Your federal government is very vague in answering most questions about Social Security Numbers. If you persist in your inquiry (which will take dozens of letters), the Government will openly and honestly tell you a few certain facts about Social Security numbers:
1. It is a permanent irrevocable status. Some bureaucrats claim that it is a contract, while the higher level authorities in the Social Security Administration say it is not a contract, but a status. Go to any law library and look up `status' in any law dictionary. You cannot change your own status once you've signed up anymore than one who enlists in the military can change his own status.
2. It is up to the bank, employer, school, or stockbroker to determine whether or not they will discriminate against someone who fails to give a number. The government has no policy on this.
3. Many State driver's license Applications request a SSN. I cannot prove it, but it seems that this is allowed only for federal territories. Strange language in Section 205(c)(2)(C)(i) of the Social Security Act allows federal states "... for the purpose of establishing the identification of individuals affected by such law, and may require any individual who is or appears to be so affected to furnish to such State ... or agency thereof having administrative responsibility for the law involved ..." his SSN. Yet, The Social Security Administration before 1996 would not issue Social Security Numbers for the purpose of getting a driver's license. If you applied for a Social Security Number and stated that your purpose for applying is to qualify for a driver license, you would get a denial notice Form SSA-L676. If you want to do more research, try to find out how a State driver's license became a federal benefit in 1996.
Also read Leahy v. District of Columbia, 833 F2d 1046 where Leahy refused (based on religious objections) to give his SSN on an Application for a driver's license. Religious objections are powerful, because the first Amendment acknowledges the free exercise of religion. In the Leahy case (as in others), only government "... interests of the highest order can overcome legitimate claims to the free exercise of religion."
4. According to a federal report to a Congressional Subcommittee on Social Security, some people do not have Social Security Numbers. You can order one free copy of this report from U.S. General Accounting Office, P.O. Box 37050, Washington, DC 20013. The title of the report is "SOCIAL SECURITY, Government and Commercial Use of the Social Security Number Is Widespread" Report GAO/HEHS-99-28. On the bottom of page 3 you will read:
"Some individuals do not have an SSN either because they do not want one or because they are ineligible to receive one."
Later, the same paragraph continues:
"... the only noncitizens to whom SSA has issued SSNs have been those with one of two valid nonwork reasons for needing a number. That is, the federal government requires applicants for benefits or services under certain federal programs to have an SSN, and states require applicants for driver's licenses to have SSNs."
Now re-read this cleverly written TRUE statement, while keeping in mind that SSNs have never been required for work purposes either, not even for citizens, and the law requiring SSNs for driver licenses refers only to federal states.
5. According to the IRS, an ITIN (Individual Taxpayer Identification Number) is available to those who cannot qualify for a Social Security Number. The Application Form for the ITIN (Form W-7) in the general instructions, says that anyone eligible for employment in the U.S. is eligible for a Social Security Number and cannot apply for an ITIN. This seems to confirm that Employment really is a federal benefit, rather than a private contract. Employment, as that term is used in the tax code, is a taxable government granted privilege and is available only to those who waive their right to sell their labor.
6. Once you get a number by signing up for Socialist benefits (financed in whole or in part from Federal funds), guess what happens next. The Social Security Act, Title VIII, Section 801 requires you to pay Social Security AND OTHER TAXES. This Statute is not referenced within the Internal Revenue Code. They don't tell you this - they presume that you know of your vow of poverty. You agreed to partake of the communal fund in exchange for contributions to the communal fund. You agreed to contribute whatever they ask. This allows Congress to tax you at any rate they want to. They can increase your tax to 100%, without a Constitutional Amendment, by a simple majority vote. You no longer have a right to your wages, you only have a government granted privilege of keeping what they allow you to keep. The Buck Act authorizes taxation of anyone with a Social Security Number, even though this is not referenced within the Internal Revenue Code either. More about this, later.
Aside: This is what you agreed to. Courts cannot impair the obligation of your permanent irrevocable contract. It doesn't matter that the 16th Amendment wasn't properly ratified. It doesn't matter that the tax laws would only apply to federal employees in federal territories. It doesn't matter that wages would otherwise not be taxable.
Since you volunteered to pay whatever they will demand, they can use your future labor as collateral for the national debt.
7. Those who already have a SSN must disclose it on Forms or suffer a fine. Those who do not have a SSN can file a 1040 Form without a number, and the IRS will assign a Taxpayer ID number. These numbers are assigned by the IRS Entity Section in Philadelphia, and are not Social Security Numbers, and begin with the number "9".
8. In the Legislative History of Public Law 99-514 (which is available in your local law library) in the discussion of Internal Revenue Code, Section 6109(e), shows that Congress never required religious objectors to begin using Social Security Numbers. Also see Revenue Ruling 85-61, 1985-1 CB355.
9. I have copies of letters from Social Security Officials which state:
10. AND NOW AS OF SEPTEMBER 1999, in Sutton v. Providence, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case Number 99-55050, the Defendant is required by law to obtain Plaintiff's Social Security Number. The employer is not subject to discrimination laws IF accommodating an employee's religious beliefs would require the employer to violate federal law. I spotted many errors in the Court decision, and I hope he Appeals to the Supreme Court. But a precedent has been set. It seems straightforward to me that THE BEAST'S INTENT IS TO CAUSETH ALL TO RECEIVE A MARK, at least to sell labor.
11. The Patent Number on the back of the Social Security Card (Patent Number 1,904,650) refers to a carefully worded technique involving a manifold web with permanently retained record and transfer strips. WHY WOULD SIMPLE CARDS NEED THEIR OWN PATENT? If you were a suspicious skeptic, you could find legal definitions:
The Patent Class is 462/2, which also includes the "federal drug testing custody and control Form (CCF)