Leonard G. TONKIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret H. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee

Ninth Circuit

Leonard G. TONKIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret H. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee

734 F.2d 1388, 5 Soc. Serv. Rev. 263

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided June 12, 1984·No. 83-5755·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Leonard Tonkin appeals the judgment in favor of the Secretary holding in effect that he was overpaid in Social Security Retirement Insurance in 1979. We affirm.

The Secretary found that Tonkin could not deduct business expenses because he was an employee and, therefore, he had erroneously understated his net earnings for Social Security purposes. Tonkin contends that he was an independent contractor, not an employee, and thus was entitled to deduct business expenses from net income as he would for tax purposes.

The Secretary’s findings of fact, if supported by substantial evidence, are conclusive. 42 U.S.C. 405(g); see Sample v. Schweiker, 694 F.2d 639, 642 (9th Cir.1982); Thompson v. Schweiker, 665 F.2d 936, 939 (9th Cir.1982).

Substantial evidence supports the Secretary’s finding that Tonkin was an employee, rather than an independent contractor, and thus was not entitled to deduct business expenses. See Flemming v. Huycke, 284 F.2d 546, 547-48 (9th Cir.1960); Selman v. Califano, 619 F.2d 881, 882-83 (10th Cir.1980); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1007.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Leonard Tonkin appeals the judgment in favor of the Secretary holding in effect that he was overpaid in Social Security Retirement Insurance in 1979. We affirm.

The Secretary found that Tonkin could not deduct business expenses because he was an employee and, therefore, he had erroneously understated his net earnings for Social Security purposes. Tonkin contends that he was an independent contractor, not an employee, and thus was entitled to deduct business expenses from net income as he would for tax purposes.

The Secretary’s findings of fact, if supported by substantial evidence, are conclusive. 42 U.S.C. 405(g); see Sample v. Schweiker, 694 F.2d 639, 642 (9th Cir.1982); Thompson v. Schweiker, 665 F.2d 936, 939 (9th Cir.1982).

Substantial evidence supports the Secretary’s finding that Tonkin was an employee, rather than an independent contractor, and thus was not entitled to deduct business expenses. See Flemming v. Huycke, 284 F.2d 546, 547-48 (9th Cir.1960); Selman v. Califano, 619 F.2d 881, 882-83 (10th Cir.1980); 20 C.F.R. § 404.1007.

Affirmed.

Leonard G. TONKIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret H. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee, 734 F.2d 1388, 5 Soc. Serv. Rev. 263 (9th Cir. 1984).

Pincite

734 F.2d 1388 (Leonard G. TONKIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Margaret H. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related