- 13 -
We address the issue under four headings. First, we examine
the history of the commercial practices and employment tax
treatment of fishing boat workers and fishing boat owners.
Second, we interpret the requirement that an individual receive a
share of the “proceeds” from the sale of the catch that “depends
on the amount” of the boat’s catch. In arriving at our
interpretation, we examine: (a) The general meaning of the terms
in section 3121(b)(20) and section 31.3121(b)(20)-1(a),
Employment Tax Regs.; (b) the legislative history and
congressional intent underlying section 3121(b)(20) and the
issuance of section 31.3121(b)(20)-1(a), Employment Tax Regs.;
(c) Rev. Rul. 77-102, supra, and (d) the $100 exception in
section 3121(b)(20)(A) and whether and how the canon of statutory
construction “expressio unius est exclusio alterius” bears on the
question. Third, we apply section 3121(b)(20) to petitioner’s
fishing activities in light of our interpretation of the statute
and the regulation that his share of the proceeds after
subtraction of operating expenses depended on the amount of the
catch. Fourth, we consider petitioners’ other arguments.
1. History of Compensation Arrangements for Fishing Boat Workers
a. The Lay System
It has been customary in the fishing industry for fishing
boat owners to compensate their workers under the “lay” or
“share” system; under this system, workers on fishing boats
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