- 15 -
As Graham testified, he is “a one man band” with respect to
petitioner’s business activities. Graham also obtained
remuneration from petitioner’s bank account as his needs arose.
Furthermore, although section 3121(d)(1) may be inapplicable
to the extent that an officer performs services in some other
capacity, i.e., as an independent contractor, petitioner does not
contend and offered no evidence that Graham worked for or was
engaged by petitioner in a capacity other than president. See
Joseph M. Grey Pub. Accountant, P.C. v. Commissioner, 119 T.C. at
129-130; Rev. Rul. 82-83, 1982-1 C.B. 151, 152. Hence, we
conclude that Graham was an employee of petitioner for employment
tax purposes, in accordance with section 3121(d)(1).
B. Availability of Section 530 Relief
Section 530 affords relief from employment tax liability,
notwithstanding an adverse classification, where the following
three requirements are satisfied: (1) The taxpayer has not
treated the individual, or any individual holding a substantially
similar position, as an employee for any period; (2) the taxpayer
has consistently treated the individual as not being an employee
on all tax returns for periods after December 31, 1978; and
(3) the taxpayer has a reasonable basis for not treating the
individual as an employee. Sec. 530(a)(1), (3). With respect to
the case at bar, respondent has conceded that petitioner meets
the first of the above requirements and does not argue that
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