7
relationship exists between the parties, including: (1) The
degree of control exercised by the principal; (2) which party
invests in work facilities used by the individual; (3) the
opportunity of the individual for profit or loss; (4) whether the
principal can discharge the individual; (5) whether the work is
part of the principal's regular business; (6) the permanency of
the relationship; and (7) the relationship the parties believed
they were creating. See Weber v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 378, 387
(1994), affd. per curiam 60 F.3d 1104 (4th Cir. 1995). No single
factor dictates the outcome. All the facts and circumstances
should be considered. Id.
The right of control is ordinarily the crucial factor in
determining whether an employer-employee relationship exists.
See Matthews v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 351, 361 (1989), affd. 907
F.2d 1173 (D.C. Cir. 1990). To retain the requisite control over
the details of an individual's work, the principal need not stand
over the individual and direct every move made by the individual.
See Weber v. Commissioner, supra at 388.
In this case, petitioner's services were fixed by a deal
memo which petitioner signed with each production company which
hired her. The deal memo also fixed petitioner's compensation.
Depending on the circumstances, petitioner was variously paid an
hourly rate which may or may not have included overtime, a flat
rate, or a rate based on union guidelines. The deal memo also
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011