Attachment 1 - Vendor Response Form ITMT.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 142 KB Posted
- Attached to
- International Tax Modeling Tool
- Solicitation number
- 26-22-APMO
About this file
This is a Vendor Response Form for a Request for Information (RFI) concerning the International Tax Modeling Tool (ITMT) procurement by the Internal Revenue Service's Large Business & International division. The form is designed to collect comprehensive vendor capability and company profile information from potential contractors interested in developing a software solution for modeling international tax provisions, including Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) provisions and emerging tax regulations.
Part I of the form requests standard company profile information including SAM.gov Unique Entity Identifier, technical points of contact, company size classification (small business or other), and socio-economic status (HUBZone, WOSB, SDVOSB, 8(a), or other classifications). The form also requires vendors to identify applicable NAICS codes and Product Service Codes, and to disclose any existing General Services Administration contract vehicles held, including GSA Multiple Award Schedule (MAS), OASIS variants, Alliant 2 and 3, 8a STAR III, VETS2, POLARIS, and NASA SEWP contracts, along with employee count and subcontracting capabilities. Part II contains 17 technical capability questions requiring detailed responses (limited to 3,000 characters each) addressing expertise in international tax provisions, software development experience with tax modeling tools, solution flexibility across diverse taxpayer profiles, service delivery locations, development timelines, staffing resources, tax law update processes, concurrent user capacity, data processing capabilities, data storage architectures, FedRAMP authorization status, vendor support options, XML data ingestion for tax return replication, implementation and deployment processes, pricing and contract structure recommendations (Firm-Fixed-Price, Labor-Hour, or Time-and-Materials), and total estimated costs including recurring annual expenses.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFI - ITMT LBI.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Part I Company Profile
| Vendor Response Form: Request for Information (RFI) International Tax Modeling Tool (ITMT) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1. Company Name | 1a. Address | 2. System for Award Management (SAM.gov) Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) | 3. Company technical Point of Contact (POC) information to include name, title, telephone number, email address, website, and social media if applicable. | 4. Company Size: Small Business or Other than small business | 5a. Is your company a classified as a Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone)? Yes = HUBZone, No = Cell is Blank | 5b. | Is your company a classified as a Woman Owned Small Business (WOSB)? If no, cell is left blank. | 5c. Is your company a classified as a Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB)? If no, cell is left blank. | 5d. Is your company a classified as a 8(a)? If no, cell is left blank. | 5e. Does your company have another socio-economic classifications, which is not already mentioned? | 6a. Recommended North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)(s), please list one NACIS code per cell. | 6b. Other recommended | North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)(s), please list one NACIS code per cell. | 6c. Suggested Product Service Code(s) (PSCs), please list one PSC code per cell. | 6d. Other Suggested Product Service Code(s) (PSCs), please list one PSC code per cell. | 7a. Is your firm a contract holder of General Service Administration (GSA) Multiple Award Schedule (MAS) ? If no, cell is left blank. | 7a1.List one applicable MAS SIN? | 7a2. List one other applicable MAS SIN? | 7b. Is your firm a contract holder of GSA One Acquisition Solution for Integrated Services (OASIS) Small Business (SB) ? If no, cell is left blank. | 7b1. Which applicable GSA OASIS SB Pool ? | 7c. Is your firm a contract holder of GSA OASIS Plus (OASIS+) If no, cell is left blank. | 7c1. Which applicable GSA OASIS+ Pool ? | 7d. Is your firm a contract holder of GSA OASIS 8a (OASIS 8a) If no, cell is left blank. | 7d1. Which applicable GSA OASIS 8a Pool ? | 7e. Is your firm a contract holder of GSA Alliant 2? If no, cell is left blank. | 7e1. List one applicable Alliant 2 NAICS? | 7f. Is your firm a contract holder of GSA Alliant 3 ? If no, cell is left blank. | 7f1. List one applicable Alliant 3 NAICS? | 7g. Is your firm a contract holder of GSA 8a STAR III ? If no, cell is blank. | 7g1. List one applicable 8a STAR III NAICS? | 7h. Is your firm a contract holder of GSA VETS2 ? If no, cell is left blank. | 7h1. List one applicable VET2 NAICS? | 7i. Is your firm a contract holder of GSA POLARIS ? If no, cell is left blank. | 7i1. List one applicable POLARIS NAICS? | 7j. Is your firm a contract holder of NASA SEWP 334111 Group A ? If no, cell is left blank. | 7k. Is your firm a contract holder of NASA SEWP 541519 Group B ? If no, cell is left blank. | 7l. Is your firm a contract holder of NASA SEWP 541519 Group C ? If no, cell is left blank. | 7m. Is your firm a contract holder of NASA SEWP 541519 Group D ? If no, cell is left blank. | 7n. If your firm is a contract holder of a Governmentwide Acquisition Contracts (GWACs) not already listed, please list GWAC. | 7o. Provide contract number for each vehicle. | 7p. Does your firm hold a contract on any other GWAC? | 8. Number of Employees | 9. Subcontracting / partnering/ team possibilities |
| Instructions: |
| Complete Tabs Part I and II |
| Answer all questions |
| If the answer is No, the cell should remain blank. Do not type N/A, No, or None. |
| If your firm does not hold a GWAC contract, skip questions 7a - 7o (Leave blank), complete question 7p, and the remaining questions. |
Part II Technical Capability
| Part II - Capabilities Questions | Vendor Answers (3000 character limit) |
| 1. Does your firm have expertise in international tax provisions, including TCJA and non-TCJA provisions, and newly issued tax provisions (e.g. OB3)? If yes, provide a description of relevant experience, including representative clients and the nature of services performed. | |
| 2. Describe your firm’s experience in developing software tools for modeling international tax provisions: | |
| a. Identify the specific international tax provisions modeled | |
| b. Describe the scale and complexity of the models developed | |
| c. Specify the tools, platforms, and technologies utilized | |
| d. Clarify your firm’s role (e.g., solution architecture, design, development, implementation) | |
| e. Identify the client(s) served | |
| f. Provide any additional information about relevant experience | |
| 3. Describe the flexibility of your solution in modeling calculations across diverse taxpayer profiles and fact patterns, particularly when using a filed tax return as the baseline input. Include any design limitations: | |
| a. Identify components of tax modeling that are inherently difficult to standardize | |
| b. Explain how the tool accommodates varying taxpayer profiles | |
| c. Describe how the system adapts to new or evolving tax regulations | |
| 4. Specify the location(s) where services will be performed and the extent to which services can be delivered remotely versus on-site. | |
| 5. Provide an estimated timeline for development and customization of the solution (e.g., in weeks or months). | |
| 6. Identify the resources required to develop and implement the tax modeling tool, including staffing (roles and team size) and supporting technologies. | |
| 7. Describe the process and frequency for updating the tool to reflect changes in tax law, including governance and deployment mechanisms. | |
| 8. How many concurrent users can your product support? Describe any system limitations or constraints related to user concurrency and performance. | |
| 9. Describe the product’s maximum processing capacity, including supported data volumes, record counts, and concurrent workloads. | |
| 10. Describe the available data storage and retrieval architectures for the solution, including deployment on government-furnished infrastructure (e.g., local machines, on-premises servers, or government cloud) versus vendor-managed environments. Provide a comparative analysis of each option, including security, compliance, performance, scalability, accessibility, and operational control considerations. | |
| 11. Provide your current FedRAMP authorization status, including the authorization level (Low, Moderate, or High), the authorizing body, and whether the authorization is active and listed in the FedRAMP Marketplace. If your solution is not currently authorized, indicate whether you are pursuing FedRAMP authorization and your anticipated timeline. | |
| 12. Assuming the solution is customized for exclusive IRS use, describe available options for ongoing vendor support, including service models, service level agreements (SLAs), and long-term maintenance considerations. | |
| 13. Describe the solution’s capability to ingest, or be modified to ingest, XML data to replicate an “as-filed” tax return. Include details on data ingestion, validation, transformation/mapping processes, and any constraints (e.g., number of entities, tax years, or file size limitations). | |
| 14. Describe the setup, configuration, customization, and deployment process for the solution. Include methodologies, tools, or accelerators used to enhance efficiency, along with estimated timelines, required resources, and key factors affecting implementation speed. | |
| 15. Recommend appropriate pricing and contract structure (e.g., Firm-Fixed-Price, Labor-Hour, Time-and-Materials), including a rationale for the proposed approach. | |
| 16. Provide an estimated total cost to deliver the full scope of the requirement, including recurring annual costs. | |
| 17. Provide any additional comments, recommendations, or insights that would assist the IRS in refining this requirement or evaluating potential solutions. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .