4 ms·
My first thought on that: How many of those missing 7m were split custody cases where both were claiming them. Then with the new law it's "Oh hey, [parent allo
by flutas 3y ago
My first thought on that:
How many of those missing 7m were split custody cases where both were claiming them. Then with the new law it's "Oh hey, [parent allowed to claim tax for the child] can I have their social for taxes? Whatdya mean you won't give it to me?"
- bombcar 3y agoSome podcast did an "update" on Freakonomics and according to them the majority of the difference could be explained by double custody/double claims and people not getting SSNs in time.
- whimsicalism 3y ago10% of all children had double custody claims? That seems surprisingly high to me
- bombcar 3y agoThere's an and in there. SSNs weren't automatically issued at birth until relatively recently.
- jjk166 3y agoAugust 1987 specifically. So everyone the rule change affected would have been born before. Since most people got SSNs only when they started working, a good chunk of these dependents likely didn't have SSNs at the time.
- adolph 3y agoMight be the case but I remember the day I got one as a kid, unknown to me this was the reason. Oh the stress of signing my name in permanent ink on this very small piece of light cardstock to which I needed access if required by the government and yet must not be lost. How can something so small not go missing? How could I possibly sign my name again like that to prove that I am me or that I am the legitimate bearer of more numbers than my parent’s telephone?