Mike J. Graham Trucking, Inc. - Page 10




                                       - 10 -                                         
          have fully cooperated with the Secretary.  Because, as explained            
          in detail below, petitioner did not establish a prima facie case            
          that its treatment of Graham was reasonable, the burden of proof            
          remains on petitioner with respect to 1997 as well.                         
          II.  Classification of Graham for Employment Tax Purposes                   
               A.  Status Under FICA and FUTA Provisions                              
               In contending that Graham should not be classified as an               
          employee under the FICA and FUTA provisions of the Internal                 
          Revenue Code, petitioner focuses on Graham’s status as an                   
          S corporation shareholder and alleged lack of status as a common            
          law employee.  We briefly address these contentions seriatim.               
                    1.  Contentions Regarding S Corporation Shareholders              
               Petitioner cites sections 1366, 1372, and 6037(c) and                  
          Durando v. United States, 70 F.3d 548 (9th Cir. 1995), presumably           
          in support of an argument that S corporation shareholders should            
          not be deemed employees.  Sections 1366 and 6037(c) generally               
          require that income items of S corporations be passed through to            
          shareholders on a pro rata basis and reported by such                       
          shareholders in a manner consistent with treatment on the                   
          corporate return.  These rules, however, pertain to calculation             
          of income tax liability under subtitle A and have no bearing on             
          computation of Federal employment taxes.  Veterinary Surgical               
          Consultants, P.C. v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 141, 145 (2001),                
          affd. sub nom. Yeagle Drywall Co. v. Commissioner, 54 Fed. Appx.            






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011