=llworking;777966]That doesn't mean that the paper return will not also be rejected. That is merely the process for dealing with an electronic reject. That isn't "law" that's procedure.
then if there is no law to support the rule, it becomes unenforceable.

Also, once again, state law doesn't trump federal law in this kind of instance. Nor would federal law trump state law in something that has nothing to do with the feds.
I didn't say state law trumped fed law., I said the states have sole power to determine how a person can effect a legal name change. You are arguing they don't. In fact, by requiring a person present proof of a court ordered change preempts the full faith and credit clause every state in the country is required to honor. While that normally would not be an issue as the feds are allowed to enact their own laws for many reasons with them being fully enforceable, in this situation, they are imposing a rule that is not supported by any law. It becomes a de facto federal law as they refuse to accept the states laws on the matter on an issue they have no power to enact a law concerning the issue.



The UCCJEA is not a federal law. The feds don't have the authority in the constitution to make any laws regarding child custody. However, the feds put the UCCJEA together and recommended that the states pass it as state law. As far as I know, all states have agreed and adopted the legislations. However, if any state had chosen not to do so, the UCCJEA would not apply in those states.
but the states have accepted it in part or in whole so what the states have codified within their states is enforceable in their states. No idea what your point is though since it is a totally different issue. The issue at hand is simply stating the SSA has a right to enforce laws outside of their jurisdiction to create.

- - - Updated - - -

Quote Quoting Dogmatique
View Post
I'm completely confused with this thread.

Help me out please?

Mr Doggie and I got married before we filed taxes for that year. We filed under my married name, but my SS card had my previous last name.

IRS didn't even blink.



Am I missing an obvious point?
nope. You are making my point quite well thank you very much.

. I am arguing that the IRS does not mandate the name on the return match the name recorded by the SSA. 11working is stating they must match or they will be rejected. I accept they will likely be rejected if electronically filed and possibly initially with a paper return but I suspect there is a process to explain the discrepancy to their satisfaction without the filer having to change the name on the SSA registry.