Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 17:36:50 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V2#006 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 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]. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Rhonda Landy 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" Date: Sat, 09 Jan 93 01:01:23 CST Organization: Villa CyberSpace, Minneapolis, MN Jarrod Staffen 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 | "press to test" roy%cybrspc@cs.umn.edu | main(){ | cybrspc!roy@cs.umn.edu | float x=1; | "release | printf("Just my $%.2f.\n",x/50);} | to detonate" ------------------------------ From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) Subject: Re: Radar Detector Prohibitions Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 19:11:22 GMT In article Richard Pierson 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 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" Subject: Re: SSN and new baby Originator: mda46419@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 23:38:38 GMT Apparently-To: comp-society-privacy@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu Hans Lachman 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 StarOwl@uiuc.edu | removed by argument. -- Samuel Johnson an692@anon.penet.fi | 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 Subject: Re: SSN and new baby Organization: Cray Computer Corporation Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 04:20:31 GMT In article lachman@netcom.com (Hans Lachman) writes: >In article johnl@iecc.cambridge.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" Subject: Re: SSN and New Baby In Computer Privacy Digest V2 #005 Hans Lachman writes: >In article johnl@iecc.cambridge.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: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: John McGing Subject: Re: SSN and new baby Date: 10 Jan 93 18:54:35 GMT Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt MD USA Reply-To: jmcging@access.digex.com 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 -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- jmcging@oss724.ssa.gov or jmcging@access.digex.com SSA, your FICA tax people woodb!oss2cc!jmcging@soaf1 J.MCGING on GEnie 70142,1357 on Compuserve ------------------------------ From: fwebb@star-trek.bbn.com (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 Hans Lachman writes: >In article johnl@iecc.cambridge.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 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 Hans Lachman 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 grady@world.std.com So many newsgroups, so little time! ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 09:52:02 MST From: Tom Wicklund Subject: Re: SSN and new baby In lachman@netcom.com (Hans Lachman) writes: >In article johnl@iecc.cambridge.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 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 Hans Lachman 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 >lachman@netcom.com 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 ******************************