[MajorDave]

I'm not a lawyer but I play one, on occasion, on TV. Just kidding.

Actually, I was one in real life (I quit practicing three years ago) and I have litigated this issue with other types of professions other than officiating.

Most professions and employers spend lots of time and money trying to have their workers classified as independent contractors to avoid the expenses of unemployment insurance, FICA, income tax withholding, workers compensation insurance, etc. as they all require some sort of employer accounting and funds matching and ultimately expense for the employer.

The real key issue for the IRS and most courts in the nation is the right to control the work. When to work? What to do at work? How to do the actual job? Where the job is performed? What the workers wear while at work? Who owns the equipment and machinery used in the work? These are all important questions and the answers determine how the issue will be decided. There is no hard and fast rule but the right to control the work is the essential question. The intent of the parties at the outset of the agreement is also a consideration but is not a paramount consideration. Both parties can agree that they intended to create an independent contractor relationship but the government tends favor employer-employee status due to the tax and workers compensation factors.

Whatever happens good luck in your endeavors.

(disclaimer: This is not an attempt to offer specific legal advice. It is merely an attempt to make you aware of the depth of the legal issues in play here. Please discuss your specific facts and circumstances with a competent attorney in your local area.) The bar association makes me say that.