Kevin and Bridget Naughton - Page 17




                                       - 17 -                                         
          the Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has explained in a              
          scenario where medical residents sought refund of employment                
          taxes withheld from their stipends:                                         
               section 530 allows employers to avoid liability for                    
               past-due employment taxes when the employer erroneously                
               but reasonably classified employees as independent                     
               contractors rather than employees.                                     
                    By its very terms, section 530 is a relief                        
               provision available only to employers who erroneously                  
               classify their employees.  Section 530 applies if (1)                  
               the taxpayer does not treat a worker as an employee for                
               employment tax purpose during a particular period; (2)                 
               the taxpayer files all required federal employment tax                 
               returns on a basis consistent with this treatment; and                 
               (3) the taxpayer has a reasonable basis for not                        
               treating the worker as an employee.  If these                          
               requirements are satisfied, tax liability is terminated                
               “for purposes of applying such taxes for such period                   
               with respect to the taxpayer.”  Notwithstanding the                    
               clarity of the statute, the residents contend that a                   
               broad interpretation of the term “taxpayer” is                         
               appropriate because they are, at least in a general                    
               sense, “taxpayers.”  We do not agree, for the focus of                 
               section 530 is on the taxpayer’s treatment of the                      
               taxpayer’s employees.  In this context, it is clear                    
               that the term “taxpayer” refers only to employers and                  
               not to employees.  [Ahmed v. United States, 147 F.3d                   
               791, 797 (8th Cir. 1998); citations omitted.]                          
               Moreover, the view of this Court is in accord with that                
          recounted above, and we have expressly held that “‘Taxpayer’ as             
          used in the context of Section 530 refers to an employer”.                  
          Pariani v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-427.  Accordingly,                 
          petitioners’ contentions in this regard are not germane and                 
          warrant no further discussion.  We hold that petitioner was an              
          employee of DWP and not an independent contractor for Federal tax           
          purposes.                                                                   





Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011