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!