- 19 -
received the subject payments as a conduit. Based upon all
of the facts and circumstances of this case, we find that
petitioners received the subject payments from BMAP under a
claim of right with no restriction or limitation on their
use of the funds.
Our conclusion that the subject payments constitute
taxable income to petitioner is not based upon his status
as an employee of BMAP or as an independent contractor.
The subject payments are taxable income to Mr. Vetrano
regardless of whether his status is that of an employee or
that of an independent contractor. This is so because,
in either event, he received the funds without restriction
or limitation as to their disposition.
Petitioner’s second assertion is that he paid junk
dealers the amount specified on BMAP’s price list for
the automobile parts supplied to BMAP. According to
petitioner’s testimony, he did not attempt to buy any
parts for less than the amount specified on BMAP’s price
list. Petitioner testified as follows:
Q. Well, I’m saying is you would try to get the
parts as cheaply as you could, correct?
A. You have price lists from BMAP that you went
and I went and had to pay for that. I went
and paid for that price. Whatever he had on
that list, I paid for the price because I
worked for him. He wanted me to get as much
material as possible, so what I did, I went
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011