كتابة تعليق

Does the introduction explain the objective of the research presented in the preprint?

Partly

The forensic accounting of the keyword may not related to the topic since it should be focused on the tax disputes rather than discover the fake cash flow or book keeping.

Are the methods well-suited for this research?

Somewhat appropriate

The methodology should be elaborate to discuss why IRS should reply on the human factor. The comparison and sample selection should be provide those details.

Are the conclusions supported by the data?

Somewhat supported

Since the paper focused about the lack of senior IRS member, it should addressed the cost and time consuming of the procedure. Also, the paper should discuss what "human" element would be important when you faced the tax disputes. The nature of paper would treated as the commentary report of the IRS staff rather than the difficulty. Also, single data would not be sufficient to support the argument.

Are the data presentations, including visualizations, well-suited to represent the data?

Neither appropriate and clear nor inappropriate and unclear

It has been illustrated the data but it did not related to the analysis part. The discussion would be improved with different angle.

How clearly do the authors discuss, explain, and interpret their findings and potential next steps for the research?

Somewhat unclearly

The future research gap is missing. Also, the discussion too simple to focus on the senior staff. The IRS adopted techniques to enhance their service is not contradicts with the tax disrupts. Moreover, the electric tax platform would be reduce the waiting time which would be the potential benefit. The paper should explain why senior staff retirement would affected the quality of the IRS service.

Is the preprint likely to advance academic knowledge?

Not likely

The paper have illustrated the fact but did not enhance the discuss of the IRS system. It may provide alternative by introduce other method to avoid the issue.

Would it benefit from language editing?

Yes

Would you recommend this preprint to others?

Yes, but it needs to be improved

The idea would be familiar with the public during US. However, the reference did not contain too much at all. The paper should discover more literature to elaborate the point of view.

Is it ready for attention from an editor, publisher or broader audience?

No, it needs a major revision

The paragraph is too short without explicit methodology, adopted data analytics would be benefits for the paper.

Competing interests

The author declares that they have no competing interests.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

The author declares that they did not use generative AI to come up with new ideas for their review.