From: Adam Shostack <adam@homeport.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 1996 08:13:49 +0800
To: dlv@bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM)
Subject: Re: Internal Passports
In-Reply-To: <RDo0RD45w165w@bwalk.dm.com>
Message-ID: <199608071729.MAA15197@homeport.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote:
| Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com> writes:
| > At 12:06 AM 8/6/96 -0700, Marshall Clow wrote:
| >
| > >I have found that promising to provide the necessary docs, and then failing
| > to do so, is the least confrontational and most effective way around this.
| > >
| > >"Delay is the deadliest form of denial"
| >
| > Works for me as well.  Likewise, self employment.
| 
| That's the key word here - I don't think you need I-9 if you get paid on 1099
| or equivalent. However for W-4 employment, the emplyer must send a signed I-9

	This is correct; you don't need an I-9 to work when your wages
are reported via a 1099.

| to los federales. Otherwise the computer will flag this situation and they'll
| get a letter asking why they pay wages to someone whose I-9 isn't on file.

The privacy act statement on the I-9 instructions claims that the form
will be kept on file by the employer, who can be asked for it by the
INS.  This 'we keep it on file' was confirmed by a contracting firm
with whom I did some work recently.  It also has some newspeak that
has to be read to be believed.

ADam



-- 
"It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
					               -Hume