<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Does the IRS discriminate against unmarried couples?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.taxgirl.com/does-the-irs-discriminate-against-unmarried-couples/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.taxgirl.com/does-the-irs-discriminate-against-unmarried-couples/</link>
	<description>tax news, tax info and tax policy</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 12:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: margaret</title>
		<link>http://www.taxgirl.com/does-the-irs-discriminate-against-unmarried-couples/comment-page-1/#comment-6187</link>
		<dc:creator>margaret</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2008 19:01:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxgirl.com/does-the-irs-discriminate-against-unmarried-couples/#comment-6187</guid>
		<description>I know of a situation where both partners were available to be present at a meeting with the IRS (to discuss both cases). The IRS asserted that while the attorney could remain throughout, ONLY the partner whose case was being discussed at the time would be allowed to remain in the room. The other partner would have to step out of the room. Permission by, desires of, the taxpayer whose case was under discussion was not relevant.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know of a situation where both partners were available to be present at a meeting with the IRS (to discuss both cases). The IRS asserted that while the attorney could remain throughout, ONLY the partner whose case was being discussed at the time would be allowed to remain in the room. The other partner would have to step out of the room. Permission by, desires of, the taxpayer whose case was under discussion was not relevant.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
