- 6 -
Loss, characterize the foregoing amounts as nonpassive income
from Schedules K-1.
The Notice of Determination
Prior to the audit underlying the instant case covering
1996, 1997, and 1998, respondent neither audited petitioner for
employment tax purposes nor challenged petitioner’s treatment of
Stark as other than an employee. Thereafter, on June 8, 2001,
respondent sent to petitioner the notice of determination at
issue in this proceeding. The notice was based on a
determination that Stark was to be legally classified as an
employee for purposes of Federal employment taxes and that
petitioner was not entitled to relief from such classification
pursuant to Section 530. Enclosed with the notice was a schedule
setting forth petitioner’s liabilities for FICA and FUTA taxes.
It is stipulated that, if the Court decides that Stark is to
be classified as an employee for Federal employment tax purposes
for all periods in 1996, 1997, and 1998, the amounts of taxes due
and owing are as set forth in the notice of determination.
Conversely, if the Court decides that Stark should not be
classified as an employee for any of the periods in issue, the
parties agree that petitioner owes no employment taxes.
ULTIMATE FINDINGS OF FACT
Stark, as president of petitioner, performed more than minor
services and received remuneration therefor.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011