|
Computer Privacy Digest Vol 2 #006
NOTICE: TO ALL CONCERNED Certain text files and messages contained on this site deal with activities and devices which would be in violation of various Federal, State, and local laws if actually carried out or constructed. The webmasters of this site do not advocate the breaking of any law. Our text files and message bases are for informational purposes only. We recommend that you contact your local law enforcement officials before undertaking any project based upon any information obtained from this or any other web site. We do not guarantee that any of the information contained on this system is correct, workable, or factual. We are not responsible for, nor do we assume any liability for, damages resulting from the use of any information on this site.
Computer Privacy Digest Tue, 12 Jan 93 Volume 2 : Issue: 006
Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears
Re: zip+4 codes
Re: The UPS clipboard
Re: Radar Detector Prohibitions
SSN Flames
Re: SSN and new baby
Re: SSN and new baby
Re: SSN and New Baby
Re: SSN and new baby
Re: SSN and new baby
Re: SSN and new baby
Re: SSN and new baby
Re: SSN and new baby
The Computer Privacy Digest is a forum for discussion on the
effect of technology on privacy. The digest is moderated and
gatewayed into the USENET newsgroup comp.society.privacy
(Moderated). Submissions should be sent to
[email protected] and administrative requests to
[email protected].
Back issues are available via anonymous ftp on ftp.pica.army.mil
[129.139.160.133].
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Rhonda Landy <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 16:11:48 PST
Subject: Re: zip+4 codes
Michael D. Adams writes:
>And going to the extreme...I currently live at a unique address that is
>served by not one, but two zip+4 codes -- one for this address, and one
>for this block.
>
>Of course, that might be because I live in a church.... ;)
Not so extreme...My apartment building corresponds to two zip+4-digit
zip codes: 5445 and 5402. And the one I lived in before that *also*
corresponded to two zip+4 codes.
If the codes overlap, they can't be all that specific...
rhl
------------------------------
Subject: Re: The UPS clipboard
From: "Roy M. Silvernail" <[email protected]>
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 01:01:23 CST
Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN
Jarrod Staffen <[email protected]> writes:
> BTW, UPS is not ignoring security risks. They just ignore people
> who ask about safety risks. They know what is possible.
Doesn't that strike you as extremely arrogant?
> IMO, though, I think they should do something more to ensure the
> safety of their electronic data.
And IMO, they should be a little more forthcoming to their customers
about the precautions they do take (if, in fact, they take any at all...
I'm still not very convinced). As a computer professional, I was
not exactly enthralled to be summarily dismissed by a marketing droid
who obviously had no grasp of the technical issues I raised.
--
Roy M. Silvernail | #include <stdio.h> | "press to test"
roy%[email protected] | main(){ | <click>
[email protected] | float x=1; | "release
| printf("Just my $%.2f.\n",x/50);} | to detonate"
------------------------------
From: [email protected] (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Radar Detector Prohibitions
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 19:11:22 GMT
In article <[email protected]> Richard Pierson <[email protected].com> writes:
:There is also a product on the market from uniden that
:you plug your detector into and when is senses a radar
:detector shuts off your radar unit, a Detectors, detector,
:detector so to say (Just saw one in truckstops of america
:last wednesday for $90.00).
This sounds like a con to me; how can you detect a radar-detector? Surely
they're passive devices? Also, why would anyone except the police want one?
Or do we have one too many 'detectors' in the description above?
G
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 93 19:50:57 -0500
From: Susanna Elaine Johnson <[email protected]>
Subject: SSN Flames
Recently I posted in this conference an article which is in my
possession concerning the structure of Social Security Numbers.
I did this because there has been discussion in this conference
on the uses and abuses of SSN's and I thought it would be cogent,
and also public spirited, to distribute the information at hand.
I have received a number of flames in response, most attacking my
grammer (which is not mine, I copied but did not write the
article), and/or my typing. THIS IS NOT NICE - PLEASE DESIST!
If you can use the information I presented, be my guest. If
however you wish to attack me, personally, because I am not (and
do not pretend to be) a professional typist, you know where you
can head in. For those who have more manners than to behave in
this manner, "Gentlemen, I apologize for the disturbance." As
for those who have been attacking me, and you know who ayou are,
PLEASE STOP!
Anna Johnson
N.b. In response to the POLITE requests for the date of the
table, it was November, 1987. I have an updated table dated
8-1-91, and I WAS going to post it, but after THIS...
AJ
[Moderator's Note: Anna is right. She posted her message to provide
useful information to this digest. If some of the material is out of
date or wrong, there is a proper way of correcting it. ._dennis ]
------------------------------
From: "M. Adams/StarOwl" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: SSN and new baby
Originator: [email protected]
Reply-To: [email protected]
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 23:38:38 GMT
Apparently-To: [email protected]
Hans Lachman <[email protected]> writes:
>It would seem reasonable to decline their offer to set your kid up with an
>SSN since he won't need one until he starts working.
According to the IRS, if you wish to claim a child over age 1 as a
dependent for tax purposes, that child *must* have a SSN.
True, the kid doesn't need a SSN for hirself, but the parent(s)/guardian(s)
might need the kid to have a SSN.....
--
Michael D. Adams | Bigotry not being founded on reason cannot be
[email protected] | removed by argument. -- Samuel Johnson
[email protected] | There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned
NBCS: B1f+t-w+g+k++s+me+h-qv | lies, and statistics. -- Benjamin Disraeli
------------------------------
From: James Davies <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: SSN and new baby
Organization: Cray Computer Corporation
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 04:20:31 GMT
In article <[email protected]> [email protected] (Hans Lachman) writes:
>In article <[email protected]> [email protected].ma.us (John R. Levine) writes:
>>Getting an SSN for a child involves the parent filling out and signing a
>>form and sending it to the SSA. What's the hospital going to do if you
>>refuse to fill it out, keep the baby?
>
>It would seem reasonable to decline their offer to set your kid up with an
>SSN since he won't need one until he starts working.
The IRS now requires that the SSN be supplied for a dependent on your
income tax form, at least when the dependent is over the age of 2.
So you can refuse to get a SSN for your kid, but it'll cost you the
ability to get a deduction for the kid on your income tax.
[Moderator's Note: For those individuals/couples (not me) whoose income
is over a certain threshold, the exemption is phased out. ._dennis ]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 7:18:47 -0500 (EST)
From: "Dave Niebuhr, BNL CCD, 516-282-3093" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: SSN and New Baby
In Computer Privacy Digest V2 #005
Hans Lachman <[email protected]> writes:
>In article <[email protected]> [email protected].ma.us (John R. Levine) writes:
>>>What experience have people in this group had in keeping the SSN of a newborn
>>>private? I have heard that some hospitals insist on submitting the paperwork
>>>to the Social Security Administration to obtain the number.
>
>
>It would seem reasonable to decline their offer to set your kid up with an
>SSN since he won't need one until he starts working. I was born in '63,
>and didn't get an SSN until around age 10, and the world didn't come to an
>end. I suggest you just act like not having a number is the most natural
>thing in the world, and maybe we'll infect others with that attitude.
Since the Infernal Revenue Service requires a SSN for all dependents over
the age of one if a person is claiming that dependent for tax purposes, it
seems to me to be an easy thing to do when a baby is born.
That ruling went into affect a few years ago and the original limit was
two years old but the IRS dropped it to one about two years ago. Check
your previous year's federal tax returns to obtain the exact date.
Dave
Dave Niebuhr Internet: [email protected] / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093
------------------------------
From: John McGing <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: SSN and new baby
Date: 10 Jan 93 18:54:35 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt MD USA
Reply-To: [email protected]
SSN's and newborns. Now that IRS wants one for any child over age 1, you
can't wait till 18 anymore :(
Also, you don't fill out the SSN forms at the hospital per se, what you
aree to is the use of the birth certificate data (which you gotta have) to
be used by SSA to get the SSN. It's called Enumeration at Birth and works
with the hospital getting the BVS data, permission to share it with SSA
and SSA getting periodic updates from state BVS and issuing the card based
on the BC data. It's not like you fill out an SS-5 at the hospital.
John
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[email protected] or [email protected]
SSA, your FICA tax people woodb!oss2cc!jmcging@soaf1
J.MCGING on GEnie 70142,1357 on Compuserve
------------------------------
From: [email protected] (Fred Webb)
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: SSN and new baby
Date: 11 Jan 1993 14:15:27 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc., Cambridge, MA
In article <[email protected]> Hans Lachman <[email protected]> writes:
>In article <[email protected]> [email protected].ma.us (John R. Levine) writes:
>>>What experience have people in this group had in keeping the SSN of a newborn
>>>private? I have heard that some hospitals insist on submitting the paperwork
>>>to the Social Security Administration to obtain the number.
>
>It would seem reasonable to decline their offer to set your kid up with an
>SSN since he won't need one until he starts working.
Well, things have changed since Hans was born. Now, in order to get an
income tax exemption for the new baby, you have to get a SSN for him, and
supply it on your tax return. There is some sort of an exemption for newborns,
but I think you now have to say that the SSN has been "applied for", and it's
only good for the first year or less.
Even before that, if you wanted to establish any kind of a savings account in
the baby's name (to avoid taxes), you had to supply the baby's SSN to the
institution holding the account. Again, the rules on this have been getting
stricter and stricter, and I don't think you can get away with not suppling
a number for very long.
Now, I don't think there's a privacy issue in the hospital submitting the
paperwork to the SSA on your behalf - just make sure that the address for
returning the Social Security Card is yours, not the hospital's. The SSN
doesn't appear on the application form - it's assigned by the SSA after they
get the paperwork, so there's no way the hospital can find out the SSN
assigned. All the hospital can know is that you have applied for a number.
By insisting on filling out the paperwork, the hospital is mostly doing you a
favor.
-- Fred
------------------------------
From: Dick Grady <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: SSN and new baby
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 07:04:19 GMT
Apparently-To: uunet!comp-society-privacy
In article <[email protected]> Hans Lachman <[email protected]> writes:
>It would seem reasonable to decline their offer to set your kid up with an
>SSN since he won't need one until he starts working. I was born in '63,
>and didn't get an SSN until around age 10, and the world didn't come to an
>end.
Your kid may not a SSN for himself, but *you* will nedd a SSN for him if
you want to claim him as a deduction on your federal income tax.
--
Dick Grady Salem, NH, USA [email protected]
So many newsgroups, so little time!
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 09:52:02 MST
From: Tom Wicklund <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: SSN and new baby
In <[email protected]> [email protected] (Hans Lachman) writes:
>In article <[email protected]> [email protected].ma.us (John R. Levine) writes:
>>>What experience have people in this group had in keeping the SSN of a newborn
>>>private? I have heard that some hospitals insist on submitting the paperwork
>>>to the Social Security Administration to obtain the number.
>>
>>Getting an SSN for a child involves the parent filling out and signing a
>>form and sending it to the SSA. What's the hospital going to do if you
>>refuse to fill it out, keep the baby?
>
>It would seem reasonable to decline their offer to set your kid up with an
>SSN since he won't need one until he starts working. I was born in '63,
>and didn't get an SSN until around age 10, and the world didn't come to an
>end. I suggest you just act like not having a number is the most natural
>thing in the world, and maybe we'll infect others with that attitude.
Nope, you now must get a social security number for your child by
age 1. The SSN must be included on the parent's tax return. This was
to cut down on the number of false dependents reported on tax returns.
[Moderator's Note: This is *only* true if claim him/her as an exemption.
._dennis ]
When I went through this 2 years ago the hospital didn't require
that you fill out the SSN paperwork, it was done as a service since
it'll have to be done within a year anyway (unless you aren't required
to fill out a tax return, which covers very few of us). Of course, if
you don't want to claim your child as a dependent I suppose you don't
need an SSN. I'm not sure the IRS would mind if you pay the extra tax
instead.
I've heard that according to IRS records several million children
disappeared in the U.S. in the couple years after 1986 (when SSNs for
children were first required) -- nonexistent dependents which people
quit listing.
I doubt there's a big privacy issue regarding the child -- the
hospital sends birth information to the social security administration
which sends the SS card and number direct to the parent. There may be
some information on the application which the hospital doesn't have on
either the birth certificate application or insurance records, but I
doubt it's much.
------------------------------
From: Kevin White <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: SSN and new baby
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 17:40:20 GMT
Apparently-To: uunet.uu.net!comp-society-privacy
In article <[email protected]> Hans Lachman <[email protected]> writes:
>
>It would seem reasonable to decline their offer to set your kid up with an
>SSN since he won't need one until he starts working. I was born in '63,
>and didn't get an SSN until around age 10, and the world didn't come to an
>end. I suggest you just act like not having a number is the most natural
>thing in the world, and maybe we'll infect others with that attitude.
>
>Hans Lachman
>[email protected]
Ouch! Bad advice for this tax season! From the 1992 1040A, page 21:
"Any dependent age 1 or older must have a social security number. You
must enter that number in column (3). If you do not enter it or if the
number is wrong, you may have to pay a $50 penalty."
It goes on to describe the procedure for applying for the required SSN
and what to do while waiting. The world won't come to an end if you don't
have it, but it will cost a few dollars...
Kevin
------------------------------
End of Computer Privacy Digest V2 #006
******************************
|
|
