- 8 -
accepted a job. For instance, petitioner’s services were
negotiated through agents and memorialized in written agreements
or contracts. At trial petitioner referred to a number of
agreements he entered into with the various companies he worked
for during the year in issue but failed to introduce them into
evidence. Without the contracts in the record for our review, we
cannot assume that petitioner had the requisite control over his
services.
Furthermore, the record reflects that petitioner willingly
accepted Forms W-2 for services. Although he may not have
considered himself an employee of the companies for which he
provided services, it is clear that the companies considered him
an employee during the engagement because they issued Forms W-2
and withheld FICA, FUTA, and State employment taxes. The record
also reflects that three different companies checked the “pension
plan” box on petitioner’s Forms W-2, although petitioner
testified he had no independent knowledge of participation in any
pension plan other than the unions. Petitioner admits that he
failed to correct the companies’ alleged “error” in treating him
as an employee by issuing him Forms W-2 for his services.
Finally, petitioner’s argument that working for a number of
companies demonstrates a lack of continuity in the employer-
employee relationship is without merit. In Kelly v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-140, this Court found that working
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011