Kicked out for no SSN.

[LdiJ]

And then it is safe to assume that he never asked anyone for their information. Or was this tenancy set up before they visited?

This wasn't just one place/one landlord. Yes, the tenancies were often set up in advance because it was less expensive than a long term hotel, but just as often they were set up after the fact.

Heck my brother in law's own inlaws rented here in the same town I live in and their's was not set up until a week after they got here.

 

[Taxing Matters]

I don't know how familiar you are with the proceedures regarding filing a tax return using an ITIN, however, every person who works as a standard employee in the US and is an undocumented worker, works under either a fake SSN or someone else's SSN. The SSN that they are working under is reported on their tax return (filing under their ITIN). That reporting is used to resolve any issues regarding SS credits under the SSN that does not belong to them. It also fixes the problem of additional income showing up under someone else's SSN. They themselves, of course are not entitled to any SS credits that otherwise might have been earned because they are undocumented. The IRS does not share that information with any other government agency nor do they prosecute an undocumented worker who uses an SSN that does not belong to them as long as they are filing taxes using an ITIN.

Again, though, any admissions the alien makes about violations of the law made to a tax professional other than an attorney can be used against the alien. That is the problem talking to a tax attorney would address. You may not see that risk as very great, but believe me there are situations in which that does matter.

I do agree that consulting with a tax attorney regarding any tax returns that were filed under the niece's name or income included on the niece's return is in order.

And that same reason applies here — the person needs the protection of the attorney confidentiality rules and attorney-client privilege with respect to things told the attorney.

 

[Zigner]

This wasn't just one place/one landlord. Yes, the tenancies were often set up in advance because it was less expensive than a long term hotel, but just as often they were set up after the fact.

Heck my brother in law's own inlaws rented here in the same town I live in and their's was not set up until a week after they got here.

What is, in essence, a short-term rental isn't the same thing. Apples & oranges
A hotel doesn't need the same level of information as a long-term residence.

 

[Taxing Matters]

New York for one, I believe.

NY state does not make it illegal for a landlord to simply report the presence of an undocumented alien to ICE. The legislature is, however, considering adopting a law which makes it a crime for a landlords, employers, and a few others to threaten to report an undocumented alien to authorities in an attempt to coerce or blackmail them. Several other states, including mine, have similar laws. Such threats might also be covered under the general blackmail/extortion statutes of other states.

California, however, does has a law that makes it illegal to either report the alien or threaten to report the alien in an attempt to harass the alien or get the alien evicted.

 

[LdiJ]

Again, though, any admissions the alien makes about violations of the law made to a tax professional other than an attorney can be used against the alien. That is the problem talking to a tax attorney would address. You may not see that risk as very great, but believe me there are situations in which that does matter.



And that same reason applies here — the person needs the protection of the attorney confidentiality rules and attorney-client privilege with respect to things told the attorney.

I don't disagree with you. However, our firm was an ITIN Application Acceptance Agent for many years so we were well versed in any risks involved in filing current tax returns that had W2s with invalid SSNs (or valid ones that belonged to someone else) when filing using an ITIN. There really were not any real risks in that instance. The IRS was very careful to make it public that there were no risks involved, because they wanted to encourage those people to file a tax return and pay their taxes.

We only stopped being an Acceptance Agent when the IRS started requiring that their original IDs be sent in with their applications, instead of certified copies. We did not want to be responsible for their original IDs being sent with the applications. We still do tax returns however, for many people with ITIN numbers who are working under invalid or someone else's SSN. Not once in the last 16 years have any of them been sought after by ICE, law enforcement or the IRS (other than normal things like CP-2000 letters).

 

[quincy]

Just to relieve me of having to start a new thread off the board just for Payroll, these links (if they work ) speak to landlords and ICE that I mentioned earlier:

Out of Massachusetts:
https://www.mass.gov/news/ag-healey-sues-lynn-landlord-for-intimidating-tenants-and-threatening-to-report-them-to-immigration-authorities

Out of New York:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/09/21/us/ice-judge-new-york-city/index.html

Sorry, HectorK, for my role in diverting your thread away from your concerns in Florida. You really should speak to an attorney in your area now, though. I am happy at least that your landlord intends to honor your current lease through its expiration in December. Good luck.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

In both of those, it has the LL threatening to contact ICE as a method to make the tenant do or not do something. That isn't the case here. You have a new LL that doesn't want to rent to those breaking the law.

ETA: I'm not posting this to play with you. The OP needs to understand that if he is in fact breaking the law the LL can call the law enforcement agency involved.

 

[quincy]

In both of those, it has the LL threatening to contact ICE as a method to make the tenant do or not do something. That isn't the case here. You have a new LL that doesn't want to rent to those breaking the law.

ETA: I'm not posting this to play with you. The OP needs to understand that if he is in fact breaking the law the LL can call the law enforcement agency involved.

Florida law applies and I am afraid Florida is not the best state to be in if you are an undocumented immigrant. Not the worst state, but definitely not the best.

 

[PayrollHRGuy]

Florida law applies and I am afraid Florida is not the best state to be in if you are an undocumented immigrant. Not the worst state, but definitely not the best.

I generally find it bad to be a criminal in any state.

 

[quincy]

I generally find it bad to be a criminal in any state.

Obeying all laws is recommended.

 

[LdiJ]

I generally find it bad to be a criminal in any state.

What have undocumented immigrants ever done to harm you personally?

They own property and pay property taxes or rent property that puts money in the pockets of American Citizens and the economy.
They own businesses that put money into the economy and pay taxes.
They buy products and services that help the economy.
They pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for which they will never benefit, but the rest of us will.
UC taxes are paid on their behalf for which they will never benefit, but some of us will.
They qualify for very few tax credits for their children so they pay more income tax than most American Citizens.
They take many jobs that nobody wants.
They take very few jobs that American Citizens DO want.

If a large chunk of them were deported in a short period of time, our economy would really notice...in a bad way.

Yes, they came into the US without being documented and that IS a violation of the law. However, to suggest that we don't benefit from that in any way is inaccurate.

Yes, some of their American Citizen children recieve some benefits that some people believe that they should not receive. Otherwise, they drain nothing else of substance from the economy. Instead of being so fixated on keeping them out, perhaps it would do more good to address things in the law that would make it less attractive to be here?..and I do not mean inhumane things like separating them from their children. I mean like making their American Citizen children ineligible for many welfare benefits unless at least one of their parents is an American Citizen or legal permanent resident? There are probably lots of non inhumane disincentives that could be put into place.

In the case of refugees, how about requiring that they have a sponsor who is willing to support them so that they are not a burden on the taxpayer, until or unless they get permission to live and work here?

 

[quincy]

Nice post, LdiJ.

 

[LdiJ]

Nice post, LdiJ.

Thank you...and OG too

 

[Taxing Matters]

They own property and pay property taxes or rent property that puts money in the pockets of American Citizens and the economy.
They own businesses that put money into the economy and pay taxes.
They buy products and services that help the economy.
They pay Social Security and Medicare taxes for which they will never benefit, but the rest of us will.
UC taxes are paid on their behalf for which they will never benefit, but some of us will.
They qualify for very few tax credits for their children so they pay more income tax than most American Citizens.
They take many jobs that nobody wants.
They take very few jobs that American Citizens DO want.

While that is true for many undocumented immigrants, it is not true for all of them. Some do not pay all the taxes that they are obligated to pay. Some do get benefits that they should not get. Some do commit crimes that harm others. It is not possible to lump all undocumented aliens together and characterize them as either all good or all bad.

We desperately need to update our immigration laws to deal with the immigration issues we currently have in this country. We've not done that in decades and it's been well known to both parties that the laws we have are outdated and don't meet our present circumstances. Unfortunately, while the broad outline of what most in this country would support for immigration law changes has been known to both parties for a long time, their disagreements over some parts of immigration policy always have kept proposed changes from going through. That won't change until enough people in the country finally demand Congress really address it.

 

[reenzz]

"Harboring" a person who is illegally in the United States has been a federal crime since 1917. It’s been used against human trafficking rings and, in the 1980s, against the Sanctuary Movement that involved churches and individuals giving shelter to Central American asylum seekers. The current law is in the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, which made it a crime to "conceal, harbor, or shield from detection" an illegal immigrant. If you’ve acted "knowingly or in reckless disregard of the fact that an alien has come to, entered or remains in the United States in violation of law," you come within the law’s reach.