by segment. 

 Results showed quite clearly that there is a 

awareness and interest in e-file and level of tech acce

 With the Tech Leaders generally having significantly higher int

of the above measures, followed by the Tech Followers, wit

notably lowest interest.

 The following charts summarize these results for 20

from each measure can be found in the Appendix. 
Awareness Of e-file Among The Tech Accept

 Unaided awareness, a strong indicator of brand saliency

among the first two segments (Tech Leaders and Tech 

Laggards. Total awareness (unaided plus prompted) was n

three segments.

89%

100%

92%

99%

75%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Unaided Awareness Total Awar

Tech Leaders Tech Followers Tech Lagga
Experience With e-file Among The Tech Acce

 Looking at the experience with e-file among the three Tech 

see that Tech Leaders are significantly higher than the oth

trial and usage, equal to Followers in lapsed usage (used ibut would consider using), and average in terms of being e

did not use in 2002 and would not consider using again).

36%

64%

46%

16%

45%

34%

17%

55%

53%

47%

34%

11

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Never Used Ever Used Used Past Year Lapsed Use

Tech Leaders Tech Followers Tech Lag
Each Segment’s Share Of Past-Year e-

 Looking at each segment’s share of past-year e-file usage 

Users, how many are from each segment), we see that ind

driving usage so far...

 With Tech Leaders accounting for 52% of all PY e-file usage. While Tech Followers account for only 22% of PY usage. And Tech Laggards account for 26%.

Tech Leaders

52%

Tech Fol

22%

Tech Laggards

26%

Each Segment’s Share 

Of Past-Year e-file Usage
e-file Consideration & Recommendation Amo

 Consideration and recommendation of e-file followed the tec

segment, with the Tech Leaders significantly higher than 

each of these measures -- and with the Tech Laggards alway

88%

81%

73%

63

61%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Would Consider Using Would Recomm

Tech Leaders Tech Followers Tech Lag
Consideration Of Each e-file Method Among 

 In consideration of use of specific e-file products, Tech 

higher than the other two segments in consideration of Prac

Filing, though the segments are more similar in their conside

58% 57%

48%

38%

42%

23% 

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Would Consider Electronic Filing

Using A Tax Professional

Would Consider On-Line Filing W

Tech Leaders Tech Followers Tech La
Recommendation Of Each e-file 

M

ethod Amo



T

he sam

e p

atter

n held for rec

o

m

mend

ation of specifi

c e-file 

Leaders were highes

t in po

t

ential rec

o

m

mendation o

f eac

h 

Tech Followers

a

n

d then the Tech Laggards.

52

%

43

%

43

%

26

%

38

%

15

% 

0%

10

%

20

%

30

%

40

%

50

%

60

%

70

%

80

%

90

%

100%

Wo

uld R

e

c

ommen

d

Ele

ctro

nic

Filin

g U

sin

g A T

a

x

Profe

s

sio

n

al

W

oul

d Re

c

o

m

m

end O

n-Li

n

e

Fili

n

g

W

Tech L

e

a

d

e

rs Tech F

ollo

w

e

rs Tech 
Disposition Toward e-file Among The Seg

 To see the depth of interest in e-file among the segm

interest found among the Tech Leaders went beyond 

interest in technology, we looked at each segme

benefits.

 As demonstrated in the following table, interest in e-file am

than simple “tech-i-ness”, with the Tech Leaders being sig

file benefits and more likely to believe in the product.

 The Tech Followers -- while not strong believers in e-fi

ahead of Tech Laggards in agreeing that e-file wa

private/secure, and inexpensive.

 The Tech Laggards, meanwhile, were the group most like

file, with 59% saying they see no reason to change from 

saying that mailing in a tax return is still safer, more reliathe 57% earlier who said that they could not imagine filing 
Detailed Segment Attitudes Toward e-file A

TECH 

LEADERS 

BASE: 450 

% 

Filing taxes is something nobody likes, but everybody has to do 92 e-file is a faster way to get your Federal income tax return to the IRS 82 e-file is an accurate way to file your Federal income taxes 81 e-file is a private and secure way to file Federal income taxes 78 e-file is a faster way to get your Federal tax refund [money] 74 e-file is a better way to file your Federal income taxes 71 e-file is an inexpensive way to file your Federal income taxes 71 

The IRS is becoming a friendlier, more helpful government organization 66 

e-file is easy to use with little hassle 66 e-file provides proof of receipt 65 e-file changes the way you look at the IRS 36 

Mailing in your Federal tax return is still safer, more reliable 33 

I’m used to doing my taxes on paper and see no reason to change 23 

BOLD GREEN=SCORES HIGH ON THIS ITEM; BOLD BLACK=SCORES NOTABLY LOWER THAN Q20--Agree Completely or Agree Somewhat With Each Statement

Tax Filing Statements

(% Agree)
Segment Attitudes Toward e-file And 

 As shown later, the detailed attitudes toward e-file and its 

segment the total Taxpayer audience into two groups -- 

Skeptics. As might be expected from the ratings in the 

Leader group skews toward belief in e-file while the other 

skepticism about e-file. 

62%

37%

38%

63%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Tech Leaders Tech Followers 

e-file Believers e-file Skeptics
Assessing The Opportunity Among Tech Acce

 With such greater usage of, interest in, and belief in 

Leaders, it might be assumed that this group is the 

increasing e-file usage. But there is evidence that 

much more broad, extending to all Tech Acceptance s

 Tech Leaders are still a part of the opportunity, because of the

toward technology and e-file. But, this group already constitu

file and since they skew toward complex returns, the remainde

 We believe Tech Followers are also an opportunity -- while th

they are accounting for only 22% of PY e-file Users. And th

mindset after all -- while they are not true believers in techno

technology at relatively high levels and 73% of them say they w

 Even the Tech Laggards seem to offer opportunity. At 31

already have a 25% share of PY Users of e-file and, even tho

technology and to e-file, 61% of them say they would consider 

 Finally, the trends we saw earlier of usage of technology r

suggest that there is a prospect of opportunity even amonsegments.
Reaching The Technology Acceptance S

 In each year’s tracking survey, there is a series of question

habits, results of which are provided to the IRS and the atargeting Taxpayers in the high-opportunity Tech Acceptan2003 data showing that all segments offer potential opportbelow those media with the greatest reach across all segreaching specific groups. (The detailed media tables can be 

 The leading media across all segments (with 50%+ reach 

FM radio station stationsEarly evening TV news programsAll-news cable stations such as CNN, Headline News, MSLate evening TV news programsNon-premium cable TV movie channelsAnd TV sports programming

 However, there are other media with high potential amon

The Internet (which as 76% reach among Tech Leaders and Cable family/life programs (which have 49-57% reach amoAnd early evening investigative shows (which reach 55% o
The 

Return Type

Segmentation
The Return Type Segments

 In addition to the attitudinal segmentation, we are now s

other characteristics, looking for potential opportunities fo

Acceptance segments. 

 The first of these is segmentation by Type Of Return. This is a be

segmentation. In it, Taxpayer responses to two simple questions (wor not and degree of complexity of return) are used to categorize thefiling classifications of “Self-Simple”, “Self-Complex”, “Paid-Simple” ain mind that classification on the basis of two questions is likely to ysegments, here is how the 2003 survey data aligned with the hard year: 

 21% of Taxpayers classified themselves as Self-Simple (vs. 25% in the 20 24% were Self-Complex (vs. 17% in the filing data) 21% were Paid-Simple (vs. 22% in the filing data) And 34% were Paid-Complex (vs. 36% in the filing data).
The Return Type Segments (Cont

 Although the classification is rough, the filing method usag

each segment this year were again very comparable to thfiling data for the same year (2002). This gives us conAttitudinal Study measures among the four Return Type Seg

Self- Self- 

Simple Complex 

SOURCE: THIS IRS THIS IRS TH

STUDY DATA STUDY DATA ST

BASE: 210 30M 239 20M 2

RETURNS RETURNS 

% % % % 

Used in Past Year (2002)Electronic Filing Using Tax Prof’l. 4 4 2 5 4TeleFile 12 14 2 0 

On-Line Filing 15 14 16 24 

Paper 65 68 72 71 4(NOTE: “THIS STUDY” TOTALS WILL NOT ADD TO 100% SINCE “e-file Unspecified” AND “Don’t Recall” 
Demographic Characteristics Of Return Ty

 The demographics of the total samples of each of the four Return 

 Self-Simples are younger, more likely to be single without families, and have  Self-Complex are older, more likely to be married, higher income, and more  Paid-Simple are younger but married with children, lower income, and less e Paid-Complex are older, more married, higher income, and more educated.

Self- Se

Simple Com

BASE: 210 2

%%

QA--Gender

Male 47 5Female 53 4

QB--Average Age 38 4

Q15--% Married 43 6Q13--Average HH Size 2.7 2

Q14--% With Children 36 4

Q17--Median HH Income (000) $40.9 $6

Q27 – % With College Education 68 7

% Who Are Spanish-Language Taxpayers 11 
Other Analysis Of The Return Type Se

 In the other analysis of the total samples of each of t

Segments, we focus on:

 The levels of awareness, usage (e-file experience), and 

products within each Return Type Segment.

 And how the Return Type Segments relate to each of t

analyses:

 Technology Acceptance e-file Attitudes Filing Behavior

 After looking at the total in each of these segments, we 

Paper Filers (or Past-Year Non-Users of e-file) vs. the 

Past-year Users of e-file) in each segment in an effort 

opportunity within these segments.
Awareness Of e-file Among Return Type Seg

 Looking at the total sample in each segment, we see that t

have similar levels of unaided awareness of e-file – the exc

group, who have significantly lower awareness (possibly dufiling in this group). Total awareness is virtually universal in 

89%

99%

92%

100% 

74%

9

87%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Unaided Awareness Total Aware

Self-Simple Self-Complex Paid-Simple Paid-Comple
e-file Experience Among Return Type Segm

 Even though their unaided awareness was lower, the Total P

to have had higher e-file trial and PY usage and lower lapse

all of the other Return Type Segments. These are people gsimple return and it is possible that while they are using e-f

in their taxes, thus the lower unaided awareness that we saw 

58%

35%

21%

21%

52%

28%

8%

53%

62%

40%

11%

54%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Ever Used Used Past Year Lapsed Users 

Self-Simple Self-Complex Paid-Simple Paid-Complex
Consideration & Recommendation Among Ret

80%

70%

84%

70%

6

73%

72%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Would Consider Using Would Recommend 

Self-Simple Self-Complex Paid-Simple Paid-Comple

 The two groups with the lowest PY usage of e-file (Self-Simp

the highest consideration of future use of it, with lower con

Paid segments. There were no significant differences amorecommending e-file to others.
Technology Acceptance Among Retur

n Type S

 Cros

s-linking the R

eturn T

y

p

e Seg

ments (

t

o

tal) with the T

e

w

e find that the Self-Com

plex are skewed toward the Tech 

Paid-Si

m

ple ske

w somewha

t t

o

w

ard the Tech Laggard minds

45

%

52

%

36

%

21

% 23%

32% 31

%

17

%

43%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%

S

elf-Sim

ple

S

elf-C

o

m

ple

x

P

aid-Sim

ple

Te

c

h L

e

a

d

ers Te

c

h F

ollow

ers Te

c

h L

ag
Attitudes Toward e-file Among Return Type S

 But cross-linking these segments with the later e-file Attitud

significant differences across Return Type Segments -- thoutoward e-file Skeptics among the Self-Simple group.

44%

49%

46% 

54% 56% 

51%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Self-Simple Self-Complex Paid-Simple 

Believers Skeptics
Filing Behavior Among Return Type Segm

46%

31%

49%

8%

11%

6%

39% 41% 43% 

4%

11%

4%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

Self-Simple Self-Complex Paid-Simple 

ASAP Get Around To It Late But Not Last Last 

 Cross-linking the Return Types with the four Filing Behavi

detail later, we find a natural skew toward later filing 

segments (who say they file “when I get around to it”, minute”, and “at the last possible minute”) compared to t(who are more likely to file “as soon as” they can).
How Do Paper vs. Electronic Filers Differ In T

 When we compare Paper vs. Electronic Filers within each s

Paper Filers (people who are NOT using e-file) tend to be 

later-season filers, less likely to get a refund, and far more l

e-file benefits.

Self-Simple Self-Complex 

Paper e-file Paper e-file 

Filers Filers Filers Filers 

BASE: 124 82 151 85 

% % % % 

Noting Only Differences:

Tech Leaders 43 49 43 75 Tech Followers 25 21 38 13 Tech Laggards 32 30 19 12 Average Age 37 36 45 42 Early-Season Filers 41 56 29 38 Later-Season Filers 15 7 24 16 Usually Get A Refund 75 84 64 85 Usually Have A Bal Due 22 10 30 13 

e-file Believers 35 59 35 84 e-file Skeptics 65 41 65 16 
How Do Paper Filers Differ Across Seg

 Comparing just the Paper Filers in each segment, we see th

(with both “Self” segments somewhat more tech-forwardemographically (with both “Simple” segments being young

the two “Complex” segments).

Self-Simple Self-Complex P

Paper Paper 

Filers Filers 

BASE: 124 151 

%%

Noting Only Differences:

Tech Leaders 43 43 Tech Followers 25 38 Tech Laggards 32 19 Average Age 37 45 Have Children 37 38 Married 46 67 Attended College 71 77 Median HH Income $40K $59K Spanish-Language 14 6 
How Do Paper Filers Differ Across Segme

 They also differ in filing behavior (with both “Simple” segme

likely to get a refund while both “Paid” segments include mo

awareness and acceptance of e-file (with the two “Self” 

interest in and acceptance of e-file). 

Self-Simple Self-Complex P

Paper Paper 

Filers Filers 

BASE: 124 151 

%%

Noting Only Differences:

Early-Season Filers 41 29 Later-Season Filers 15 24 Usually Get A Refund 75 64 Usually Have A Bal Due 22 30 V-Coders 16 28 Unaided Awareness of e-file 84 90 

Ever Tried e-file 36 33 Lapsed Users of e-file 32 29 Would Consider Using e-file 73 78 Would Recommend e-file To A Friend 56 60 

e-file Believers 35 35 e-file Skeptics 65 65 
Assessing The Opportunity Among Return T

 Among the four Return Type Segments, the high opportun

to be the two “Self” segments -- Self-Simple and Self-Compl

 These segments in total have been slower to adopt e-file 

32% usage in these two segments vs. 39-56% in the two “

 Even though the Paper filers among them are somewhat m

higher interest in and acceptance of e-file than the Papsegments. 

 So why are these two segments not using e-file at a highe

know the main barriers for Self-Complex (this study is diagnostics), we do have a sense of the barriers among Sfrom the recent Self-Simple Focus Groups, which showed Preparer stimulating familiarity and comfort with paper filin

knowledge of e-file benefits and lack of comfort with the e

that cross-linkage of segmentations showed that this group 

e-file Skeptics (who also do not have strong belief in e-file b

what we heard in the focus groups.
The 

e-file Attitudinal

Segmentation
The e-file Attitudinal Segmen

 In one of the new segmentation objectives this year, 

Taxpayers segment in terms of their attitudes towar

To do this, RMR conducted Cluster Analysis on Taxpattitudes toward the e-file product and tax filing.

 After detailed analysis of various groupings and configur

Taxpayers were best split into two camps -- e-file Believshown below. (Expanding the analysis to 3, 4, or 5 groushades of “Skeptics”, and little differentiation, so we left it at 

Group 2 -- e-file

Skeptics

54%
Attitudes Toward Filing Among e-file Attitud

 The differences between the two segments on e-filing vs. 

highlighted below. Note that they share only one attitude nobody likes, but everyone has to do”. 

e

Be

BASE: Filing taxes is something nobody likes, but everybody has to do e-file is an accurate way to file your Federal income taxes e-file is a faster way to get your Federal income tax return to the IRS e-file is a faster way to get your Federal tax refund [money] e-file is a better way to file your Federal income taxes e-file is a private and secure way to file Federal income taxes e-file is easy to use with little hassle e-file provides proof of receipt e-file is an inexpensive way to file your Federal income taxes 

The IRS is becoming a friendlier, more helpful government organization 

e-file changes the way you look at the IRS 

Mailing in your Federal tax return is still safer, more reliable I’m used to doing my taxes on paper and see no reason to change 

Q20--Agree Completely or Agree Somewhat With Each Statement
Demographic Characteristics Of e-file Attitud

 There are also differences in the demographic characteris

with the e-file Believers being higher income, higher educa

likely to have larger households and more children than the 

B

BASE: QA--Gender

Male Female 

QB--Average Age 

Q15--% Married Q13--Average HH Size 

Q14--% With Children 

Q17--Median HH Income (000) Q27 – % With College Education % Who Are Spanish-Language Taxpayers 
Other Analysis Of The e-file Attitudinal 

 In the other analysis of the two e-file Attitudinal Segments

 The levels of awareness, usage (e-file experience), and 

products among Believers and Skeptics.

 And how the two segments relate to each of the other se

 Technology Acceptance Return Type And Filing Behavior
e-file Awareness Among The e-file Attitudi

 We found that, in addition to differing in disposition towa

differ in their awareness of e-file, with the Believers h

unaided awareness of the product to begin with.

92%

100%

80%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Unaided Awareness Total A

e-file Believers e-file Skeptics
e-file Experience Among The e-file Attitudi

 As might be expected, the e-file Believers have had far grea

-- being higher in trial and past-year usage, though not sSkeptics in terms of lapsed users or quitters.

77%

59%

17%

39%

13%

23%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Ever Used Used Past Year Lapsed Users 

e-file Believers e-file Skeptics
Segment Consideration & Recommendat



A

n

d it is n

ot surprising t

o find that b

oth c

onsidera

tio

rec

ommendati

o

n of 

e-file are higher among the Believers. 

88

% 86%

65

%

0%

10

%

20

%

30

%

40

%

50

%

60

%

70

%

80

%

90

%

100%

W

o

uld C

o

nsid

er Usin

g

W

o

uld

Reco

m

me

n

e-file Believers e-file S

ke

ptics
Belief & Skepticism About e-file Among Use

 Another interesting way to look at belief in vs. skepticism ab

presence of each e-file mindset among actual past-year Use

What we find is the vast majority of Users are Believers whilof Non-Users, where the vast majority are Skeptics. But, thnot have to be a Believer to use e-file -- in line with the ove

we saw earlier (where usage of technology was outpacing a

69%

31% 31%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Past-Year e-file Users Past-Year e-fil

e-file Believers e-file Skeptics
Technology Acceptance Among e-file Attitud

 Linking the T

echnol

o

g

y Accep

tance Seg

ments

t

o the two e-

we see that the Believers are dominantl

y Tech Leaders, wh

o

f the three tech seg

ments -- th

o

u

g

h skewed so

m

e

w

hat t

o

w

59%

31% 29%

20%

21%

0%

10

%

20

%

30

%

40

%

50

%

60

%

70

%

e-file B

elie

v

ers e-file

S

k

Tech Leaders Tech F

ollowers Tech Laggards
Return Type Of The e-file Attitudinal S

 There are no substantial differences in how the two e-file A

to the four Return Type Segments. 

24%

27%

16% 18%

22% 

36% 

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%

e-file Believers e-file S

Self-Simple Self-Complex Paid-Simple Paid-C
Filing Behavior Among e-file Attitudinal 

 And there are no clear differences in how the two e-file At

to the four Filing Behavior Segments.

41%

36%

8% 

40% 43%

6% 

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Believers Ske

ASAP Get Around To It Late But Not Last Last 
What Is The Opportunity Among These 

 With past-year usage of e-file among the Believers 

high (60% vs. the 39% national filing figure opportunity coming out of this segmentation is to inspecifically awareness of e-file benefits, among the S

 This group has both lower unaided awareness of e-

Believers and sharply lower awareness of e-file bene

 Only 80% were aware of e-file without prompting. And only 23% said they used e-file in the past year -- eve

they would consider using it.

 Why don’t they use it? They don’t believe in it. This segm

file benefits that are sometimes only one-third to one-half t

 And while we learned (from the chart showing Belief vs. Skepticism 

one does not necessarily have to believe in e-file benefits to use it, to believe in its benefits while the clear tendency among Non-Users 
The 

Filing Behavior

Segmentation
The Filing Behavior Segment

 Another new objective for this year’s study was t

based upon their filing behavior -- i.e., when they file 

 The “when” question was asked two ways -- both in terms 

What is the general filing stimulus? (Do you file...as soon 

when you get around to it, as late as possible during ta

last possible minute?)

And what is the specific time period? (January, Februa

15th, and After April 15th).

 Taxpayers were then asked for their reasons for filing at th
Main Motivation For Filing Behav

 As shown below, there was a strong correlation between 

and the specific time frame -- e.g., Taxpayers who say they W-2” are likely filing in February or even January, while ththe last possible minute” are likely to be filing April 1-15 or b

As Soon When I Ge

As I Get Around 

My W-2 To It 

BASE: 371 418 

%%

WHEN FILE:

January 21 1 February 74 39 March 4 43 April 1-15 1 12 After April 15th 0 0 Varies/Can’t Recall 05
Main Motivation For Filing Behav

As Soon When I 

As I Get Aroun

My W-2 To It 

BASE: 371 418 

%%

MAIN MOTIVATION FOR FILING THEN:

Like To Get It Done & Over With As Soon As Possible 56 8 Usually Get A Refund & Like To Get My Money Back ASAP 28 6 I’m Pretty Busy, So I Get To It When I Can 2 36 It All Depends On When I Can See My Preparer 2 17 I’m A Procrastinator, Always Do Things At The Last Minute 0 4 Usually Owe The IRS Money So I Wait Until Late In Season 0 3 Have To Wait For Paperwork 6 12 

 So we looked at reasons for filing at each of the stimulus po

were clusters of responses that explained why Taxpayers fthis, we concluded that Taxpayers could be segmented on looking at the four stimulus points and that these points toward tax filing.
The Filing Behavior Segments

Last Possible 

Minute

9%

Late But Not Last

7%

Ge

ASAP

38%

Other

4%

 Each stimulus point was then re-named/re-labeled to allo

possible when discussing them. Following are the labelsproportions of Taxpayers in each group. Note: those who sacould not recall timing were treated as “others” or outincluded in the analyses that follow.
Characteristics Of Filing Behavior Se

 Their demographics show us that ASAPs skew toward younger fem

education; Get Around To It are fairly typical though with a h

Language Taxpayers; Late But Not Last are more likely to be old

income; and the Last Possible Minute filers skew slightly fem

educated, and also with a higher than usual proportion of Spanish-Laof type of tax return, we see more Balance Due and fewer Refunds t

Get Around 

ASAP To It 

BASE: 371 418 

%%

QA--Gender

Male 44 52 Female 56 48 

QB--Average Age 39 41 

Q15--% Who Are Married 55 62 Q13--Average HH Size 2.8 2.8 

Q14--% With Children 46 42 

Q17--Median HH Income (000) $44.4 $56.5 

Q27 – % With College Education 58 68 

% Who Are Spanish-Language Taxpayers 5 10 

% With Balance-Due Returns 9 21 % With Refunds 88 72 
Other Analysis Of The Filing Behavior S

 In the other analysis of the four Filing Behavior Segments, 

 The levels of awareness, usage (e-file experience), and 

products across these segments.

 And how the segments relate to each of the other segme

 Technology Acceptance Return Type e-file Attitudes
e-file Awareness Among The Filing Behavi

 There are no strong differences in levels of awareness o

segments.

87%

100%

85% 84%

99% 

80%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Unaided Awareness Total A

ASAP Get Around To It Late But Not Last Last Po
e-file Experience Among The Filing Behav

 There is a correlation of earlier, more eager filing with gre

file. The data below show a pattern of higher trial and usa

then the Get Around To It, with clearly lower trial and usage 

usage and quitting) among Late But Not Last and Last Possi

67%

49%

15%

14%

52%

37%

18%

25%

48%

19% 21%

44%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Ever Used Used Past Year Lapsed Users 

ASAP Get Around To It Late But Not Last Last Po
Usage/Consideration Among Filing Behav

 The earliest, mo

s

t eager filers (ASAP

s) als

o have h

rec

ommendati

on of 

e-file than the other seg

men

t

s.

81%

77

% 75

%

64

%

75

%

69

%

0%

10

%

20

%

30

%

40

%

50

%

60

%

70

%

80

%

90

%

100%

W

o

uld

C

o

n

sid

er U

sin

g

W

o

uld

R

e

c

o

m

ASAP

G

e

t

Around T

o I

t

L

ate B

ut 

N

o

t L

a

s

t Last P
Technology Acceptance Among Filing Behav

 Linki

ng 

t

he Tech Ac

c

eptanc

e segment

ati

o

n to t

his o

ne

differences in tec

h acceptance mindsets acr

o

s

s the four Filin

45

% 42% 41% 

27%

24% 25% 

31% 33% 32% 

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

AS

A

P Get Aro

u

n

d To It L

ate B

ut N

ot L

a

st 

Te

c

h L

ead

ers T

e

c

h F

ollo

w

ers

T

ech L

ag
Return Type Of The Filing Behavior Se

 However, linking the Return Type Segments to these, we d

with the earlier filers (ASAP and Get Around To It) hav

Simple returns while the later filers (Late But Not Last and L

higher proportions of Complex returns (especially Paid-Comp

31%

25%

14%

26%

14%

18%

28%

20%

11%

48%

27%

37%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%

ASAP Get Around To It Late But Not Last 

Self-Simple Self-Complex Paid-Simple Paid-Com
e-file Attitudes Among The Filing Behavio

 Finally, linkage of the two e-file Attitudinal Segments with 

groups shows that ASAPs split evenly between e-file Believe

other three Filing Behavior segments skew toward Skeptics. 

50%

44%

40% 

60%

50%

56%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

ASAP Get Around To It Late But Not Last 

e-file Believers e-file Skeptics
What Is The Opportunity Among These 

 Results of the Filing Behavior segmentation indicate 

opportunity among the three later filer segments -- sin March or later (Get Around To It, Late But Not Last, an

 These three groups (which account for 58% of all Ta

 Have significantly lower e-file usage (21-37%) than earlier fil

about 70% or more of them say they would consider e-filing.

 Why don’t they? Not because of lack of tech acceptance -- th

Leaders among them as the earlier filers. And, for most, it 

Balance Due and perceive e-file as being for people getting Ref

3 opportunity segments here, 65% got a refund in 2002. 

 Instead, it seems to be linked to Return Type -- each of these 

returns (55-70% in each group) and, for many, it may be unpleasant task (about 40% of each group say they are “buCommunications addressing these reasons for later filing as might be helpful in converting these late filers.
Other Special Segments
Spanish-Language

Taxpayers
Spanish-Language Taxpayers

 For the first time during the Taxpayer Attitudinal tracking pr

Language Taxpayers was added to the sample (via augmnaturally in the Taxpayer random sample) to allow anaemerging Hispanic target audience. In analysis of this segdemographics as well as their:

 Levels of awareness, usage (e-file experience), and cons

among this group.

 And how this segment relates to each of the other segmen

 Technology Acceptance Return Type e-file Attitudes And Filing Behavior
Demographic Characteristics Of Spanish-Lan

 As might be expected from recent Census data and exten

growth of the Hispanic market, Spanish-Language Taxpadifferent demographic profile from other Taxpayers -- this more children and larger HH sizes, and has far lower income 

S

Total La

Taxpayers Ta

BASE: 1000 

% 

QA--Gender

Male 49 Female 51 

QB--Average Age 41 

Q15--% Married 60 Q13--Average HH Size 2.8 

Q14--% With Children 44 

Q17--Median HH Income (000) $52.9 

Q27 – % With College Education 66 
Awareness Of e-file Among Spanish-Langua

 In the awareness measures, we found that Spanish-La

significantly lower levels of both unaided and total awarenes

85%

99%

64%

9

85%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Unaided Awareness Total A

Total Taxpayers Spanish-Language Taxpayers Non Spanish
e-file Experience Among Spanish-Languag

 They are also significantly less likely than other Taxpayers 

statistically similar to other Taxpayers in terms of lapsed usa

57%

39%

15%

52%

18%

31%

15%

40%

57%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Ever Used Used Past Year Lapsed Users 

Total Taxpayers Spanish-Language Taxpayers Non Spanish
Consideration & Recommendation O

 However, their levels of consideration and recommendation 

(but not significantly) lower than the rest of the Taxpayer po

76%

68%

72%

6

76%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Would Consider Using Would Recomm

Total Taxpayers Spanish-Language Taxpayers Non Spanish
Spanish-Language Taxpayers vs. Other 

 As shown in the next table, RMR analyzed Spanish-Languag

the other segmentation data captured in this study and differed from other Taxpayers only in terms of Tech Accepta

 In Tech Acceptance, Spanish-Language Taxpayers are f

Laggards and far less likely to be Tech Followers or Tech Le

 In Return Type, Spanish-Language Taxpayers skew strong

away from all other Return Types, especially Self-Complex 
Spanish-Language Taxpayers vs. Other Se

S

Total L

Taxpayers T

BASE: 1000 

%

Tech Acceptance Segments

Tech Leader 44 Tech Follower 25 Tech Laggard 31 

Return Type Segments

Self-Simple 26 Self-Complex 17 Paid-Simple 22 Paid-Complex 35 

e-file Attitudinal Segments

e-file Believers 46 e-file Skeptics 54 

Filing Behavior Segments

As Soon As Possible 38 When I Get To It 42 Late, But Not Last Minute 7 

Last Possible Minute 9 

V-Coders 29 
What Is The Opportunity In This Se

 Over half of the Spanish-Language segment are Pa

alone should make them strong candidates for e-f

having the highest level of use e-file of all Return Ty

Spanish-Language segment is e-filing at just the 31% more of this group e-filing?

 We looked at technology acceptance to see if that was the pr

they are heavily skewed toward Tech Laggard influences, this 

attitudes toward e-file, with this segment having equal propo

Skeptics (or about the same as that of the total Taxpayer samp

 We also looked at their income and their perceptions of e-file’s 

far lower than other Taxpayers in HH income, they do not see

expensive than other filing methods.

 So, what is the problem? It may be simply lack of awareness 

file voluntarily (without prompting) vs. 85% among non-Spani

IRS’s new communications focus on this segment should help c
V-Coders
V-Coders

 Taxpayers who said that their return was prepared on a com

to the IRS -- V-Coders -- were separated out from other sample (along with Non V-Coding Paper Filers and CuUsers) and analyzed for their demographics as well as their

 Levels of awareness, usage (e-file experience), and conside And their relationship to each of the other segmentation an

 Technology Acceptance Return Type e-file Attitudes And Filing Behavior
Demographic Characteristics Of V-C

 Demographically, V-Coders differ from Non V-Coding 

Taxpayers mainly in that they are older, more likely to be mhigher incomes. 

Total 

Taxpayers V-Coders 

BASE: 1000 310 

%%

QA--Gender

Male 49 52 Female 51 48 

QB--Average Age 41 44 Q15--% Married 60 72 Q13--Average HH Size 2.8 2.9 

Q14--% With Children 44 47 

Q17--Median HH Income (000) $52.9 $59.9 

Q27 – % With College Education 66 68 
Awareness of e-file Among V-Cod

 The awareness data shows that V-Coders have only slightly 

of e-file than Non V-Coding Paper Filers, but significant

Current e-file Users.

85%

99%

81%

99% 

83%

92%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Unaided Awareness Total A

Total Taxpayers V-Coders Non V-Coder Paper Filers C
e-file Experience Among V-Code

 28% of V-Coders claimed to have tried e-file, but these 

Instead, they are Lapsed Users -- similar to what we see Filers.

57%

39%

15%

28%

23%

0%

26%

0%

30%

0

100% 100%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Ever Used Used Past Year Lapsed Users 

Total Taxpayers V-Coders Non V-Coder Paper Filers 
Consideration & Recommendation Amon

 V-Coders are also very similar to Non V-Coding Paper Filers 

potential recommendation of e-file -- though both are sign

file Users on these measures.

76%

67% 68%

53% 

69%

90%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Would Consider Using Would Recomm

Total Taxpayers V-Coders Non V-Coder Paper Filers C
V-Coders vs. Other Segment

 In the table that follows, we show how V-Coders, Non V-

Current e-file Users relate to all of the other segmentati

survey. This shows that V-Coders:

 Include fewer Tech Leaders (as do the Non V-Coding P

Users skews toward Tech Leaders.

 They skew heavily toward Paid-Complex Returns, while 

skew heavily toward Self-Filing (both Simple and Complemore of a mix of return types (though skewing somewhat t

 V-Coders (like Non V-Coding Paper Filers) are mainly e-f

Users of course are mainly e-file Believers.

 Finally, looking at how V-Coders relate to the Filing Behav

they (and Non V-Coding Paper Filers) include substantially 
V-Coders vs. Other Segments

Total 

Taxpayers V-Coders 

BASE: 1000 310 

%%

Tech Acceptance Segments

Tech Leader 44 40 Tech Follower 25 26 Tech Laggard 31 34 

Return Type Segments

Self-Simple 26 9 Self-Complex 17 12 Paid-Simple 22 23 Paid-Complex 35 56 

e-file Attitudinal Segments

e-file Believers 46 33 e-file Skeptics 54 67 

Filing Behavior Segments

As Soon As Possible 38 29 When I Get To It 42 44 Late, But Not Last Minute 7 11 

Last Possible Minute 9 12 

Spanish-Language Taxpayers 8 7 
What Is The Opportunity In This Se

 In analyzing the opportunity with this segment, we looke

Coders are. They are...

 That portion of Paper Filers who have higher income and greater comple

returns).

 And 82% of them are paying a Preparer to do their return (only 18% are  In addition, those with Complex returns tend to be later filers (March or la So, essentially these are later-season users of Preparers who are not te

return -- either because of their own insecurities about e-file (two-thirdlow belief in e-file) or because of Preparer dominance in filing or negativ

above).

 With such high levels of return complexity, dependence on 

to e-file among V-Coding Taxpayers, the opportunity would s

who appears to be the real V-Coder here.
e-file Experience Segment

(Including Lapsed Users & Quitters
e-file Experience Segments

 Finally, RMR was asked to look at e-file Quitters as a segmen After defining Quitters as Taxpayers who had tried e-file 

used it in 2002 and would not consider using it again, we 

actually quite a small segment (only 29 people in the However, we did find a larger segment of Lapsed Users 

used e-file in the past, did not use in 2002, but would co

future).

 These groups, along with Current Users, were analyze

Experience Segmentation to see their demographic composit

 Levels of awareness and consideration of e-file. And how these segments relate to all of the other segmenta

Acceptance, Return Type, e-file Attitudes, and Filing Behavior.

 Note that, with only 29 Quitters as a base, we could not ru

group vs. the others, so we looked for directional differences they occurred.
Demographics Of The e-file Experience 

 Demographically, the small base of Quitters seem to differ 

Users mainly in income (they skew higher). The Lapsed UsCurrent Users in HH income, and had a strong female skew 

Current 

e-file Users 

BASE: 370 

% 

QA--Gender

Male 49 Female 51 

QB--Average Age 39 

Q15--% Married 56 Q13--Average HH Size 2.8 

Q14--% With Children 47 

Q17--Median HH Income (000) $49.9 

Q27 – % With College Education 63 
Awareness of e-file Among e-file Experien

 There were no substantial differences in unaided awarene

segments and all had universal awareness of e-file after pro

100%

87%

92%

100%

94%

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Unaided Awareness Total Awa

Current e-file Users Lapsed e-file Users e-file Q
Recommendation Of e-file

 By definition, none of the Quitters would consider using e

Lapsed Users would consider using it again, so we focused each segment who would recommend e-file. We found 84

even 16% of Quitters) would recommend e-file to others 

Users. This seems to indicate that while the small group o

“turned off” to e-file, the larger group of Lapsed Users ar

offer an opportunity for resumed usage.

96%

84%

16

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Would Recommend To A Friend

Current e-file Users Lapsed e-file Users e-file Quitter
e-file Experience Segments vs. Other 

 In the table that follows, we show how the e-file Experien

other segmentation data in the study. We focused this analsince Quitters are so small-based and Current User linkage in preceding analyses. This analysis shows that Lapsed User

 Are about as tech-forward as the Current Users. Skew toward Self preparation (of mainly Simple returns). Are an even mix of e-file Believers and e-file Skeptics. And tend to be somewhat later filers than Current Users.
e-file Experience Segments vs. Other S

Current Laps

e-file Users U

BASE: 370 

%

Tech Acceptance Segments

Tech Leader 52 Tech Follower 21 Tech Laggard 27 

Return Type Segments

Self-Simple 23 Self-Complex 12 Paid-Simple 29 Paid-Complex 36 

e-file Attitudinal Segments

e-file Believers 69 e-file Skeptics 31 

Filing Behavior Segments

As Soon As Possible 48 When I Get To It 39 Late, But Not Last Minute 5 

Last Possible Minute 5 
What Is The Opportunity In This Se

 The opportunity in this segment is not the Quitter gr

into the survey) -- Quitters are only a small part of e

opportunity is the Lapsed User of e-file (15% of all T

Taxpayer who has used e-file in the past but not the 

who would consider using e-file again. Who are Lap

 Heavily (62%) female. Almost as tech-forward as Current Users of e-file. With high awareness of e-file and no indication of unusual  Who skew strongly (61%) toward Self preparation of thei

close mix of Simple and Complex returns).

 The opportunity here may be one of targeting via m

in mind this segment’s strong female skew and do-itax filing.
Other Learning

From The Study
Learning From Other Measure

 While the Attitudinal Tracking Study is not th

awareness and usage levels for e-file, the survemeasures and, given the high random sample base in report this data for information purposes each year.

 The first set of 3 tables which follow show awareness, 

recommendation of filing methods (with recommendation addereading these tables, keep in mind that we changed the manne(breaking it out into O-L With An On-Line Company and O-L we added e-file as a general mention. As expected, these cha

data for specific e-file products compared to 2002 (though 

generally stable). We will resume year-to-year comparisons owhen we present On-Line Filing in a manner consistent with thi

 The second set of 2 tables show data from all of the remain

questions about EITC filing, balance due and method of receState e-filing, etc. Some of these data have been in

segmentations. They are reported here for information purpos
Awareness Of Tax Filing Methods -- 19

Taxpayer Taxpayer Taxpaye

Attitudinal Attitudinal Attitudina

Tracking Tracking Tracking 

1998 1999 2000 

BASE: 1017 1005 1000 

%%%

Unaided Method AwarenessSelf-Prepared Paper Return 67 74 73 Paper Return Using A Tax Professional 54 46 52 Electronic Filing Using A Tax Professional 41 42 41 On-Line Filing (Net) 29 41 47 

O-L With On-Line Company xxxO-L With Software xxx

TeleFile 21 24 25 e-file Unspecified xxxNet Unaided Mentions of ETA Products 70 74 77 Total Method Awareness (Unaided + Aided)Self-Prepared Paper Return 96 97 97 Paper Return Using A Tax Professional 96 96 97 Electronic Filing Using A Tax Professional 84 87 86 On-Line Filing (Net) 70 78 82 

O-L With On-Line Company xxxO-L With Software xxx

TeleFile 62 60 61 e-file Unspecified xxx

Net Total Mentions of ETA Products 95 97 97 
Usage Of Tax Filing Methods -- 1998

Taxpayer Taxpayer Taxpayer 

Attitudinal Attitudinal Attitudina

Tracking Tracking Tracking 

1998 1999 2000 

BASE: 1017 1005 1000 1000 

%%%

Methods Ev

er Use

d

Self-Prepared Paper Return 70 74 71 Paper Return Using A Tax Professional 66 68 66 Electro

nic Filing Usin

g A Ta

x Professio

nal 26 29 31 

TeleFile 10 12 14 On-Line Filing (Net) 3

8

9 

O-L With On-Line Company xxxO-L With Software xxx

e-file U

nsp

ecifie

d xxx

Net Mentions Of E

TA Pro

d

ucts 34 41 45 

Met

h

o

d Used in P

ast Y

e

ar (2002)

Paper Return Using A Tax Professional 41 39 39 Self-Prepared Paper Return 36 35 35 Electro

nic Filing Usin

g A Ta

x Professio

nal 12 14 19 

TeleFile 455On-Line Filing (T

otal) *12

O-L With On-Line Company xxxO-L With Software xxx

e-file U

nsp

ecifie

d xxx

Net Mentions Of E

TA Pro

d

ucts 16 20 26 
Consideration & Recommendation -- 1

Taxpayer Taxpayer Taxpaye

Attitudinal Attitudinal Attitudina

Tracking Tracking Tracking 

1998 1999 2000 

BASE: 1017 1005 1000 

%%%

Methods They Would Consider UsingPaper Return Using A Tax Professional 62 68 62 Self-Prepared Paper Return 57 61 50 Electronic Filing Using A Tax Professional 47 57 55 On-Line Filing 41 49 46 

O-L With On-Line Company xxxO-L With Software xxx

TeleFile 34 43 35 e-file Unspecified xxxNet Mentions Of ETA Products 71 80 79 Methods They Would Recommend To A FriendPaper Return Using A Tax Professional xxxSelf-Prepared Paper Return xxxElectronic Filing Using A Tax Professional xxxOn-Line Filing xxx

O-L With On-Line Company xxxO-L With Software xxx

TeleFile xxxe-file Unspecified xxxNet Mentions Of ETA Products xxx
Totals For Other Measures -- 2003 

Taxpayer A

2

BASE: Q. 15 -Type Of Return Filed

Basic Return With No Schedules Attached Return With Schedules Attached 

Q. 16 -Additional Forms/Attachments Filed

Form 2106 – The Business Expense Form Schedule “C” Schedule “E” Schedule “F” 

Q. 14 - Did You Receive the Earned Income Tax Credit?

Yes No Don’t Know 

Q. 11 - Result of Tax Filing

Balance Due To The IRS Received A Refund Had A Zero Balance 

Q. 12 - How Paid the Balance DueNEW BASE: TOTAL WITH BALANCE DUE 

Automatic Withdrawal from a Checking/Savings Credit Card Wrote A Check 

Q. 13 - Method of Receiving Refund NEW BASE: TOTAL RECEIVED A REFUND 

Direct Deposit to Checking/Savings Received A Check From The IRS 
Totals For Other Measures -- 2003 On

Taxpayer 

2

BASE: Q. 10a - Method Of Preparing Paper ReturnNEW BASE:TOTAL PAPER RETURN USERS 

Pen/Pencil On A Computer, Then Printed Out And Mailed (V-Coder) Can’t Recall/Don’t Know 

Q. 10b - Who Prepared ReturnTOTAL RESPONDENTS 

Paid Preparer Self, Family Member, Or Friend 

Q. 10c - If Paid Preparer Above, Was the Preparer A...NEW BASE:TOTAL WHO USED A PAID PREPARER 

Certified Public Accountant (CPA) Other Tax Professional Can’t Recall/Don’t Know 

Q. 10d - Did The Paid Preparer Offer e-file?

Yes No Can’t Recall 

Q. 17a – If State Income Tax, Is There A Fed/State e-file Option?TOTAL RESPONDENTS 

Yes, Had A Fed/State e-file Option 

No, Did Not Have A Fed/State e-file Option 

No State Income Tax Don’t Know 

Q. 17b – Use Of Combined Fed/State e-file Tax OptionNEW BASE:TOTAL WITH FED-STATE e-file OPTION 

Use Combined Fed/State e-file Option 

Did Not Use Combined Fed/State e-file Option 

Can’t Recall 
Summary & Conclusion

Summary & Conclusion
Summary & Conclusions

Followin

g are t

h

e key fin

din

g

s f

r

o

m t

he 2003 I

RS 

e-file Attitudina

1. Tax

pay

e

rs & T

echnol

ogy: Results of t

he 2003 I

RS e-file A

show a continuation of t

wo important t

rends obs

e

r

ved in ear

 Sl

o

wly, b

u

t s

tea

dily, Taxpayers are increasing their acceptan

 Wit

h a +7 point a

v

erage increase in

T

axpa

yers’ tech leader-like t

h

th

eir tech follower-like thinking over the cours

e of this tra

ckin

g progr

 At the s

ame time, Taxpayers are much more rapidly adoptin

 With a +

21 poi

nt av

erage i

ncre

a

s

e i

n clai

m

ed adoption of that gro

up 

covered in the survey since 1

9

9

8.



T

his suggests that people will a

dopt spe

cific technologies (b

need or even other influ

e

n

ces, s

u

c

h as advertising, wordof-

etc.) ev

e

n before the

y hav

e reach

ed emotional acceptanc

e o

We s

ee this in the cas

e of e-file too, 

where we fo

u

nd t

hat no

attitudinally accepting of e-file ben

e

fits, yet were using i

t.
Summary & Conclusions (Cont’d

2. Segme

nting Tax

p

a

y

e

rs On T

echnol

ogy Acceptan

c

e: As ex

p

e

c

us

e

d to segme

nt Tax

pay

e

r

s by their t

echnology attitude

s an

5 years has age

d (as peopl

e and technol

o

g

y produ

cts hav

s

egme

ntati

o

n

effort thi

s year, we found t

hat Taxpa

yers s

three gro

ups an

d not four as in th

e past. These thr

e

e groups 

 Tech Leaders -- 44% of all Tax

payers, l

eading the wa

y in acceptan

 Tech Followers --

2

5

% of Taxpayers, cauti

ous abo

ut technology, b

 Tech Laggards --

3

1

% of Taxpayers, resisting technology yet acco

 All three groups c

an -- and, if the 80% goal is to be reac

oppor

tunities for increasing usage of e-file; though em

Followers and Laggards, who are the key to future gro

education about the b

enefits of e-file. 

 One further note: the new s

egme

ntation of Taxpayers alig

s

egme

ntation of Tax Preparers

(in 

t

h

e

Preparer

Attitu

dina

I

R

S now has a b

asis for comparison of acceptance and ado

its two most impor

tant targets.
Summary & Conclusions (Cont’d

3. Segmenting Tax

p

a

yers On Other Attitude

s & Be

h

avi

o

r

s: Th

FCB and 

I

RS for e

xpan

ding the study thi

s y

ear to i

nclu

Tax

pay

e

r prospects, togethe

r wi

t

h de

e

p

e

r anal

y

sis of Taxpay

other possibl

e opportunities for growt

h of 

e-file, in

cludin

g o

p

 Retu

r

n Ty

p

e --

T

h

e high 

o

pportunity seg

ments here are the 

S

elf-S

32

% actual e-file usage, b

oth are well b

elow the usage level

s of 

even t

hough t

he Paper Filers in t

hese segments are more tech-forw

and accepta

nce of 

e-file tha

n Paper Filers in the oth

er two seg

ment

is a guide, then t

he barrier to use for th

e Self-Simple is a profou

n

d 

its benefits a

nd high comfort with paper filing. The barriers amon

explore

d (

since this stu

dy does not pro

vide usage diagnosti

cs).

 Attitudes Toward e-file --

T

axpayers split into two segme

nts in 

e-file -- with 4

6

% being e-file Believers and 54

% bei

ng e-file Sk

having high e-file use (60

%), the

o

pportunity here are the Skeptic

of somewhat weaker awareness of e-file gen

erally and sharply lowe

 Filing Behavior -- In t

erms of when and why Taxpayers file, there 

them (Get Around To It, Late But Not Last, and Last Possible Minut

or later) account for 58

% of all Tax

payers and have significantly 

oth

er s

egment (ASAPs). T

heir reasons for later filing and non-use 

Ret

urn Type (th

e

y skew strongly toward Complex returns). 

communicatio

ns or messages which address this Return Type and 

e
Summary & Conclusions (Cont’d

3. Segmenting Tax

p

a

yers On Othe

r Attitude

s & Behavi

o

r

s (Cont’d

 Spanish-Language Taxpayers -- With over h

alf of this segme

with usage of e-file highest among this Ret

urn T

ype, the Spanish

usi

ng e-file at a higher rate tha

n now (

only 31% are users). So, wh

The pro

blem (

and the opp

ortunity here) appears to be weak aware

e-file voluntarily vs. 85

% among other Tax

payers. IRS’s commu

n

should h

elp with t

his problem.

 V-Coders -- To better understand this segment and why the

y do n

are and found that they are essentially lat

er-season, Com

plex f

exception

al rat

e (7

9

%) and who are n

ot telling their Preparer to e-fi

of their own in

s

e

c

urities about e-file (two-thirds of them are e-file S

or because of Pre

parer dominance i

n filing or negative Preparer in

Given this profile and the apparent dependence on Preparers in thi

s 

would seem to be the Preparer.

 Quitters & Lapsed Users -- While we went into t

his particular 

s

hould be on e-file Quitt

ers, we found instead t

h

at Quitters are a v

real opp

ortunity are the L

apsed Users of e-file (15

% of all Tax

payers

used 

e-file in the past, but not during the most recent t

a

x

y

ear, a

again. The

y are sk

e

wed female (

6

2

%) a

nd toward Self preparatio

suggests that t

hey c

an be reached wit

h targeted media and a

p

pro

pr
Appendix Appendix
Methodological Appendix
Methodological Appendix



E

ach wav

e

of t

h

e study i

s conduct

ed by tel

ephone from RMR’s

nation

al 

NJ. Thi

s wave of th

e study w

as conducted January 2

4--M

arch 

2, 2003.

 The sample eac

h year consists of a nationally representativ

e Random S

U.S. Tax

payers each year, drawn from a computer-generated rando

m 

listed and unlist

ed telephone households. In 2003, the IR

S also ad

Language Taxpayers up to the 200 l

evel (with these intervi

ews conducted 

 To qualify for the study, Tax

payers hav

e to be ages 18-64, employed, an

previous tax year (in this y

ear’s case -- 2

002 for tax year 2001).

 Int

ervi

ews are conducted during eve

nin

g hours (

5--9 p.m. in each ti

averaging about 1

5 minutes per respond

ent. To assure that the survey 

audience, repeated c

ontacts are made on eac

h interviewing attempt to a

-- 64% in t

he 2003 study.

 Note: data are weig

hted to reflect th

e previou

s year’s tax filing patterns 

u

se of filing methods in the survey te

n

ds to be n

aturally very close to ac

only a very minor effect on dat

a. 

 As shown in the following chart, the demographic c

o

m

p

o

sition of the R

each year, though with a naturally incre

asing median HH income along 

HHs with children -- both mirroring Census trends occurring during the tra
Demographic Composition Of Tracking 

Taxpayer Taxpayer Taxpayer T

Attitudinal Attitudinal Attitudinal A

Tracking Tracking Tracking T

1998 1999 2000 

BASE: 1017 1005 1000 

%%%

QA--Ge

n

d

er

Male 46 48 49 Femal

e 54 52 51 

QB--Averag

e Ag

e 40 41 41 

Q15--Marital Stat

u

s

Married 62 60 60 Single 23 24 24 S

e

parate

d, Div

orce

d or Wid

o

w

e

d 15 16 16 

Q13--Averag

e H

H Size 2.

9 3.0 2.

9 

Q1

4--Pres

ence of Children

Hav

e Children 54 52 48 

N

o children pres

ent 46 48 49 

Q17--Me

dian H

H I

ncom

e (000) $43K $47K $47K 
Detailed Support Data Fo

Tech Acceptance Segmen
Tech Attitudes Of The 3 Technology Accepta

Technological Leader Statements

(% Agree)

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

% 

Have a good idea of what the World Wide Web is 97 I think most technology can be trusted 80 

Wish all government forms could be filed by computer 92 I'm one of the first to try new technology 71 The kind of person who needs lots of phone technology 61 If I could, I'd do all my financial dealings by computer 74 

The easiest way to do banking is by personal computer 75 Rather e-mail friends/family than talk to them on phone 37 BOLD GREEN=SCORES HIGH ON THIS ITEM; BOLD BLUE=SCORES NOTABLY LOWER THAN Q1 -- Agree Completely or Agree Somewhat With Each Statement
Tech Attitudes Of The 3 Tech Acceptance Se

Technological Follower Statements

(% Agree)

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

% 

Most kids can handle new tech.; most adults can’t 51 

When you order by phone, you're really taking a chance 35 

Should never put financial information on a computer 29 

I cannot keep up with all the new technology 30 

We control computers today, someday they’ll control us 20 

Can’t imagine filing taxes except using paper returns 6 

Computers scare me -- so much that can go wrong 7 

I'm one who has no luck programming a VCR 17 

BOLD RED=SCORES HIGH ON THIS ITEM; BOLD BLUE=SCORES NOTABLY LOWER THAN OT

Q1 -- Agree Completely or Agree Somewhat With Each Statement
Use Of Technology Among Tech Acceptan

% Use Each Regularly/Occasionally

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

% 

Use of a telephone to order from a catalog 66 

Use of a PC for work 87 Use of a PC for entertainment 84 

Use of the Internet to search for information 98 Use of a Debit Card to pay for purchases 79 

Use of a telephone for doing personal banking 66 

Use of e-mail for personal correspondence 95 

Use of e-mail for business correspondence 84 

Use of the Internet to order products or services 88 

Use of a PC for doing personal banking 65 

Use of Government Websites 71 

Use of Beeper/Pager 29 

Use of Broadband, DSL, or cable modem 59 

Use of a PDA, like a Palm Pilot 31 

BOLD GREEN=SCORES HIGH ON THIS ITEM; BOLD BLUE=SCORES NOTABLY LOWER THAN Q3--Use Each Technology
Psychographics Of Technology Acceptanc

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

% 

I like to be around people who are open-minded 98 I like to experiment with new ways of doing things 94 

Over next few years, my financial situation will improve 93 

I make time for things that are really important to me 93 My family is my main source of satisfaction 90 I need to remind myself to slow down and enjoy life 77 

Like to be up on latest events, movies, fashions, etc. 67 Generally make decisions on what the group will do 66 

I often worry about money 61 

I like to do a lot of entertaining in my home 58 

Prefer to shop better stores -- though things cost more 50 Like to be in situations where unexpected can happen 47 

Having a lot of money is very important to me 47 The world is changing too fast 46 

I worry that I don't spend enough time with my family 42 I live from pay check to pay check 40 

Am more comfortable at computer than anywhere else 27 

It is the luxuries in life that make life worthwhile 25 

BOLD RED=SCORES HIGH ON THIS ITEM; BOLD BLUE=SCORES NOTABLY LOWER THAN OT

Q18--Agree Completely or Agree Somewhat With Each Statement

% Agree With Each Statement
Demographics Of The Technology Acceptan

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

%

QA--Gender

Male 50 Female 50 

QB--Average Age 38 

Q15--Marital Status

Married 62 Single 26 Separated, Divorced or Widowed 12 

Q13--Average HH Size 3.0 

Q14--Presence of Children

Have Children 47 No children present 51 

Q17--Median HH Income (000) $61.9 

Q27 – Education

Some College or More 80 No College 19 

Qs E-1 – E-3 – Spanish-Language Taxpayers 7 
Distribution Of Tech Acceptance Segments 

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

%

Region

Area #1 -- Northeast 11 Area #2 – Mid-Atlantic 20 Area #3 – Southeast 15 Area #4 – Great Lakes Region 15 

Area #5 – Mid-America 18 Area #6 – West (Excl. CA) 10 Area #7 – California 13 
Awareness Of e-file Among Tech Acceptan

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

% 

Q4 -- Unaided Method Awareness

Self-Prepared Paper Return 80 Paper Return Using a Tax Professional 61 Electronic Filing Using a Tax Professional 44 On-Line Filing (Total) 42 

On-Line Filing w/On-Line Company 25 On-Line Filing w/Software 26 

TeleFile 28 

e-file (non-specific) 20 

Net Mentions Of e-file Products 89 

Q4+5--Total Method Awareness (Unaided + Aided)

Self-Prepared Paper Return 97 Paper Return Using a Tax Professional 99 Electronic Filing Using a Tax Professional 96 On-Line Filing (Total) 92 

On-Line Filing w/On-Line Company 68 

On-Line Filing w/Software 84 

TeleFile 59 

e-file (non-specific) 55 Net Mentions Of e-file Products 100 
Usage Of e-file Among Tech Acceptance 

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

% 

Q6--Methods Ever Used

Self-Prepared Paper Return 74 Paper Return Using a Tax Professional 63 Electronic Filing Using a Tax Professional 41 On-Line Filing (Total) 28 

On-Line Filing w/On-Line Company 11 On-Line Filing w/Software 23 

TeleFile 16 e-file (non-specific) 18 Net Mentions Of e-file Products 64 

Q7-- Method Used In Past Year (2002) 

Self-Prepared Paper Return 29 Paper Return Using a Tax Professional 25 Electronic Filing Using a Tax Professional 28 On-Line Filing (Total) 12 

On-Line Filing w/On-Line Company 3 On-Line Filing w/Software 10 

TeleFile 2 

e-file (non-specific) 5 

Net Mentions Of e-file Products 46 
Tech Segment Consideration/Recommend

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

% 

Q8--Methods They Would Consider Using

Self-Prepared Paper Return 36 Paper Return Using a Tax Professional 46 Electronic Filing Using a Tax Professional 58 On-Line Filing (Total) 57 

On-Line Filing w/On-Line Company 36 

On-Line Filing w/Software 47 

TeleFile 30 

e-file (non-specific) 42 Net Mentions Of e-file Products 88 

Q9-- Methods Would Recommend To A Friend 

Self-Prepared Paper Return 33 Paper Return Using a Tax Professional 47 Electronic Filing Using a Tax Professional 52 On-Line Filing (Total) 43 

On-Line Filing w/On-Line Company 23 

On-Line Filing w/Software 36 

TeleFile 22 

e-file (non-specific) 29 Net Mentions Of e-file Products 81 
Filing Behavior Among Tech Acceptance 

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

% 

Q. 15 -Type Of Return Filed

Basic Return With N

o

Schedules Attached 44 

Return With Schedules Attached 56 

Q. 16 -Additional Forms/Attachments Filed

Form 2106 –

The

Business Ex

p

ense F

orm 15 

Sche

dule “C” 12 

Sche

dule “E” 4

Sche

dule “F” 3 

Q. 14 -

Did You 

Receive the Earned Income Tax Credit?

Yes 22 No 51 

D

on’t Kno

w 27 

Q. 11 -

Result of Tax Filing

Balance Due T

o The IR

S 22 

Rec

eived A Refund 75 

Had A Zero Balance 2 

Q. 12 -

How Paid the Balance Due

NEW BASE: TOTAL WITH BALANCE DUE 100 

Automatic Withdrawal fro

m a Checking/Savin

gs 10 

Credit Card 3 Wrote A Chec

k

8

0

Q. 13 -

Method of Receiving Refund 

NEW BASE: TOTAL RECEIVED A REFUND 334 

Direct Deposit t

o Checking/

Savings 48 

Rec

eived A Check From 

The IRS 50 
Filing Behavior Among Tech Acceptance Se

Tech 

Leaders 

% 

Q. 10a -

Method Of Preparing Paper 

Return

NEW BASE:TOTAL PAPER RETURN USERS

237 

Pen/Pencil 47 On A Computer, Then Printed 

Out And Mailed (VCoder) 49 

Can’t Recall/Don’t Know

4 

Q.

10b -

Who Prepared Return

TOTAL RESPONDENTS 450

Paid Preparer 53 

Self, Family Member, Or Friend 47 

Q. 10c -

If Paid Preparer

Above, Was the Preparer

A...

NEW BASE:TOTAL WHO USED A PAID PREPARER

218

Certified Public Accountant (

CPA) 68 

Other Tax Professional 20 Can’t Recall/Don’t Know 12 

Q. 10d -

Did The Paid Preparer Offer e-file?

Yes 65 No 23 Can’t Recall 13 

Q. 17a –

If State Income Tax, Is There A Fed/State e-file Option?

TOTAL RESPONDENTS 450

Yes, Had A Fed/State e-file

Option 24 

No, Did Not Have A Fed/State e-file Option 31 

No State Income Tax 6 Don’t Kno

w 40 

Q. 17b –

Use Of Combined Fed/State e-file Tax Option

NEW BASE:TOTAL WITH 

FED-STATE e-file OPTION 105

Use Combined Fed/State e-file

Option 49 

Did Not Use Combined Fed/State e-file Option 40 

Can’t Recall 11
Filing Behavior Among Tech Acceptance Se

Tech 

Leaders 

% 

(450) 

Return T

y

p

e:

Self-Simple 26 Self-Comple

x 21 

Paid-Simple 18 Paid-C

o

m

plex 35 

T

otal Simple 44 

T

otal Complex 56 

T

otal Self 47 

T

otal Paid 53 
Filing Behavior Among Tech Acceptance Se

Tech 

Leaders 

% 

(450) 

Filing Behavior (Wh

en File Each Y

e

ar):

As S

o

on As Possible

4

0 

When I G

et Aroun

d

T

o It 40 

Late, But N

ot At The Last Minute

7

At The Last Possible Minute

9

Varies/Can’t Recall 4
Reaching The Technology Acceptance S

Media Habits -- Print & Radio

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

%

Q21--Media Read/Subscribed ToYour Local Newspaper(s) (NOTE: CAPTURED BUT NOT FEASIBLE) 69 The Internet 76 News Magazines -- Time, Newsweek, USN&WR 29 Entertainment Magazines -- Ent. Weekly, People, etc. 25 Women’s Magazines – Oprah, Rosie, Family Circle etc. 24 Sports Magazines such as SI or Inside Sports 22 Business Magazines -- Bus Week or Forbes 23 

National Newspapers -- NY Times or USA Today 24 Fashion Magazines -- Allure, Elle, Cosmopolitan, etc. 20 Computer Magazines 19 Q22--Radio Stations Listened To Regularly

FM Music Stations 89 All News Stations 37 AM Mixed Format Stations (Talk + News + Features) 26 All Talk Stations 27 AM Music Stations 14 All Sports/Sports Talk Stations 11 Financial News Stations 14 
Reaching The Technology Acceptance Seg

Media Habits -- TV

Tech 

Leaders 

BASE: 450 

%

Q23--TV Programming Watched RegularlyEarly evening news programs 66 All news cable -- CNN, Fox, Headline News, MSNBC 65 Late evening news programs 57 Non-premium cable movie channels such as AMC 53 Sports programs (e.g. Tennis, Baseball, etc.) 52 Cable family/life programs 41 Early evening investigative shows 38 

Premium cable movie channels -- HBO, Showtime, etc. 40 Early eve. enter. shows such as Entertainment Tonight 37 Early morning shows -- Today, This Morning, etc. 33 Late night talk or variety shows 31 Game shows 17 Later morning talk -- Regis & Kelly, etc. 9 Afternoon soap operas 5