If a person provides labor.............AND........is compensated for that labor under some method...........has to be handled as earned income under the law.   If not an employee, then 1099 must be used to record that INTENT.

If a person gifts his labor..............then INTENT steps forward again, and rules with respect to the transactors-----------BUT not necessarily with respect to those who enforce the letter of the law, ie the IRS.

If they can show that even though the ee/er INTENDED that gifts were exchanged, if the meat of the transaction indicates that the so-called intent was merely to avoid taxes------ie INTENT as presented is hooey, that another INTENT really existed-----like compensation STYLED as a gift-------they will discard the INTENT as presented, and enforce the letter of the law.

Practically speaking..........the transaction will not be sizeable enough for the IRS to try and overturn the presented INTENT.

The point to all of this diatribe is---------------there is in fact something called a gift of labor............I did it a number of years ago, for example, just to have an excuse to get out of a friggin' (that's a technical term) office for a while.  If that is the intent, then there is no taxable event.

But.........the catch.........as always..........is proving it..........doing what is necessary to make others believe your position.

"Any reasonable person" can look at the circumstances, and know if a gift were intended.  (Now, just what is a reasonable person???------an IRS agent having a good day??   My wife during the fifteen minutes after she got her new patio???)

How big was the transaction?  What were the characteristics of the transaction---former farmer now retired getting a chance to do the things he had done for the prior 50 years?  Helping out a friend?

In the cases noted waaaay above, I would bet a lot of money that a "gift" situation was intended, and could be sustained, and the IRS would leave things alone......because it sounds as if that was what was really intended.

But........do not EVER discount the possibility of the IRS exploiting a situation to merely use it as a learning device for the neighbors and friends and other business people and tax preparers, etc etc...........cheapest enforcement tool they have.

And, with the way the Dems are spending money right now, expect IRS audits to increase.......IRS is still the Fed govt's biggest profit-making enterprise............they have already made public statements that such is going to happen.  

(That reference to the "Dems" was for you, Don!!!!  Heh, heh.......)

Just be careful about leaving a trail that negates the INTENT of a gifting process........like making sure that a "gift" is made of value equal to the value of the labor provided, etc etc.

Like they say, don't get into a spitting match with a cobra.......and fighting with the IRS over "intent" would be just that.

And, really, the smaller the transaction, the less an auditor SHOULD be concerned about it..........although there are anal persons in every part of life.

In your case, I would be really disappointed if the IRS looked at that situation and called the events taxable............nature of the person providing the labor was probably such that he did not need the labor to live on, probably could be shown that he derived more satisfaction from providing the labor (being on the farm) than he did from receiving compensation, and you took no tax benefits from your reciprocity......so screwing the govt was not "intended".

Soooooo........that said.........it appears that you're not going to be hauled off to jail in the near future, and we're going to have to put up with your OUTLANDISH political beliefs for a while longer!!!!!!!