"Stuart A. Bronstein" <spamtrap[at]lexregia.com> wrote:

- quote -

Processing as many as 800 checks an hour the transcriber has
little time to discern the nuances of the diverse script &
penmanship

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

Stuart A. Bronstein <spamtrap[at]lexregia.com> wrote:

- quote -

With my handwriting I'm sure they couldn't tell the
difference anyway. But under current law, would that be
subject to a "frivolous filing" penalty?

Seth

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

an_ordinary_guy_158[at]hotmail.com (Bill) wrote:

- quote -

Banks are specifically allowed to do that under the Uniform
Commercial Code.

- quote -

Technically when someone does that he is adopting "Mickey
Mouse" as his signature for that instance, and legally has
all the obligations of an endorser.

Reminds me of a guy I knew who used to write his tax checks
to the Infernal Revenue Service. The IRS and their bank
accepted every one of them without trouble.

Stu

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

mathcircle[at]gmail.com posted:

- quote -

I doubt it. Most states retain the right to determine the
age of majority ... and most have tied it to the voting age
of 18 (though a few still retain the traditional 21).

- quote -

No, definitely not.

- quote -

You have a quaint view of the deposit-checking process.
There may have been a day when _people_ were expected to
eyeball signatures on the back of a check presented for
deposit ... but that has long gone.

The current practice is, that any bank will accept the
notation, "For Deposit to Credit of John Q. Doe" and the
account number involved, and whisk it into the system (even
without a signature).

[Wags have reportedly even signed "Mickey Mouse" on checks
and had no problem. This is _not_ recommended, but
exemplifies the low level of concern for such niceties.]

Bill

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >

A 20-year-old college student paper-filed his 2006 1040 tax
return with his correct legal name, "JOHN Q. DOE."

The refund check has arrived in the mail for the correct
amount, but the check is made out to "JOHN Q DOE MINOR."

His previous year's refund check was just made out to JOHN Q
DOE.

He and his are all puzzled about why the IRS would append
"MINOR" at the end of the check this year. Is this a
standard new practice.

He was 20 years old at the time he filed his return in early
April and turned 21 before the date on the IRS check. He
did not claim a personal exemption for himself, because his
parents can claim him, since he is a full-time college
student and they provide over half his support.

Does this make him a legal minor in the eyes of the IRS?

Should he attempt to get the IRS to cut a replacement check
with his name without the word MINOR appended?

Will there be problems if he attempts to deposit this check
in his bank account, which is, of course, registered under
his legal name of "JOHN Q. DOE," with no MINOR on the end.

<< ------------------------------------------------------- > << The foregoing was not intended or written to be used, > << nor can it used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties > << that may be imposed upon the taxpayer. > << > << The Charter and the Guidelines for submitting posts > << to this newsgroup as well as our anti-spamming policy > << are at www.asktax.org. > << Copyright (2006) - All rights reserved. > << ------------------------------------------------------- >