Date: Sat, 15 May 93 15:52:39 EST
Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler <comp-privacy-request@PICA.ARMY.MIL>
From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator <comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL>
To: Comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL
Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V2#042
Computer Privacy Digest Sat, 15 May 93 Volume 2 : Issue: 042
Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears
Re: privacy vs banks (was: Re: I won one!)
[Bear Giles: Re: privacy vs banks (was: Re: I won one!)]
Re: Computer Privacy Digest V2#041
Credit Card without SSN
Re: driver's license for jurors (was: Re: SSN)
Compromised privacy on usenet
DIA Analyst To speak on Eastern Europe: May 17 in DC
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
comp-privacy@pica.army.mil and administrative requests to
comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil.
Back issues are available via anonymous ftp on ftp.pica.army.mil
[129.139.160.133].
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 13 May 93 16:59:56 PDT
From: Brian Gordon <Brian.Gordon@eng.sun.com>
Subject: Re: privacy vs banks (was: Re: I won one!)
A common theme in this discussion seems to be
>In article <comp-privacy2.40.4@pica.army.mil> Jonathan Thornburg writes:
>>In article <comp-privacy2.39.7@pica.army.mil> Bear Giles <bear@eagle.fsl.noaa.gov> writes:
>>>2. I asked about this and she said the bank _requires_ SSNs for any
>>> account. If I went in with $1000 in cash and tried to open a
>>> savings account, agreeing that 33% of all interest will be paid
>>> to the IRS (and 5% to Colorado) to cover any possible income tax,
>>> _they would refuse my business_.
>>
>>Indeed, they're required by law to get an SSN any time they pay interest.
>>This is so they can report the interest to the IRS, who can in turn
>>cross-match this with your tax return to make sure you report that
>>interest as income.
>
>If I agree to pay the maximum marginal tax rate, the IRS should be satisfied
>that _at least_ the proper amount of tax is being paid, without requiring
>my SSN. I know my previous bank had indicated that I did _not_ have to
>provide a SSN for my (existing) interest-bearing checking account, but if
>I declined they would withhold taxes on my interest.
Am I missing something, or is not your IRS "Taxpayer ID" _identical_ with your
SSN? To protect itself, the bank would have to take out and send to the IRS
the 33% or whatever you agree to -- for which they would _need_ your SSN,
right?
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 13 May 93 21:11:00 EDT
From: Brinton Cooper <abc@brl.mil>
Subject: [Bear Giles: Re: privacy vs banks (was: Re: I won one!)]
Organization: The US Army Research Laboratory
Bear Giles <bear@eagle.fsl.noaa.gov> writes, in part
> If I agree to pay the maximum marginal tax rate, the IRS should be satisfied
> that _at least_ the proper amount of tax is being paid, without requiring
> my SSN.
That's his opinion. The LAW state3s that you must give your SSN.
> Besides, this argument is completely irrelevant for accounts which don't
> earn any interest.
WRONG. See below.
> Requiring a SSN on all accounts, despite the customer offering to pay
> excess taxes in order to gain privacy, only makes sense if someone is
> trying to track all _assets_, not just taxes due.
The IRS, by tracking CASH FLOW, was able to charge and convice Al
Capone of tax evasion, for which he went to prison. He was never
convicted of extortion, murder, robbery, or conspiracy to commit any of
these. When you spend more money than you declare, you have
established, in my view, "probable cause" to believe that you have some
undeclared income lying around.
Read your 1040 carefully. You are required to list tax-free income,
such as that from interest-bearing municipal bonds. Again, the tax
people are auditing your cash flow. For this reason, and the reason
that *some* taxpayers lie, the interest payers are required, BY LAW, to
report interest. The SSN is used to report that interest and to compare
it with what you report on your tax return.
The right to do this is claimed to be derived from the Constitutional
right of the federal government to collect taxes.
But I think that you already knew all of this.
_Brint
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 13 May 93 20:11:08 PDT
From: Dave Gomberg <GOMBERG%UCSFVM.BITNET@cmsa.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Re: Computer Privacy Digest V2#041
Robert Jacobson's item on the demise of Caller ID may have in fact turned
me around on the question of whether it is a good idea, but...
The tone of the item was totally unprofessional. Rabid is the word that
comes to mind. It was hard for me to understand what was being said because
the tone was so emotional. I would appreciate it if this group would stick
to facts, not emotions. Does anyone else feel the same? Dave
Dave Gomberg, role model for those who don't ask much in their fantasy lives.
GOMBERG@UCSFVM Internet node UCSFVM.UCSF.EDU fax-> (415)731-7797
------------------------------
From: Cristy <cristy@eplrx7.es.dupont.com>
Subject: Credit Card without SSN
Organization: DuPont Central Research & Development
Date: Fri, 14 May 1993 14:08:42 GMT
I just received my first VISA card without submitting my SSN. I applied
to over 10 different offers I got in the mail. They all turned me down
because I did not submit my SSN except for one.
--
cristy@dupont.com
------------------------------
From: Charles Mattair <mattair@synercom.hounix.org>
Subject: Re: driver's license for jurors (was: Re: SSN)
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX
Date: Fri, 14 May 1993 15:25:54 GMT
In article <comp-privacy2.41.10@pica.army.mil> Mike Brokowski <brokow@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> writes:
<extracts from my orginal article concerning TX use of DPS records for
jury lists deleted>
I seem to have started somewhat of a (very restrained) flame thread here.
To clarify my position, I was not stating my opinion but merely paraphrasing
an article which appeared in the _Houston Chronicle_ shortly before my
original post.
My opinion, FWIW, is adding the DPS records (DLs and DPS issued ID cards) is
a good thing. I didn't add this at the time as I didn't see any particular
relevance.
My only desire is, should the situation arise, to be judged by a competent
jury which takes its job seriously, is relatively unbiased toward either
party and is capable of understanding the issues at hand; in other words,
how the system is supposed to work.
While the new system will pull in individuals who are not qualified
to serve, as does the old system, I must add; voire dire should eliminate them.
--
Charles Mattair (work) mattair@synercom.hounix.org
<standard.disclaimer> (home) cgm@elmat.synercom.hounix.org
In a mature society, "civil servant" is semantically equivalent to
"civil master." - Robert Heinlein, _The Notebooks of Lazarus Long_
------------------------------
From: TG May <T.G.May1@lut.ac.uk>
Subject: Compromised privacy on usenet
Organization: Loughborough University, UK.
Date: Fri, 14 May 93 18:40:07 GMT
Forgive me for my ignorance..., but...
How can I get hold of examples of compromised privacy on usenet?????????
Thanks in advance,
Thelms
Loughborough University of Technology.
------------------------------
From: James Olds <olds@helix.nih.gov>
Subject: DIA Analyst To speak on Eastern Europe: May 17 in DC
Organization: National Institutes of Health, Bethesda
Date: Fri, 14 May 1993 20:59:15 GMT
PROFESSIONAL PUGWASH EVENT: OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
The Peace and Security working group will host a discussion with
Major James David Marchio of the Defence Intelligence College on:
NEXT EXPLOSION IN EASTERN EUROPE: COLD WAR LESSONS FOR
THE NEW WORLD ORDER.
Contact James Olds at olds@helix.nih.gov for more information.
THE EVENT WILL BE HELD AT 6:30PM in Room 2325 of the Rayburn
House Office Building at the corner of Independence and First St.
Near Capitol South Metro. DATE: MAY 17.
--
****************************************************************************
* James L. Olds Ph.D. Neural Systems Section *
* domain: olds@helix.nih.gov NINDS, NIH, Bethesda, MD. 20892 USA *
****************************************************************************
------------------------------
End of Computer Privacy Digest V2 #042
******************************