The Internal Revenue Service, tossing aside the principle of “let the buyer beware,” is drawing up regulations establishing licensing requirements for hundreds of thousands of tax preparers across the country.

They’re regulations with good intentions, but arguments by opponents have validity as well. Additionally, there’s the issue of government trying to fix something that might not really be broken.

Isolated problems could be handled on an individual basis rather than impacting everyone because of problems with a few.

An evaluation of arguments on both sides is appropriate to enable taxpayers to form their own opinions.

Meanwhile, a federal lawsuit challenging the new requirements will be starting its trek through the courts this week.

In preparing the new rules over the span of two years, the IRS has said the regulations are necessary to ensure that taxpayers who hire tax preparers get high-quality service.

According to an Associated Press article in Monday’s Butler Eagle, the regulations require most paid tax preparers to pass a federal competency exam and take ongoing continuing education courses to keep up with tax law changes.

That IRS logic is reasonable.

But opponents also make good points, even absent the thinking of “let the buyer beware.”

“The likely result of these regulations is less options for consumers and higher prices,” said Bob Ewing, a spokesman for the Arlington, Va.-based Institute for Justice, which is filing the lawsuit on behalf of three plaintiffs.

The Institute for Justice not only contends that the IRS lacks the statutory authority to require the licenses without congressional authorization, but says the new rules also are bad policy that would put mom-and-pop tax preparers out of business.

The institute says there would be unfair advantages to lawyers and certified public accountants, who would be exempt from many of the new licensing requirements.

That opinion also is a logical assessment of the issue.

It will be the responsibility of the courts to weigh the arguments of both sides. It seems clear that there is no middle ground for the courts — either the rules will remain or they won’t.

If the rules do remain, there will be new costs and requirements for the mom-and-pop tax preparers that will cause some to close up shop rather than endure what they will perceive to be too much of a hassle.

The Institute for Justice, which is a nonprofit libertarian law firm, has made some other points on which the courts and taxpayers should reflect. One of them involves the growth in licensing requirements over the past 60 years.

Only 5 percent of the U.S. workforce was subject to licensure in the 1950s; by 2006, that figure had grown to 30 percent.

That trend has prompted the institute to file numerous legal challenges over the years.

The principle of “let the buyer beware” has stood the test of time, and the regulations in question apparently weren’t spawned by taxpayers clamoring in the wake of having paid for substandard tax-preparation.

It would seem that the IRS had more important things to do — like going after tax cheats, large and small — than spend two years on this tax-preparer-regulations exercise.

Of course, people who prepare their own tax returns could care less how the issue is resolved.