- 13 -
.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. Weber v. Commissioner, 103 T.C.
378, 387 (1994), affd. per curiam 60 F.3d 1104 (4th Cir. 1995).
All the facts and circumstances of each case are considered, and
no single factor is dispositive. Id.
1. Degree of Control
The degree of control necessary to find employee status
varies with the nature of the services provided by the worker.
Id. at 388. 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; it is
sufficient if he has the right to do so. Id.; see sec.
31.3401(c)-1(b), Employment Tax Regs.
Similarly, the employer need not set the employee’s hours or
supervise every detail of the work environment to control the
employee. Gen. Inv. Corp. v. United States, 823 F.2d 337, 342
(9th Cir. 1987). The fact that workers set their own hours does
not necessarily make them independent contractors. Id.
a. Bakery Workers and Cash Payroll Workers
Petitioner controlled where the bakery workers and cash
payroll workers worked, what products they used to complete their
work, and how much product they had to produce. Petitioner also
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011