- 12 -
do so.7 [H. Conf. Rept. 99-841 (Vol. II), at II-790 (1986),
1986-3 C.B. (Vol. 4) 1, 790.]
We do not find that this IRS practice establishes that
accommodation is feasible in this case. Taxpayers who are
exempted from Social Security employment taxes under section
1402(g) include only those who are members of an established
religious sect opposed to public or private insurance and who
have waived Social Security benefits.8 See Wolfrum v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1991-370. The creation of a general
religious exemption to the dependent TIN requirement would have a
far greater impact on respondent’s administration of the
dependency exemption and would increase the risk of fraudulent
claims being made.9 We cannot say that the balance struck by
respondent in excusing only those who are statutorily exempted
from participation in the Social Security system is
constitutionally impermissible.
7Though the legislative history refers to an IRS practice of
issuing ITIN’s to the dependents of taxpayers exempted under sec.
1402(g), respondent acknowledged on brief that the IRS’
longstanding practice has been to excuse these taxpayers from the
TIN requirement entirely. See also Chief Counsel Advice
1999-50-034 (Oct. 21, 1999).
8Petitioners acknowledge that they are not eligible to claim
exemption under sec. 1402(g).
9In 1997 alone there were more than 2.5 million instances
where TIN’s required to claim dependency exemptions and the
Earned Income and Child Care Tax Credits were either missing or
did not match IRS or SSA records for the name used. See I.R.S.
News Release, IR-98-25 (Mar. 25, 1998).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011