- 14 -
right to discharge; and (7) the provision of benefits typical of
those provided to employees. NLRB v. United Ins. Co., 390 U.S.
254, 258-259 (1968); Weber v. Commissioner, supra at 387; Profl.
& Executive Leasing, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 232. No one
factor is determinative; rather, all the incidents of the
relationship must be assessed and weighed. NLRB v. United Ins.
Co., supra at 258.
1. Degree of Control Exercised by RHB
Although no single factor is dispositive, the test usually
considered fundamental is whether the alleged employer has the
right to control the activities of the individual whose status is
in issue. Weber v. Commissioner, supra at 387; Profl. &
Executive Leasing, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 232-233. In
order for an employer to retain the requisite control over the
details of an employee’s work, the employer need not stand over
the employee and direct every move made by the employee. Weber
v. Commissioner, supra at 388; Profl. & Executive Leasing, Inc.
v. Commissioner, supra at 234; Simpson v. Commissioner, supra at
985.
The threshold level of control necessary to find employee
status is generally lower when applied to professional services
than when applied to nonprofessional services. Weber v.
Commissioner, supra at 388; James v. Commissioner, 25 T.C. 1296,
1301 (1956). In James v. Commissioner, supra at 1301, this Court
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011