In today's economic climate, downsizing is an unfortunate reality for many businesses. Despite staff reductions, a company must continue to produce if it is to survive long term. While contingent staffing may seem like a logical way to get the work done (and keep headcount - and associated employment costs such as taxes and benefits - down), think twice before engaging the services of a so-called "independent contractor."
Simply because (a) you refer to a worker as an IC, (b) he or she has agreed to the arrangement in a written contract, and (c) payments are issued by accounts payable rather than the payroll department does not mean that the individual is, in fact, an IC. The nature of the relationship between the individual and the company is the true determinant and misclassification can result in serious consequences for an organization. These consequences include backpaying taxes, providing benefits - including vacation pay, stock options, and 401(K) contributions - retroactively, and stiff financial penalties.
There are a number of events that may trigger an investigation into your worker classification practices. For example, a contingent worker may apply for unemployment benefits at the conclusion of his or her contract, make a complaint of discrimination or harassment, or file a Worker Compensation claim. Additionally, the IRS may target your organization for an audit, either randomly or in reaction to a sudden and significant change in the number of reported W-2 employees.
The specific criteria used to discern whether an individual is an employee or an IC depends upon which government agency is researching the situation. But beware: It is not uncommon for one office to get others involved, and their conclusions are not always consistent!
The focus of any such inquiry is the level of control that the employer holds over the individual. It is important to note that whether this control is actually exerted is irrelevant; what really matters is whether the employer could, if it so desired, dictate the details of the individual's work.
The Internal Revenue Service's 20-Factor Control Test is the most explicit in its requirements. The good news is that no single factor is decisive. Rather, the facts and circumstances surrounding all of them must be carefully considered when assessing the degree of control that exists in a given work arrangement.
 |
