I get that there doesn't have to be cash, but it does specifically say employee. And while it says that neither the contract nor state law determines whether the meals or lodging are intended as compensation, I have to assume that the code does defer to either state law or common law to determine whether or not an employee/employer relationship exists. And that is my question - what does it take to establish that an employee relationship actually exists? I'm not saying that there is none, but rather, how can it be shown to exist?
I would assume the usual questions concerning employee versus independent contractor apply. But that begs the question as to the possibility that neither applies.
BTW: If the landlord does pay cash in addition to free rent, the landlord should issue a W-2, not a 1099. According to the chart in TTB, page 13-7, if you call the caretaker an independent contractor, the meals and lodging exclusion cannot apply.
Comment