kre
Level 3

I don't see where Notice 2007-79 supports their position at all.

The Notice provides alternative methods for an ERO to sign 8879, instead of using a wet signature. It lists rubber stamp, mechanical device (such as signature pen), or computer software as the allowable alternatives. That's it! Then it goes on to state that EACH of these alternatives MUST include either a facsimile of the ERO's signature, or the ERO's printed name. Proseries does not meet this requirement, period. This requirement makes it clear (at least to me) that the ERO's signature line cannot be left blank, while Proseries' response seems far-fetched. I want to be wrong, but still waiting for a reasonable explanation. 

Without a name on the ERO signature line, the ERO is not certifying that the EFIN/PIN used to sign the tax return is valid. Entering just the EFIN/PIN obviously cannot serve as a certification of itself.