SSN Policy Manual

Policy Manual

to incur greater than a deminimis cost or impose greater than a deminimis imposition to establish undue hardship). The Omnibus Budget Restoration Act, Public Law 101-239, Title, VII, Section 7711(b)(l), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2393, repealed Section 6676 of the Internal Revenue Code effective for statements or documents filed after December 31, 1989. Since December 31, 1989, Section 6723 of the Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C. S 6723 (Supp. 1992) has governed the failure to comply with information reporting requirements. Section 6723 states that a penalty of $50.00 'shall be assessed for each failure to comply with a reporting requirement. However, Internal Revenue Code Section 6724, 26 U.S.C. 6724 (Supp. 1992), provides for a waiver of any penalties assessed under the code upon a showing of reasonable cause. Section 6724(a) provides: While no court has ruled that a religious conviction is reasonable cause, the focus in this case is on the action of the employer in determining whether any penalty would be assessed. Unless the employer willfully fails to obtain the taxpayer identification nurnber any penalty should be waived. The key fact in determining whether the defendant violated Title VII, however, is that the defendant made no attempt to accommodate Mr. Hanson by seeking a waiver of any penalty for reasonable cause. The defendant's contention that it could be subjected to penalties under the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, 8 U.S.C. 1324 (Supp. 1992), is also meritless. The ImmigrationReform and Control Act of 1986was enacted to make the employment of iliegal aliens unlawful. 8 U.S.C. 1324a(a) (Supp. 1992). The Law requires a verification system under which an employer must attest, under penalty of perjury, that it has verified that each employee is not an unauthorized alien by examining the requisite document or documents, showing identity and employment authorization. 8 U.S.C. 1324a(b) (Supp. 1992). The law lists a number of documents which can be used to verify identity and employncnr authorization. A social security card is one document which evidences emplo~mcn: authorization, but it is not required. A birth certificate showing birth in the United States la another example of a document which evidences employment authorization. 8 L'.S C' 1324a(b)(l)(C) (Supp. 1992). The case cited by the defendant for the proposition tha: I: would be violating the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 for not includ~ng r social security number on Mr. Hanson's 1-9 form, Mester Mfg. Co. v. INS, 879 F.2d 561 (W Cir. 1989), involves an employer who continued to employ an individual after being adv l d by the INS that the individual was an unauthorized alien. The case does not support t l ~ defendant's contention that the Act requires it to furnish a social security number for Mt Hanson. IV. CONCLUSION The Commission's complaint filed herein gave the defendant sufficient notice, pursuant to Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, of the EEOC's claim of religious discrimination under- Title VII. The Commission can establish a prima facie case of religious No penalty shall be imposed under this part with respect to any failure if it is shown that such failure is due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect. 26 U.S.C. 6724(a) (Supp. 1992).