Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 8/28/84; site lll-crg.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!sdcsvax!dcdwest!ittvax!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!umcp-cs!gymble!lll-crg!brooks
From: brooks@lll-crg.ARPA (Eugene D. Brooks III)
Newsgroups: net.taxes,net.singles,net.flame
Subject: Re: Re: Marriage penalty
Message-ID: <416@lll-crg.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 26-Feb-85 23:37:37 EST
Article-I.D.: lll-crg.416
Posted: Tue Feb 26 23:37:37 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 3-Mar-85 02:48:23 EST
References: <285@calmasd.UUCP> <429@ssc-vax.UUCP> <2490@tekig.UUCP> <445@ssc-vax.UUCP>
Organization: Lawrence Livermore Labs, CRG group
Lines: 5
Xref: watmath net.taxes:757 net.singles:6059 net.flame:8623

> PS- I believe the IRS looks upon divorces for tax purposes about the way the
> INS views marriages of convenience.

But if you stay (divorced,married) there is not much the (IRS, INS) can do
about either.  Boy, what a predicament this could turn out to be!