- 14 -
conduct his business. Caselaw does not permit a taxpayer to use
his or her dual role as a shareholder of and service provider to
a corporation as grounds for ignoring the legal ramifications of
the business construct so selected. Moline Props., Inc. v.
Commissioner, 319 U.S. 436, 438-439 (1943); Joseph M. Grey Pub.
Accountant, P.C. v. Commissioner, supra at 129.
3. Application of Section 3121(d)(1)
On the basis of the foregoing analysis, application of
section 3121(d)(1) is not precluded or limited here by
considerations pertaining to Ridge’s status as an S corporation
shareholder or under the common law. Section 3121(d)(1) and
sections 31.3121(d)-1(b) and 31.3306(i)-1(e), Employment Tax
Regs., specify that corporate officers are to be classified as
employees if they perform more than minor services and receive or
are entitled to receive remuneration. The overwhelming weight of
the evidence here shows that Ridge’s activities vis-a-vis
petitioner met these criteria. (Accordingly, considerations with
respect to burden of proof do not affect our analysis on this
point.) Ridge at all relevant times served as petitioner’s
president and worked in all significant aspects of petitioner’s
business operations. Ridge also obtained remuneration from
petitioner as his needs arose.
Furthermore, although section 3121(d)(1) may be inapplicable
to the extent that an officer performs services in some other
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011