- 11 -
Commissioner, 103 T.C. 378, 386 (1994), affd. 60 F.3d 1104 (4th
Cir. 1995); Profl. & Exec. Leasing, Inc. v. Commissioner, 89 T.C.
225, 232 (1987), affd. 862 F.2d 751 (9th Cir. 1988). Factors
that are relevant in determining the substance of an employment
relationship include: (1) The degree of control exercised by the
principal over the details of the work; (2) the taxpayer’s
investment in the facilities used in his or her work; (3) the
taxpayer’s opportunity for profit or loss; (4) the permanency of
the relationship between the parties; (5) the principal’s right
of discharge; (6) whether the work performed is an integral part
of the principal’s regular business; (7) the relationship the
parties believe they are creating; and (8) the provision of
employee benefits. NLRB v. United Ins. Co. of Am., 390 U.S. 254,
258 (1968); Weber v. Commissioner, supra at 387; Profl. & Exec.
Leasing, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 232; see also secs.
31.3121(d)-(1)(c)(2), 31.3401(c)-1(a) and (b), Employment Tax
Regs.
No single factor is dispositive; the Court must assess and
weigh all incidents of the relationship. Nationwide Mut. Ins.
Co. v. Darden, supra at 324. The factors are not weighed
equally; they were weighed according to their significance in the
particular case. Aymes v. Bonelli, 980 F.2d 857, 861 (2d Cir.
1992). Moreover, while all of the above factors are important,
the right-to-control test is the “master test” in determining the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011