- 22 -
1999, and i2’s February 29, 2000, payroll register stated
petitioner was terminated. The evidence indicates an employee-
employer relationship did not exist after December 31, 1999.
None of the factors listed above support petitioner’s
position. Considering all of the facts and circumstances, this
Court finds petitioner was not a common law employee of i2 after
he retired on December 31, 1999, and was not an employee within 3
months of exercising his ISOs on November 13, 2000, for purposes
of section 422(a)(2). As a result, section 421 did not apply to
the exercise of petitioner’s ISOs on November 13, 2000, and
section 83 did.
The remaining issues will not be addressed because they rely
upon this Court’s finding petitioner was an employee within 3
months of exercising his ISOs for purposes of section 422(a)(2).
In reaching these holdings, the Court has considered all
arguments made and, to the extent not mentioned, concludes that
they are moot, irrelevant, or without merit.
To reflect the foregoing and the concessions of the parties,
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Last modified: May 25, 2011