- 4 -
the employer-employee relationship, has the status of an
employee”. That definition is made applicable for self-
employment tax purposes by section 1402(d). Whether an
individual is an employee or an independent contractor is a
question of fact determined by application of common law
principles. Hosp. Res. Pers., Inc. v. United States, 68 F.3d
421, 424 (11th Cir. 1995) (stating that common law rules serve as
the basis for classifying workers as employees or independent
contractors); Weber v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 378 (1994), affd.
60 F.3d 1104 (4th Cir. 1995); sec. 31.3401(c)-1(b), (d),
Employment Tax Regs. The Court may consider various factors in
determining the relationship between the parties. See Clackamas
Gastroenterology Associates, P.C. v. Wells, 536 U.S. __, 123 S.
Ct. 1673 (April 22, 2003); Weber v. Commissioner, supra at 387.
No one factor, however, is controlling. Weber v. Commissioner,
supra. After considering these factors, we conclude that
petitioner was not an employee of TPD but performed his off-duty
security services as an independent contractor.
First, petitioner was not an employee of TPD while working
off-duty assignments because TPD did not control petitioner’s
off-duty employment activities. TPD’s control over petitioner’s
conduct relating to off-duty security services (e.g., requiring
officers to obtain approval prior to accepting off-duty jobs,
imposing a minimum pay rate, and requiring officers to respond to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011