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