- 9 -
Cir. 1988). The common-law definition of employee controls.
Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Darden, 503 U.S. 318, 322-323 (1992);
Weber v. Commissioner, supra at 386.
Relevant factors used to analyze whether an individual is to
be treated as an employee include the following: (1) The degree
of control exercised by the principal over the details of the
work; (2) the degree of investment by the individual in the
equipment used in the work; (3) the opportunity for profit or
loss; (4) whether or not the individual is subject to discharge;
(5) whether the work is part of the principal’s regular business;
(6) the permanency of the relationship; and (7) the intent of the
parties. Weber v. Commissioner, supra at 387; Professional &
Executive Leasing, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 232; Simpson v.
Commissioner, 64 T.C. 974, 984-985 (1975).
Section 31.3401(c)-1(b), Employment Tax Regs., defines the
employer/employee relationship as follows:
(b) Generally the relationship of employer and
employee exists when the person for whom services are
performed has the right to control and direct the
individual who performs the services, not only as to
the result to be accomplished by the work but also as
to the details and means by which that result is
accomplished. That is, an employee is subject to the
will and control of the employer not only as to what
shall be done but how it shall be done. * * * In
general, if an individual is subject to the control or
direction of another merely as to the result to be
accomplished by the work and not as to the means and
methods for accomplishing the result, he is not an
employee.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011