California has a weird hobby: taking normal business relationships and turning them into legal trivia contests with expensive prizes. If you hire independent contractors (ICs) in California, you’re operating in a world shaped by Dynamex and AB 5 (plus later amendments). The big takeaway is simple: California starts from suspicion, not trust. Your job is to structure the relationship so it can survive scrutiny.

This post is a practical, more generic overview of how California looks at ICs, what the main “tests” are, and how the carve-outs work in real life.

The Big Framework: The ABC Test (And Why It’s Such a Problem)

For many California labor issues, worker classification is analyzed under the ABC test. A worker is presumed to be an employee unless the hiring business can prove all three parts:

  1. Autonomy: The worker is free from the control and direction of the hiring entity in performing the work (both under the contract and in practice).
  2. Business difference: The worker performs work outside the usual course of the hiring entity’s business.
  3. Customary trade: The worker is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business of the same nature as the work performed.

Part B is the one that sinks most “common sense” contractor setups. If the person is doing what your company primarily sells, California often says: that’s not a contractor, that’s an employee with a different label on the jar.

Paperwork Doesn’t Beat Behavior

A written agreement matters, but it’s not a force field. A 1099 doesn’t magically turn someone into a contractor.

California cares most about how the relationship functions:

If it walks like an employee and quacks like payroll, the state isn’t going to be impressed by your beautifully formatted contract.

“Carve-Outs” Exist, But They’re Not Get-Out-of-Jail Cards

California does have a long list of exemptions (“carve-outs”) where the ABC test may not apply, or applies differently. The important nuance: many carve-outs do not mean “free and clear.” Often they shift you from ABC to a different standard (commonly Borello), and they come with conditions.

Common carve-out categories people run into include:

The carve-out list is detailed, and the conditions matter. The easiest way to mess this up is to assume “my industry is on a list somewhere” and then ignore the operational requirements.

The Most Practical Safer Path: Treat Contractors Like Real Businesses

One of the strongest risk-reduction strategies in California is shifting from “I hire a person” to “I contract with a legitimate independent business.” That’s the logic behind the B2B concept, and it’s also just common sense from an audit-defense standpoint.

A “real vendor” typically has:

If your “contractor” has one client (you), uses your tools, follows your schedule, and bills like payroll, it’s going to be a long day if anyone asks questions.

Invoicing: Small Detail, Big Signal

How contractors invoice is one of those boring details that becomes a huge signal in a dispute.

Cleaner vendor-style invoicing includes:

Red flags include:

A Realistic Conclusion

California doesn’t ban independent contractors. It just makes you prove they’re independent, and it punishes “contractors” that function as under-the-table employees.

So the playbook is:

If your margins are thin, the temptation is to cut corners. California’s response to that temptation is usually: “Perfect. Now pay it all later, with penalties.”