Time: Fri Feb 07 04:52:29 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA19092;
Fri, 7 Feb 1997 20:29:16 -0700 (MST)
id WAA10834; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 22:15:29 -0500 (EST)
id WAA10830; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 22:15:28 -0500 (EST)
id AA20926; Fri, 7 Feb 1997 22:15:27 -0500
by usr09.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA18338;
Fri, 7 Feb 1997 20:13:16 -0700 (MST)
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA11718;
Fri, 7 Feb 1997 20:12:35 -0700 (MST)
Date: Fri, 07 Feb 1997 04:32:29 -0800
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SNET: SLS: IRS Form 1040 not required this year
Cc: RSayles@aol.com, hwysong@mindspring.com
-> SearchNet's SNETNEWS Mailing List
Jonathan et al.,
Are you ready for a little wry humor?
I am forwarding a true life experience
with Our "friends" at the "IRS" [sic],
with explicit permission of the author.
If possible, please let me know the very latest
on this one; I am just too busy to confirm
all "statements" which appear on my monitor
(2 megabytes per day, and growing hourly).
I can understand why you would
be in the same situation too!
Be well!
/s/ Paul Mitchell
p.s. I will dispatch Pobot (my Robot)
to RUN his digital TRUTH DETECTION MICROMETER
vise (a very reliable instrument:), using
a fast fourier doubly inverted transform
firmware algorithm. [tilt]
Take it away, Pobot!
I Pobot, I, here.
<snip>
>Subject: IRS Form 1040 not required this year
>
>Cc: jcraft@hitel.com
>
>Dave,
>
>After receiving this post I called the IRS. It was an almost humorous
>conversation. I talked to three separate 800 numbers who did not know the
>answer to the post. They transferred me to the technical department. They
>would not give me the technical department's number because it was an
>internal number. I got this gruff sounding woman on the phone. I very
>politely read to her what was in the post and asked her if it was true. She
>immediately avoided the question. She answered saying that all forms have
>the same OMB number.
Pobot tilts here!
(not to be confused with a "bow":)
>I said if that's true and if it's the OMB number is
>not considered valid in the federal registry what else do we use to file?
>She said it sounded like I was challenging the validity of the form. I told
>her no that I was trying to verify what I read was true. She abruptly said
>that the sixteenth amendment allows them to blah, blah.
Pobot assures you she did NOT
say "blah, blah."
(But, then again, you never know.)
I said I understand
>what the amendments say but would OMB tell me why the number was wrong or
>why they wouldn't give them one. She said we will collect the tax.
Pobot agrees that she probably
did say this. Bets, anybody?
>I decided she was going to be a bitch and not answer anything straight.
Pobot has a separate algorithm
for detection of this general "B" fault.
What do you mean by "going to be"?
Is that like "going to B"?
>I told her I would call OMB and see if I could get to the bottom of it.
Did ya? Did ya?
>
>I got off the phone and I shook my head.
Pobot thinks that was a good idea
(shaking your head).
This proves somethings that some
>Patriot literature says.
Pobot is dying to know here,
what do Patriot literatures say?
Pobot prefers fast fourier transforms
to much of the text-based processing
he is asked to perform daily --
too many grammar and spelling erors.
Pobot is still trying to understand
the difference between adverbs and
adjectively.
However, I need to pick up the public notice and
>see what it exactly says.
Pobot cannot read without the
aid of human eyes. Can we
get a few volunteers?
>
>I called Jonathan Craft and shared the story with him. Jonathan was
>receptive to a complete stranger calling him to tell him his experience with
>IRS. I think I'll copy him on this and see if he can make some
recommendations.
>
>If you want to post this, please, hopefully it will bring some smiles !
>
>Thanks,
>
>Terry Olgin
>Quickly becoming a believer
>
<snip>
>>Date: Wed, 05 Feb 1997 06:44:33 -0800
>>To: (Recipient list suppressed)
>>From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
>>Subject: Form 1040 not required this year
>>
>>This just in!
>>
>>It is reported that this
>>year's Form 1040 does not
>>have OMB approval and, for
>>this reason, it is no longer
>>a "required form" (read
>>"Information Collection Request").
>>
>>This means that it is now a
>>"Bootleg Form" which should be
>>thrown in the trash, pursuant
>>to the legislative intent of
>>the Paperwork Reduction Act.
>>
>>Congress wants Us Citizens to
>>"police" agencies which do not
>>comply with the PRA, so:
>>
>> LET'S START COMPLYING, EVERYBODY!
>>
>> N-O-W!!!!
>>
>>I have not had time to confirm this report.
>>
>>Can someone please confirm this for Us?
>>
>>Caveat emptor.
>>
>>Many thanks!
>>
>>/s/ Paul Mitchell
>>
>>
>>
>>>To: jcraft@hitel.com
>>>Cc: pmitch@primenet.com, RSayles@aol.com, hwysong@mindspring.com
>>>Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 02:02:37 MST
>>>Subject: Re: Hi
>>>References: <199701301953.AA155464028@akira.hitel.com>
>>>
>>>Wow, Jonathan, this is great news! Question is, do they
>>>contend you have to file something, i.e. computer generated,
>>>or other informational return?
>>>
>>>
>>>On Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:53:48 EST Jonathan Craft <jcraft@hitel.com>
>>>writes:
>>>>Great news!
>>>>
>>>>The IRS publicly admits in their paperwork
>>>>reduction act notice this year that Form 1040
>>>>is NOT REQUIRED FILING! "You are not required
>>>>to file a form..." (or something to that effect)
>>>>appears in the privacy/paperwork act notice on
>>>>Form 1040 this year. The reason being that Form
>>>>1040 does not have a valid OMB number. (This
>>>>is so exciting.)
>>>>
>>>>The pig is going to die -- and die soon.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>>>>Jonathan Craft
>>>>jcraft@hitel.com
>>>>Configuration Management (770) 446-8820 x1468
>>>>(voice)
>>>>ClearCase Administator (770) 242-1414
>>>>(fax)
>>>> H I T A C H I T E L E C O M M U N I C A T I O N S
>>>>///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
====================================================================
[Text is usually formatted in Courier 11 non-proportional spacing @]
[65-characters per line; .DOCs by MS-WORD for MS-DOS, Version 5.0B.]
Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S., email address: pmitch@primenet.com
Web site for the Supreme Law Firm is URL: http://www.supremelaw.com
Ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776, Tucson, Arizona state [We win]
We can decode all your byte streams, spaghetti code notwithstanding.
Coming soon: "Manifesto for a Republic" by John E. Trumane ie JetMan
====================================================================
-> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
-> Posted by: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail