29
benefits retained by petitioner. Petitioner argues that his
retention of benefits is not conclusive as to the identity of his
employer. We agree with petitioner. The determination of
whether petitioner was an employee of the United States depends
on all the facts and circumstances, including the paramount fact
that NATO, rather than the United States, controlled the manner
in which his work was performed. Matthews v. Commissioner, 92
T.C. at 360.
Other facts also indicate that petitioner was separated from
U.S. Government service during his transfer to NATO. Unlike a
detail, a transfer was considered a change in position.
Additionally, a transferee's right to reemployment with the
United States, in and of itself, indicates that a transferred
employee was no longer considered a U.S. employee. Although a
transferee retained an absolute right to reemployment, he had to
affirmatively apply for such reemployment. Upon transfer,
transferees were entitled to liquidate their accumulated leave
accounts in the same manner as separated employees. If a
transferee chose to retain retirement health and life insurance
coverage, the transferee was considered a U.S. employee for these
limited purposes. While on transfer to an international
organization, transferees were also considered employed by the
United States for purposes of workman's compensation coverage.
It can be inferred from these provisions that transferees were
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011