- 12 -
Terminal Cab, Inc. v. United States, supra at 580-581; Frische v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-237; In re McAtee, 126 Bankr. at
572 (while truck drivers had some discretion as to route chosen
to get to particular destination, drivers were obligated to
follow directions of employer as to where and when to transport
various loads).
2. Substantial Investment
The fact that a worker provides his or her own tools
generally indicates independent contractor status. See United
Sates v. Silk, 331 U.S. at 716-717; Breaux & Daigle, Inc. v.
United States, supra at 53. The drivers had a small investment
in their mechanic's tools, which were incidental to their service
of driving the truck, and their commercial driver's licenses.
Although the drivers incurred some cost in their hand tools and
in obtaining and maintaining their commercial driver's licenses,
the amount of each driver's investment is insignificant in
comparison to petitioner's substantial investment to acquire and
maintain his five or six trucks. See In re McAtee, supra at 572;
see also United Sates v. Silk, supra (value of the workers' tools
was so minimal that this factor was not of great weight); Breaux
& Daigle, Inc. v. United States, supra (same).
Most importantly, the drivers had no investment in the
trucking equipment; i.e., the tractors and the semitrailers. See
Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. v. United States, supra at 430; cf.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011