IRS and Phony Dependents

In response to “The IRS’ Case of Missing Children,” editorial, Dec. 11:

I don’t share your writer’s glee with having caught income tax cheats who claim phony dependents. I see something much more ominous in the recent laws requiring Social Security numbers for children--such as a major loss in individual civil liberties, for example.

If the IRS wanted to catch the phony child deductions, why didn’t the IRS simply require the attachment of a photocopy of the birth certificate to the 1040 Form? Why did IRS officials institute an entirely new policy of requiring Social Security numbers for kids?

In 1987, the law required kids of 5 or older to have Social Security numbers. No public outcry ensued so they tightened it further to age 2 in 1988.

Yet another wrinkle is coming in 1990--want to deduct your child-care expenses? You’ll have to report the Social Security number of your baby-sitter. So now we’ve got individuals spying on individuals for the IRS. By law! A tyrannical first for the U.S. (Previously, only institutions were required to spy on individuals.)

Apparently, I’m the only one disturbed by this encroachment on individual liberties. I see virtually nothing about it in the papers or see any resistance of any kind from the public. Why no protests? Why no alarmed journalists challenging the lawmakers? Is anybody awake?

Curious, while the people in Eastern Europe are throwing off their yokes of oppression, we meekly submit to new ones ourselves.

DON HULL

Costa Mesa