- 12 - principal’s regular business; (6) the permanency of the relationship; and (7) the relationship the parties believed they were creating, Ewens & Miller, Inc. v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 263, 270 (2001); Weber v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 378, 387 (1994), affd. 60 F.3d 1104 (4th Cir. 1995); Potter v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-356. No single factor is dispositive. Ewens & Miller, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 270. If an employer-employee relationship exists, characterization by the parties as some other relationship is immaterial. Sec. 31.3121(d)-1(a)(3), Employment Tax Regs. A. Degree of Control The “degree of control” test requires the Court to examine not only the control exercised by an alleged employer, but also the degree to which the alleged employer may intervene to impose control. Weber v. Commissioner, supra at 387-388. The agreement stated that “Peno Trucking Inc. shall not direct in any manner the means or method by which Operator shall perform his occupation” and “Operators shall, at all times applicable hereto, work at the direction and control of” persons or corporations petitioner contracts with to transport goods. The stipulated facts and testimony clearly show otherwise. Pursuant to the leases with Ohio Transport, petitioner was responsible for hiring drivers, overseeing all work performed by the drivers, confirming their work was performed in accordancePage: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 NextLast modified: November 10, 2007