Are you as a real estate salesperson an independent contractor
or an employee? Or, perhaps, a little of
both?
Most real estate salespersons enter into independent contractor agreements with their employing broker. An independent contractor agreement (commonly known as an “ICA”) may address:
- Obligations
of the salesperson to:
- Remain licensed
- Maintain REALTOR®
membership
- Abide by all laws and rules
- Abide by broker’s policies and
procedures
- Pay any amounts due to the broker
as set forth
- Work diligently
- Obligations
of the broker to:
- Remain licensed
- Compensate the salesperson in
the manner set forth
- Provide office space
- Other important
terms, such as:
- Independent contractor status
- E&O insurance
- Allocation of expenses
- Teams
- Payment of commissions on
pending transactions upon departure of the salesperson
- The files and documents that
the salesperson may take upon departure
- Dispute resolution between
broker and salesperson as well as between two salespersons within the
brokerage
- Liability and indemnification
Despite entering into an independent contractor
agreement, salespersons are often considered “employees” for regulatory and
civil liability purposes.
Regulatory Liability: For regulatory purposes, the Arizona Department of Real Estate Rules require the broker to maintain close supervision and control over salespeople. R4‑28‑1103(A). Further R4‑28‑1103 (D) provides: “An employing broker is responsible for the acts of all associate brokers, salespersons, and other employees acting within the scope of their employment.” Therefore, an employing broker can be sanctioned by the ADRE for the failure to exercise reasonable supervision and control “over the activities of salespersons . . . under the broker’s employ . . ..” A.R.S. §32-2153(21).
Civil Liability for Negligent or Fraudulent Conduct: As a result of the right to control, the employing broker is held liable for the acts of salespersons in court lawsuits under the doctrine of “respondeat superior” which literally translates to “let the master answer.” This court doctrine dating back to the 17th century, provides that an employer can be held liable for damages caused by the employee acting within the scope of employment. Thus, a broker is generally held liable for damages resulting from the negligent or fraudulent conduct of the broker’s salespeople acting within the scope of their “employment”.
·
The salesperson was a licensed
professional who had nearly complete discretion in the time, manner, and means
in which he traveled to meet clients.
·
The ICA expressly characterized the
salesperson as an independent contractor who was “free to devote” his time,
energy, effort, and skill as he saw fit.
·
The salesperson “was not required to
keep specific hours, attend sales meetings, or meet any sales quotas.
·
Although the broker “provided
optional office space, administrative services, sales leads, and training,” the
salesperson was charged a monthly fee for these services.
·
The salesperson “chose the territory
where he worked, created his own advertisements, prospected for clients, drove
his own car, worked from his home office, worked purely for commission, and set
up his own appointments.”
The defendant broker “had a degree of control” over the salesperson but only as it related to real estate transactions, which were not at issue in the wrongful death auto accident case. And although the defendant broker required the salesperson to carry auto insurance, that requirement did not dictate a right to control his driving and the defendant broker did not tell the salesperson “which houses to visit, what routes to take, or when to meet clients.”
Salespersons are “Statutory Non-employees” for Tax Purposes
The Internal
Revenue Code provides a statutory classification for real estate salespersons as
“statutory non-employees” for federal income and
employment tax purposes. To qualify for “statutory non-employee” status, the
real estate salesperson must:
- Be licensed as a real estate agent.
- Receive substantially all compensation based on sales
or other output, rather than the number of hours worked.
- Have a written contract with the brokerage firm that
provides that the salesperson will not be treated as an employee for
federal tax purposes.
I.R.C. §3508
Additionally, real estate brokers are exempt from Arizona withholding tax requirements. Since the federal tax code does not require withholding of income taxes, the Arizona withholding statute does not require withholding either. A.R.S. §43‑401.
The Workers’ Compensation Act exempts real estate salespersons from its provisions when:
·
Substantially all income received
for services is directly related to sales rather than the number of hours worked.
·
The services performed by the
salesperson are performed pursuant to a written contract between the
salesperson and broker.
·
The contract specifically provides
that the salesperson is not treated as an employee for federal tax purposes or
for the purposes of the Workers’ Compensation chapter.
A.R.S. §23‑910.
Because of statutory exemptions, if there is a properly
drafted independent contractor agreement, the broker/salesperson relationship
is not treated as an employment relationship for the purposes of federal and
state tax withholding, unemployment compensation contributions or workers’
compensation insurance. However, for regulatory and civil liability purposes the
real estate broker/salesperson relationship may be one of employer/employee
depending upon the facts and circumstances.
K. Michelle Lind,
Esq. is an attorney who currently serves Of Counsel to the Arizona
REALTORS®. She is the author of the
book - Arizona Real Estate: A Professional's Guide
to Law and Practice (3rd Ed.) .
For more real
estate related articles, visit Michelle’s Blog at Arizona Real Estate – A Professional’s Guide
to Law & Practice. (arizonarealestateprofessionalguide.blogspot.com)
This article is
of a general nature and may not be updated or revised for accuracy as statutory
or case law changes following the date of first publication. Further, this
article reflects only the opinion of the author, is not intended as definitive
legal advice and you should not act upon it without seeking independent legal
counsel. 1/24/23
No comments:
Post a Comment