- 12 -
During the years in issue, the functions that petitioner hired
Smith and Mawson to complete were functions of the operation of
his law practice, including filing court documents, photocopying,
running errands, and sending outgoing mail. These facts indicate
employee status.
6. Permanency of the Relationship
Smith worked for petitioner for 4 years, and Mawson worked
for petitioner for three quarters of 1997. Respondent asserts
that these time periods are sufficient to create a permanent
relationship. Petitioner argues that “there was never anything
permanent about the relationship with either Smith or Mawson.
The relationship was loose and transitory in every respect.”
A transitory work relationship may point toward independent
contractor status. See Ewens & Miller, Inc. v. Commissioner, 117
T.C. at 273. Smith, however, did not have a transitory
relationship with petitioner. Petitioner testified that Smith
could leave at any time for a better offer; however, this
possibility does not demonstrate a transitory relationship.
Although Smith and Mawson did not always work regular schedules
and Smith sometimes worked for third parties, they worked in the
course of petitioner’s regular business, and their respective
relationships with petitioner were not transitory in nature.
7. Relationship the Parties Thought They Created
Petitioner argued repeatedly at trial and on brief that he
intentionally established Smith and Mawson as independent
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011