Contractor Classification Risk Checker
Answer seven quick questions about how you actually work with a contractor and get risk indicators based on the CRA and ESA's real classification factors — a signal for where to get a lawyer's eyes, not a verdict.
The questionnaire
Answer based on how the relationship actually works, not what the contract says.
Q1 · Control
Who controls how, when, and where the work gets done?
Q2 · Tools & Equipment
Who supplies the tools, equipment, software, and workspace used for the work?
Q3 · Exclusivity
Does the worker provide services to other clients, or only to your business?
Q4 · Integration
How integrated is the worker into your day-to-day operations?
Q5 · Financial Risk
How is the worker paid, and who bears the financial risk?
Q6 · Subcontracting
Can the worker delegate the work or hire their own help to complete it?
Q7 · Duration
Is this an ongoing, indefinite relationship or a defined-scope engagement?
Your risk indicator appears here
Answer all 7questions to see risk indicators based on the CRA and ESA's common classification factors.
Note: Estimate only — not legal or tax advice, and not a definitive worker classification. CRA and ESA classification tests are fact-specific and multi-factor; this tool highlights risk indicators only. Last reviewed August 1, 2026 — reviewed annually or on CRA/ESA test changes.
Legal Guide
How worker classification actually works in Ontario
A contractor label on a contract doesn't decide anything on its own. Here's what the CRA and Ontario courts actually look at — and what's at stake if the relationship gets misclassified.
The contract's label doesn't control
Calling someone a contractor in a written agreement doesn't make them one. The CRA and Ontario courts look past the label to how the relationship actually works day to day — the paperwork is a starting point, not the answer.
The CRA's two-step test
The CRA first looks at what the parties intended when they set up the relationship, then checks that intention against reality — control, who owns the tools, chance of profit or risk of loss, and integration into the business. Intention alone doesn't win if the facts point the other way.
Ontario's ESA presumption
Under the Employment Standards Act, 2000, a worker is presumed to be an employee unless the employer can prove otherwise. That flips the usual burden — a business relying on contractor status has to be able to demonstrate it, not just assert it.
Control carries the most weight
Of all the classification factors, control — who decides how, when, and where the work happens — is generally treated as the most important. A worker who is told exactly how to do their job, on a schedule the company sets, looks like an employee no matter what the contract says.
What misclassification can cost
Getting it wrong can expose a business to retroactive CRA source-deduction assessments (CPP, EI, and income tax) and, under the ESA, liability for unpaid overtime, vacation pay, public holiday pay, and termination or severance entitlements — plus the cost of defending the claim itself.
A written agreement is a start, not a shield
A properly drafted independent contractor agreement helps — but it won't save a misclassified relationship if the day-to-day facts point to employment. The agreement has to match how the parties actually work together, not just describe how they'd like a regulator to see it.
Is this a legal classification, not just a risk indicator?
This tool produces risk indicators only — never a definitive legal classification. It scores your answers against the common factors the CRA and Ontario courts weigh, but it isn't a CRA ruling, an Employment Standards Officer's determination, or legal advice. The actual classification of any working relationship depends on its full facts, assessed by the CRA or a court.
What factors do the CRA and Ontario courts actually look at?
The CRA's common-law test weighs control, ownership of tools and equipment, chance of profit and risk of loss, and integration into the business, with the ability to subcontract as a related consideration. Ontario courts and the Ministry of Labour apply substantially the same factors when assessing Employment Standards Act claims, and add the presumption that a worker is an employee unless the employer proves otherwise.
Can I get a formal ruling instead of guessing?
Yes. Either the payer or the worker can ask the CRA for a CPP/EI ruling on a specific worker's employment status, and the CRA will issue a binding determination based on the facts submitted. It's a more formal, fact-intensive process than this tool, and it's worth doing for any relationship where real money is at stake.
What actually happens if a worker is misclassified?
On the tax side, the CRA can reassess the business for unremitted CPP contributions, EI premiums, and income tax withholdings going back multiple years, plus interest and penalties. On the employment side, a misclassified worker can claim the ESA entitlements they were denied — overtime, vacation pay, public holiday pay, and notice or severance on termination — and may also pursue a wrongful dismissal claim at common law.
Does a written independent contractor agreement guarantee contractor status?
No. A well-drafted agreement is evidence of the parties' intent and can genuinely help, but the CRA and courts look at how the relationship functions in practice. If the actual working arrangement looks like employment — set hours, close supervision, no ability to profit or lose — a contract calling the worker a contractor won't override that.
How current is this tool's question set?
The factors behind this checker were last reviewed August 1, 2026, against current CRA guidance and Ontario Employment Standards Act case law. We review the question set annually, or sooner if the CRA or the ESA's classification tests change.