Barium & Chemicals, Inc. - Page 10

                                       - 10 -                                         
               employee is subject to the will and control of the                     
               employer not only as to what shall be done but how it                  
               shall be done.  In this connection, it is not necessary                
               that the employer actually direct or control the manner                
               in which the services are performed; it is sufficient                  
               if he has the right to do so.  The right to discharge                  
               is also an important factor indicating that the person                 
               possessing that right is an employer.  Other factors                   
               characteristic of an employer, but not necessarily                     
               present in every case, are the furnishing of tools and                 
               the furnishing of a place to work, to the individual                   
               who performs the services.  In general, if an                          
               individual is subject to the control or direction of                   
               another merely as to the result to be accomplished by                  
               the work and not as to the means and methods for                       
               accomplishing the result, he is an independent                         
               contractor. * * *                                                      
               In deciding whether a worker is a common law employee or an            
          independent contractor, the following factors are considered:               
          (1) The degree of control exercised by the principal; (2) which             
          party invests in the work facilities used by the individual;                
          (3) the opportunity of the individual for profit or loss;                   
          (4) whether the principal can discharge the individual;                     
          (5) whether the work is part of the principal's regular business;           
          (6) the permanency of the relationship; and (7) the relationship            
          that the parties believed that they were creating.  Ewens &                 
          Miller, Inc. v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 263, 270 (2001); Weber v.            
          Commissioner, supra at 387.  All of the facts and circumstances             
          of each case are considered, and no single factor is dispositive.           
          Ewens & Miller, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 270; Weber v.                
          Commissioner, supra at 387.                                                 

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011