Not to be argumentative, but maybe instead of "exempt" a man or woman might write "except"ed 26 USC 3401(a)(8)(A)(I):
HEADSec.3401. Definitions -STATUTE- (a) Wages For purposes of this chapter, the term ''wages'' means all remuneration (other than fees paid to a public official) for services performed by an employee for his employer, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include remuneration paid - (8)(A) for services for an employer (other than the United States or any agency thereof) - (i) performed by a citizen of the United States if, at the time of the payment of such remuneration, it is reasonable to believe that such remuneration will be excluded from gross income under section 911;
Congress does clearly say "except" and not "exempt". Wonder why?
Maybe it has something to do with the Congress' defined employer and employee?
For purposes of this chapter, the term ''employee'' includes an officer, employee, or elected official of the United States, a State, or any political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. The term ''employee'' also includes an officer of a corporation.
For purposes of this chapter, the term ''employer'' means the person for whom an individual performs or performed any service, of whatever nature, as the employee of such person, except that - (1) if the person for whom the individual performs or performed the services does not have control of the payment of the wages for such services, the term ''employer'' (except for purposes of subsection (a)) means the person having control of the payment of such wages, and (2) in the case of a person paying wages on behalf of a nonresident alien individual, foreign partnership, or foreign corporation, not engaged in trade or business within the United
States, the term ''employer'' (except for purposes of subsection (a)) means such person.