Smart Benefits: Determine Independent Contractor vs. Employee for ACA Compliance
Monday, September 14, 2015
The distinction between employee and independent contractor is important, since employees are entitled to workplace protections such as minimum wage, overtime, and workers' compensation. In addition, ACA regulations specifically state that independent contractors are not considered employees for purposes of providing health benefits. Due to an increasing number of misclassifications of employees as independent contractors, the new guidance aims to help employers properly determine a worker’s status.
While there is no clear-cut checklist or rule to determine whether a worker is an employee or independent contractor under the FLSA, courts use the multi-factorial “economic realities” test, which focuses on whether the worker is economically dependent on the employer (an employee) or in business for him or herself (an independent contractor). This test should be applied in view of the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FSLA) broad scope of employment and the “suffer or permit” standard.
To assist in the determination of worker status, the Interpretation provides a discussion of several factors employers should consider to classify workers, including:
• Is the work an integral part of the employer’s business?
• Does the worker’s managerial skill affect the worker’s opportunity for profit or loss?
• How does the worker’s relative investment compare to the employer’s investment?
• Does the work performed require special skill and initiative?
• Is the relationship between the worker and the employer permanent or indefinite?
• What is the nature and degree of the employer’s control?
The guidance stresses that there is no mechanical formula for using these factors to arrive at the correct result; rather, they should be considered and weighed against one another in each situation to determine whether the worker is really in business for him or herself or is economically dependent on the employer.
Related Slideshow: Massachusetts Business Rankings
See how Massachusetts stacked up.
Related Articles
- Smart Benefits: New SBC Template Delayed ‘Til 2016
- Smart Benefits: Are You Audit-Ready?
- Smart Benefits: EEOC Notice Clarifies ADA-Compliant Wellness Programs
- Smart Benefits: New Study Shows Exchange Satisfaction Higher
- Smart Benefits: Self-Funded Insurance - A Growing Option Among Employers
- Smart Benefits: New FMLA Spouse Definition Now In Effect
- Smart Benefits: HHS to Up Investigations of Exchanges
- Smart Benefits: Voluntary Benefits Up with Employers and Employees
- Smart Benefits: FLSA Exempt Status Change for Home Care Workers Halted
- Smart Benefits: 8 Reasons to Have an Employee Handbook
- Smart Benefits: Fines for Small Business Premium Reimbursement Delayed
- Smart Benefits: Public Comment Period for Cadillac Tax Closed
- Smart Benefits: “Embedded” Out-of-Pocket Limits Required for Group Plans in 2016
- Smart Benefits: IRS Releases ACA Taxpayer Data for 2014
- Smart Benefits: Draft 2015 Forms Released for ACA Reporting
- Smart Benefits: Delaware Says No to State Exchange
- Smart Benefits: Is Your Package Competitive? What’s New in Employee Benefits
- Smart Benefits: File 2014 Taxes—or Risk Losing Subsidy
- Smart Benefits: SHRM Study Shows More Benefits Offered to Employees
- Smart Benefits: Fines Now In Effect for Small Business Health Plan Reimbursements
- Smart Benefits: Preventive Services Requirement Clarified
- Smart Benefits: Healthy Self” Campaign Highlights Preventive Services
- Smart Benefits: PCORI Fees Due July 31 for Some Employers
- Smart Benefits: Feedback on Next Essential Health Benefits Benchmark Plan Due June 30
- Smart Benefits: New IRS Notice Issued on Cadillac Tax
Follow us on Pinterest Google + Facebook Twitter See It Read It