I am starting up my AXP record process and I want to know what type of Employment is acceptable by NCARB when logging in my hours through them. I understand that my supervisor needs to be a Registered Architect. ( 1 ) Can I work as a 1099 or do I need to be a W-2? ( 2 ) does it matter if I work Full-time or Part-time?
W-2 is essentially a guarantee especially if you work under the supervision of an architect. If you are under the supervision of an architect that meets professional standard of care regarding the direct control and supervision, you can not legally be an independent contractor. An architect stamping work prepared by an unlicensed person who is in an independent contractor relationship, the architect would be aiding and abetting unlawful practice of architecture of an unlicensed person by stamping drawings not prepared under direct supervision and control. Direct supervision and control requires the person to be EMPLOYED as an employee not as an independent contractor. Direct supervision and control is a requirement for most of the AXP hours.
However, there are two types of employment as an employee. One is standard employment and the other is as a contracted employee but you'll need to be an employee as would be taxed as one not an independent contractor because the independence of direct supervision and control is an essential part of the very definition of an independent contractor.
Yes, there are architects that are technically violating the laws with interns/AXP trainees working in an independent contractor relationship. 1099-MISC (described under IRS as self-employment) is essentially another way of saying "independent contractor" and should only apply to independent contractor relationship such as between a professional and a client. The problem is, if you are an independent contractor working with an architect, you might have your AXP hours rejected by NCARB.
There was a short time in the early days of the transition from IDP to AXP, where independent contractor relationship was accepted by NCARB but that was removed after they started realizing, such would technically be violating architectural licensing/title/and practice laws because an architect would be violating the stamping requirements in many states. This doesn't mean an employee has to regularly work IN the office. They have to exercise the same direction, control & supervision as they would with a regularly employed employee which then means that "irregular employee" is an employee and the employee must withhold taxes and such with regards to pay, that 'irregular' yet contracted employee as any other regular employee.
There is an unclear grey area where the architect and unlicensed person may be business partners. The architect would not be a subordinate employee and can't be fired so that may be acceptable if supervision & control requirements are met but this isn't a very clear area and risky because poor haphazard documenting of how the direct supervision and control by the architect is met can result in hours not being approved and accepted by NCARB.
If you want your hours not rejected, make sure it's an actual employment relationship and taxed accordingly as a genuine employee with what may be a hybrid (remote/in-office) work structure at the very least. There should be regular and documented communication and somewhat frequent in-person work throughout every stage of the preparation where the architect has control, direction, and supervision over the preparation of everything you produce for the architect..
As to whether working part-time or full-time doesn't matter as much but you may matter with some states at licensure time if you had part-time work too short in duration and they reject some of those hours.
If you work part-time, you should be working at least 20-30 hours a week and for more than 6 months, at least 9 months to be on the safe side and be paid as any other employee even if you don't work all the time in the architect's office.
And for example, currently I work with a GC as an Assistant Project Manager. One of the Project Managers is a Licensed Architect, but non-practicing. I would not be able to get hours signed off by them b/c I am not getting paid directly by them, correct? I get paid by the Company, which is not an Architecture Firm.
Aug 17, 23 7:10 am ·
·
Non Sequitur
Need to be employed under the direct supervision of a licensed arch. Just because your GC has an arch on staff to rubber-stamp whatever does not make it appropriate for IDP.
Check out page 20 of the AXP Guidelines. You are in an experience setting O where you can earn up to 1,860 hours. To establish supervision, you need to set up and document regular periodic check-ins and mentoring with the licensed co-worker. The 1099 and the construction company paying you are non-issues for NCARB.
You can get Setting O hours but you need Setting A hours to complete AXP as a whole. There are limits on the hours under Setting O. I assumed you, the OP (ANTACE95), have read about those hours and already knew that so it would be Setting A hours that I reason to be what you are asking about. You can get hours for Setting O until you reached the limits but you will need Setting A still.
Under Setting A, you need to take those hours under a licensed architect and would need to be a genuine employee (regular and contracted employee).
ANTACE95, even if you are working for an architectural firm, you would still be working for a business entity but the work would need to be done under the architect (either a firm owner or a higher ranking employee that is an architect as architect of responsible charge. The architect will need to be in direct supervision and control over the project. Architectural firms may or may not have any special firm registration or license to practice architecture. Not all states require firms to be registered/licensed by the architect board. However, the firm must be engaged in the lawful practice of architecture and your supervisor being duly licensed. No credit for unlawful practice of architecture.
ANTACE95, Please reach out to your NCARB directly for things like this, or at least your local AIA chapter. I'm not a big AIA fan but they have their purpose. Reallynotmyname gives you good guidance, look at the source AXP guidelines. You wouldn't take our word on a code question would you? As an architect, you should get used to this protocol as much of our work involves pushing paper and producing documentation that must comply with many separate jurisdiction requirements.
1) read the source requirements (in this case, NCARB) 2) ask a senior registered architect on staff for clarification (particularly the PA/PM on the project) 3) if still unsure, schedule a meeting with the authority having jurisdiction and get their take in writing
From an NCARB blog: "NCARB has updated its rules and requirements for the AXP to allow for contract work, as well as 100 percent remote work to qualify as 'direct supervision'.” https://www.ncarb.org/blog/a-g...
Get it in writing from NCARB and the relevant state architects' board, though, since they are the ones who have to sign off on this. I've read NY state does not accept independent contract work hours for AXP credit against the national norm, so verify that if you're seeking licensure in NY. Good luck!
To address confusion. Do NOT confuse contract work (CONTRACT EMPLOYMENT) with independent contractors. Contract employment would still be W-2. 1099-MISC applies in genuine independent contractor relationship. The legal definition of independent contractor relationship and the meaning of AXP/IDP and the condition of being under direct supervision and responsible control preclude independent contractor relationship.
When you consider the rules and laws of the practice of architecture, an architect must exercise a level of control over the AXP 'intern'/'designer aspiring to be an architect' when it comes to the practice of architecture that precludes the AXP 'intern' from being "independent" but a subordinate. While it is true that most remote work / contract employment would be with those who need a little less hand holding and has some level of self-initiative and can think, but they can't legally just design it and then go to the architect to review and stamp. That has been a no no in the profession for some time now.
Meeting one condition of an independent contractor relationship just isn't enough to qualify as an independent contractor in federal law and many states' laws. Contracted employees are still employees. They work FOR the employer. This doesn't mean an employee only can work as an employee for one employer.
You can work for McDonalds, work for Safeway, and work for a gas station, and be an employee in every one of those places of employment. 1099-MISC would be like a construction contractor is to a client. Like the architect is to a client. Like an consultant may be to the architect (like engineering or other outside consultants may be to the architect).
AXP and the architectural licensing laws requires the supervisor architect to have a supervision level and control by the architect that fundamentally precludes the intern from legally being an independent contractor. You should be treated as an employee, taxes accordingly, etc. Employer should bear the burden of the intern as employee even if it is under a contractual arrangement that is different than it may be for traditional employment contract. Technically, all employees are under a contract of some form with the employers but there is the default traditional employee (W-4). You will find a lot of confusing shit on the internet. Contract employees are employees but usually under a contract for a short term like project long but are not actually independent contractors. If you are under AXP training to get licensed, you would be an employee (regular or contractual) on fundamental levels. This is because to get the hours, you must not be in a position where you can fire your supervisor architect or override him or her and must be subordinate to. If you are an independent contractor to the architect, then it wouldn't count for AXP. If you were left to decide the design without the architect holding responsible control, it might be considered unlawful practice of architecture. This is why you still need to actually be an employee. This can be contractual based or regular employment.
Now, also do not conflate contract employment and remote work. Remote work has nothing to do with whether you are a regular employee or a contracted employee.
Fundamentally, independent contractors are almost always inherently remote working (in other words, they have their own office/business locations). Basically, an independent contractor would be a business with either a home office or a commercial office / shop / (place of business). So other than visiting a project site or doing work on a project site of your client, you would be basically remote. You have control over the deliverables and means and methods of doing the work, etc. AXP and architect's supervision and responsible control responsibility would cut into the control over means and methods of doing the work and so forth. They must have a degree of control.
We all heard of this or that instance, which are almost always misrepresenting the relationship for tax purposes and such. We all heard of those. This doesn't change the law and what it says. There are key elements of what makes you "independent". This is why you should still be properly taxed and treated as employees and be paid a pay check in a similar manner with the tax withholdings, and all that. However, when you get the pay check (is it every two weeks or monthly) would be based on the contract terms and can be different than the regular employees. However, contract employees are still subject to minimum wage and labor laws as employees employers are subject to vicarious liability and worker comp requirements (as applicable per the applicable laws) and so forth. People confuse contract employment with independent contractors because of the word contract is used. That kind of cognitive conflation is common but leads to misconceptions.
Well Richard, that was quite a mansplain. As a matter of fact I had emailed and called NCARB and my relevant state architects' board for clarification before posting my prior comment.
They confirmed the current NCARB options for entering AXP experience hours in setting A include work performed as an: employee, consultant, partner/principal/corporate director, or contract worker. They confirmed full credit is given for these hours equally. HOORAY!
They also do not distinguish between the terms "independent contractor" and "contract worker."
In their view, according to another NCARB blog, anyone not licensed as an architect is by definition learning from/being supervised by the architect of record when they are doing architectural work on architectural projects. Because, they assume, an unlicensed worker in any employment category, even a principal of a firm, has less knowledge of architecture than a licensed architect.
Lets not go down this "mansplaining" crap, ok. I don't know the gender of people on a forum unless it is indicated in a public fashion. Explaining is explaining. Mansplaining is liberal bullshit except when it is intentionally done to explain in a condescending manner to women because they are women. Okay.
That said, I have talked to NCARB but the manner and how you ask the question really does matter. The problem with the Boards and NCARB is they may not fully comprehend the scenario because they only grasp well what they given as pre-canned responses. AXP training hours are valid under LAWFUL practice of architecture.
To be lawful, the architectural licensing/title/practice laws must not be broken at any point in time. In other words, if the law is broken even for a minute (albeit that would be extreme but legally a technical point of law), that minute could be invalid. However, it is more important than just a minute where an architect's license was lapsed. Whatever. The work prepared by a non-architect (a trainee) must be prepared under the responsible charge of the architect.
You can not legally be considered under the responsible charge of the architect if the relationship is an independent contractor relationship between the non-architect trainee and the Architect (AXP supervisor). The meaning and legal definition of independent contractor and degree of independent control over the means & methods and decisions made for an independent contractor to meet the definition of independent contractor under the various federal and state laws would violate the law as the work would not have been prepared under the Architect's responsible control. The level of control for an architect to legally be in responsible control negates the AXP trainee being actually an independent contractor for the AXP hours for work setting A.
You are not in the same degree of independent control over the preparation of your work as an Professional Engineering consultant or a Landscape Architect or an outside historic preservation consultant, or an third-party interior design consultant on their respective work, are you? Are you exercising that level of independent control over design decisions for architectural projects for work that constitutes the practice of architect?
Legal stuff does in fact legally matter because A) it can be invalidated ANY time. There is no statutes of limitations on the experience being invalidated. You can even been licensed for a decade and then the experience is questioned and invalidated and that would invalidate your license and if found that you have a fault in the matter can amount to significant fines as well. Things can happen. This depends on part how extensive and thorough any such investigation goes to. State law definition of architect's responsible control, stamping requirements, etc. all matters.
NCARB is not a licensing board. They have their GUIDELINES but the guidelines yields to state laws and what constitutes lawful practice of architecture and what doesn't. NCARB can invalidate AXP hours for work that constitutes unlawful practice of architecture. This is why the legal relationship is that the AXP trainee has to be an actual employee.
In fact it says it right in the AXP Guidelines on page 17. Independent contractor (1099-MISC although called self-employment does not mean being employed as an employee). Self-employment means you work for yourself and employed for yourself and applies to IRS tax code but you cut through that to the labor laws and what IRS tax code is referring to, you are not an employee. The amalgamation of various state and federal laws (which NCARB bases it meaning from) means actual employment not independent contractor relationship.
When you are an independent contractor, you are by legal definition engaged in business as a sole-proprietorship (unless you formulate a business entity like an LLC, LLP, Corporation for certain other reasons) whether or not you use your real name or an assumed business name of some form.
As a business and I have been doing this for some 20 years now, if I merely hire an architect, I would not get AXP training hours in Setting A even if I yielded in practice effectively so the architect made the design decisions, because I legally would be in the situation of being able to hire and fire that person and is his or her boss. However, I might be right on the razor's edge of "maybe" getting AXP hours IF the architect was a co-owner. The only reason I *might* be able to get the AXP hours is I wouldn't technically be able to really fire that architect. That would be a weird scenario where I might squeak by because I can be a business owner and functionally an employee of the business as well AND yield to subordinate. Only work while I yield to subordinate would constitute qualifying as AXP but certain time I spend as co-owner as equal in a laterally equal role with the architect would not count.
Yes, NCARB has its practical limits in its investigative practices and there is a long history of people getting AXP hours for dubious credits. However, if you are an independent contractor to the Architect, that would be essentially a consultant role. This would be like the architect is in relationship to the project client. The architect isn't an employee of the client and is not really a client's subordinate. The client doesn't control the architect's means and methods of delivering the services and the deliverables. They have a voice but having a voice does not mean having supervisory control. However, the independent contractor relationship isn't quite valid.
Contract employment as an employee under a special contract (different than standard employment contract) would count. Take note of Direct Supervision definition on page 18 of the AXP Guidelines. Yes, regular and contracted employees can work in traditional in the office setting or remotely or some hybrid fashion. "Direct supervision” of an AXP participant must occur either through personal contact and/or remote communication (e.g. email, online markups,
webinars, Internet), provided that your supervisor maintains control over your work and has sufficient professional knowledge to determine the competency of your performance." Key words..... MAINTAINS CONTROL OVER YOUR WORK.
This means, the supervisor must have control over the means and methods of the work prepared and control over the life, health, safety, and welfare related decisions. I say this not just to explain to you but also to others who comes across this thread in the future that are also AXP interns.
In fact, you really do WANT to be deemed an employee even as a contracted employee. You have more protections and potential benefits even if laid off or something on that front You also are guaranteed minimum wage where there isn't a minimum wage for independent contractor and can be as low a $0.01 for 2000+ hours of work and be technically legal, albeit profoundly stupid if you did. You aren't legally entitled minimum wage, in general, as an independent contractor. You won't have healthcare benefits unless you pay for it. Employees are at least guaranteed some things. Even legal recourses that isn't available to independent contractors.
There are a lot of architects that are shady and loves to get you working your ass off for pennies on the dollar and not have to cover things like worker's comp, social security, healthcare benefits, etc. all that shit because they are counting on you willing to whore yourself out for peanuts just because they think they can get you to do all that for next to nothing so they can pocket that cash into their pocket and buy a yacht or fancy car at your expense. This is just the reality of the world of assholes that exists.
I am not saying all or most architects are these kinds of assholes but they do exist. Take note of AXP Supervisor on page 18 to the left of Direct Supervision. Yes, we can have remote work situations where the worker is an employee (regular or by contract). That is why it must be clear. NCARB has a history of while trying to make clarification has in their profound way of confusing themselves in unbelievable ways. Just saying.
I have contacted several people on this. I believe, even Harry M. Falconer and others not just the regular NCARB customer service representative level "front desk" individuals.
In fact, I was more or less responding to the thread. As you noticed from NYS does not accept independent contract work for AXP. Legally, that's pretty much the case in most states. If you are labeled as independent contractor for AXP setting A work, either there is a violation of the practice of architecture law in some manner or it is a violation of IRS tax and can be some serious problems in either case.
There is reason for the basis of AXP experience falling under some form of employment relationship between supervisor (employer) and the AXP trainee (employee). This is a fundamental basis of responsible control. Part of reason why my independent experience as a building designer (in most states, it is legal) would count for AXP.
If I hired an architect as an employee, it would still be dubious for me to get AXP training hours if I have power to terminate the architect's employment. I would have to bring the person to an owner level status where I can't just fire the person. Details of the arrangement becomes VERY important. Under Oregon's law as recently amended, I could hire an architect as an employee or bring the architect in as a co-owner and the architect be placed in control of "architectural service" (services that constitute the practice of architecture). The business entity would need to be registered with the Board. I would have to yield or effectively yield to be functionally subordinate to the architect on those projects which the architect would be stamping and signing even if I were the "Project Designer", the AOR would be the architect. To make things work more respectfully, that architect would be a co-owner and treated on an equal level with functional assurance the architect can not be "fired" just because I disagree with the architect. Reassigning or pulling an architect off a project and reassigning it to another architect can be done with good cause but that is why I would aim to have more than one architect added to team among other practical reasons.
The important thing is, the architect has control over the work prepared. An AXP trainee being an independent contractor to the Architect or architectural firm would not really be subordinate and the architect wouldn't really have the control over the work -- the means and methods of the work prepared so how can the architect really be supervising?
The point of being an independent contractor and the definition of an independent contractor is that the independent contractor is not under the direct supervision and control of someone else. That is the meaning of "INDEPENDENT" in "independent contractor". Without the independence of supervision and control, it isn't independent. If you are not actually independent in that relationship, it violates the a number of laws such as but not limited to the tax laws to be classified as an independent contractor. This can be a legal quagmire in its own right. In addition, there could be a violation of the Architectural Act laws in the various states.
You seem fun! Technically, "mansplaining" is not "liberal bullshit" as you claimed, but rather, sexist bullshit. And technically "mansplaining" does not require that a man is certain that he's talking to a woman, just that he's a condescending ass who feels unduly privileged by gender to overexplain the world to the world.
If that's not your intent, settle down with the overeager gatekeeping and tax law diatribe. While W2 employment may have been the rule in the past, apparently NCARB has offered the option to document AXP hours as an employee, consultant, partner/principal/corporate director, or contract worker since at least 2019.
The real question is, why are you so worked up about it? Though there are certainly some greedy architects out there who ab/use and underpay lower-level workers, there are also many very small firms that can't reliably employ a full-time worker, so contract out specific tasks or jobs.
And there are plenty of talented workers who can't find a full-time employee position all the time in architecture, especially in a fluctuating economy, pandemic, etc. There are also plenty of people, most often women, who have competing eldercare/childcare obligations that don't allow them to work as full-time employees.
Also, all evidence on the subject shows that flexible work modes--- including part-time work, remote work, and independent contracting---majorly benefit women and people of color. Why wouldn't we all want to support that??
manspaining is literally about man explaining something to a woman in a condescending manner because she is a woman. That is where the term came from. It has to be with a misogynistic manner. Otherwise, we are just replacing the word explaining with mansplaining. I'm an equal opportunity asshole to anyone regardless of gender. People on this forum could attest to me being this way. Secondly, your use of mansplaining is BULLSHIT and liber political bullshit at that. Your own words falls on its ass. Your words: "he's a condescending ass who feels unduly privileged by gender to overexplain the world to the world. " That assumes that I feel PRIVILEGED BY GENDER to be that way. That assumes I feel privileged on the basis of my gender. I am not a condescending ass because I am a condescending asshole. I feel I am privileged to be that because of something called the FREEDOM OF SPEECH which I believe applies to ALL persons regardless of gender. I do not take this privilege on some notion of gender superiority.... whatever the fuck that suppose to mean. Your whole use of mansplaining is on false pretenses against me on your own feelings of gender inferiority which I do not think you should feel your gender is inferior. You see, your own words proved my point. It is a political portmanteau of two words used for a political purpose. I am not politically correct nor do I give a fuck about it because the very phrase politically correct is a fucking paradox. Politics is full of shit... a lot of bullshit. Politicians are professional liars. They learn that mostly because of law school which trains lawyers to be liars and the art of lying. Many politicians are lawyers. They lie or bend the truth like a pretzel as required to represent their clients and make arguments hoping to be convincing at it. Politicians continues that beyond the courtroom to keep the public baffled with bullshit that they just don't bother caring about what is said. I'll split the response to the NCARB, employee, etc.
Contract workers (employees) has to be taxed the same as W-2. 1099-MISC is for independent contractors not employees. An architect may not stamp drawings by independent contractors representing that it is prepared under their responsible control because an independent contractor is not supervised by definition in order to be legally defined as an independent contractor which you have to be to be properly classified for using 1099-MISC forms. If you are supervised under someone else's responsible control, you are an employee and must be taxed as an employee and paid according to employment laws subject to withholdings and subject to minimum wage laws. If you are being taxed and treated as an independent contractor and sent 1099-MISC instead of a W-2/W-4, then you are being misclassified as an independent contractor. Intentional misclassification for taxes can result in serious tax ramifications and CAN also result in at least one party being sent to prison. That would be called TAX EVASION. Being an employee doesn't require being full-time. Contract employees as with any employee can be part time, full-time, whatever. Regardless, employers would still be required to not require contracted employees to violate labor laws including taking appropriate breaks. IRS's word "worker" is generic and can be either but if they are supervised in the manner as an Architect would be to exercise responsible control, the supervised person is an employee not an independent contractor. I've worked part-time as an employee before. It is not a 1099-MISC situation. It is employment. Even under a contracted fashion for a short-term. What I do as an independent practicing building designer and as a business would be a 1099-MISC type arrangement as an independent contractor and I have to file the filings where that money is recorded as business income and not as income as an employee per se. When working for someone else under their supervision and control, I get paid as an employee with the withholdings taken out. That is how it is done. If I contracted you to do draw up technical drawings and other stuff, and I was exercising supervision and control as an architect would be, I would have to pay you like any employee even if it is part time even as low as like 15 minutes (a fraction of one hour). As may be required by the laws of my state, I would have to pay you at Oregon or State of Washington minimum wage or possibly New York state minimum wage, and apply withholding as required. Even if you are on contract. You would be on payroll even for a temporary duration. Even if it was for two weeks. It would be temporarily on payroll as a form of temporary worker. The situation may be different if I was using a temp worker service thing.
"Also, all evidence on the subject shows that flexible work modes--- including part-time work, remote work, and independent contracting---majorly benefit women and people of color. Why wouldn't we all want to support that??" I agree. I am not against that. However, firms have a responsibility to properly classify those workers who do work for them. Whether that be workers who are employed (supervised, including those on contract for a specified period or permanent), or those who are independent and independent of direct supervision and control (responsible control) that are called independent contractors. Such independent contractors to architects would be called consultants or subconsultants or even subcontractor. An independent contractor that is contracted by an Architect would be essentially a "subcontractor" like the subcontractor to a general contractor. The subcontractor would have control over the means and methods of fulfilling their contract to the general contractor meeting the criteria and conditions of the contract. The GC is the subcontractor's client with yet the project client (property owner for example) is the GC's client. In which case the GC has indirect supervision as would a the project client. Their supervision is indirect. Direct supervision requires a direct level of control and supervision and power to direct orders in the manner like an employer has with an employee. This is why the point is made. NCARB may be operationally confused in some manner on this topic which can be profoundly confusing. NCARB can not negate or override federal and state laws. NCARB is not really a government agency or department. It is a private entity that is controlled collectively by the state boards.
You don't have to be working a minimum number of hours a week to be considered an employee. It can be as little as a fraction of an hour. The idea that you have to be full-time to be considered an employee or at minimum half-time to be an employee is a misnomer and false concept. I could hire you for an hour or two or eight hours a week for a week with regards to a project and pay accordingly. I may have special terms where the pay is paid after the project is completed or at different pay intervals than a regular employee but still have to pay you and take out any required withholdings and other such matters that employers have to do. If the work is such that it doesn't need or require supervision then yeah, it could be a 1099-MISC matter of independent contractor stuff. However, AXP requires work performed by the AXP 'intern' be performed under the architect's responsible control and direct supervision. Such work would customarily constitute practice of architecture because it is non-exempt or it is being prepared under the architect's supervision and control and be stamped and signed by the architect. That work must be under a form of employment and be classified as employment and taxed accordingly. Proper designation is the key here.
Take note of the following: Misclassification of employees
Consequences of treating an employee as an independent contractor.
If you look at the licensing laws of most states, they would state very similarly wording about supervision and control. This is virtually the case of all states. If you look at AXP and the nature of what it is, it is TRAINING. Everything points to non-licensed persons aspiring to be architects undergoing the AXP training program (because it is essentially what it is), points to the supervisor (especially in Setting A) would be in a role giving detailed instructions on how the work is to be performed, control over the means and methods of the work performed, the order and sequence, when the work is to be delivered to the supervisor to review, etc. Instruction and training in how to do the job and/or authority to instruct and train in how the work is done is all indicators of employer-employee relationship. AXP experience is generally part of key activities of the firm (business). Generally, the main element is control over what the work is to be done and how it is to be done is a major core element of determining if a person is an employee or an independent contractor. Clients may indicate what the project is but doesn't control how I do the work as a building designer. Often resulting in me being classified as an independent contractor.
The way the laws are and with IRS, you are to be presumed an employee unless you can prove otherwise to be an independent contractor. You have to meet criteria to be an independent contractor otherwise if you perform a service for someone else, you are an employee falling back to common law definition of employee.
There is an arguably higher bar to meet the criteria of independent contractor versus meeting the definition of employee.
Can a person be both an employee and an independent contractor? Yes. Like, you can run a business in the day and work part-time in the evening/night and on the weekend.
Mar 22, 24 7:59 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
1099 vs W-2 for AXP Eligibility
I am starting up my AXP record process and I want to know what type of Employment is acceptable by NCARB when logging in my hours through them. I understand that my supervisor needs to be a Registered Architect. ( 1 ) Can I work as a 1099 or do I need to be a W-2? ( 2 ) does it matter if I work Full-time or Part-time?
W-2 is essentially a guarantee especially if you work under the supervision of an architect. If you are under the supervision of an architect that meets professional standard of care regarding the direct control and supervision, you can not legally be an independent contractor. An architect stamping work prepared by an unlicensed person who is in an independent contractor relationship, the architect would be aiding and abetting unlawful practice of architecture of an unlicensed person by stamping drawings not prepared under direct supervision and control. Direct supervision and control requires the person to be EMPLOYED as an employee not as an independent contractor. Direct supervision and control is a requirement for most of the AXP hours.
However, there are two types of employment as an employee. One is standard employment and the other is as a contracted employee but you'll need to be an employee as would be taxed as one not an independent contractor because the independence of direct supervision and control is an essential part of the very definition of an independent contractor.
Yes, there are architects that are technically violating the laws with interns/AXP trainees working in an independent contractor relationship. 1099-MISC (described under IRS as self-employment) is essentially another way of saying "independent contractor" and should only apply to independent contractor relationship such as between a professional and a client. The problem is, if you are an independent contractor working with an architect, you might have your AXP hours rejected by NCARB.
There was a short time in the early days of the transition from IDP to AXP, where independent contractor relationship was accepted by NCARB but that was removed after they started realizing, such would technically be violating architectural licensing/title/and practice laws because an architect would be violating the stamping requirements in many states. This doesn't mean an employee has to regularly work IN the office. They have to exercise the same direction, control & supervision as they would with a regularly employed employee which then means that "irregular employee" is an employee and the employee must withhold taxes and such with regards to pay, that 'irregular' yet contracted employee as any other regular employee.
There is an unclear grey area where the architect and unlicensed person may be business partners. The architect would not be a subordinate employee and can't be fired so that may be acceptable if supervision & control requirements are met but this isn't a very clear area and risky because poor haphazard documenting of how the direct supervision and control by the architect is met can result in hours not being approved and accepted by NCARB.
If you want your hours not rejected, make sure it's an actual employment relationship and taxed accordingly as a genuine employee with what may be a hybrid (remote/in-office) work structure at the very least. There should be regular and documented communication and somewhat frequent in-person work throughout every stage of the preparation where the architect has control, direction, and supervision over the preparation of everything you produce for the architect..
As to whether working part-time or full-time doesn't matter as much but you may matter with some states at licensure time if you had part-time work too short in duration and they reject some of those hours.
If you work part-time, you should be working at least 20-30 hours a week and for more than 6 months, at least 9 months to be on the safe side and be paid as any other employee even if you don't work all the time in the architect's office.
And for example, currently I work with a GC as an Assistant Project Manager. One of the Project Managers is a Licensed Architect, but non-practicing. I would not be able to get hours signed off by them b/c I am not getting paid directly by them, correct? I get paid by the Company, which is not an Architecture Firm.
Need to be employed under the direct supervision of a licensed arch. Just because your GC has an arch on staff to rubber-stamp whatever does not make it appropriate for IDP.
Check out page 20 of the AXP Guidelines. You are in an experience setting O where you can earn up to 1,860 hours. To establish supervision, you need to set up and document regular periodic check-ins and mentoring with the licensed co-worker. The 1099 and the construction company paying you are non-issues for NCARB.
You can get Setting O hours but you need Setting A hours to complete AXP as a whole. There are limits on the hours under Setting O. I assumed you, the OP (ANTACE95), have read about those hours and already knew that so it would be Setting A hours that I reason to be what you are asking about. You can get hours for Setting O until you reached the limits but you will need Setting A still.
Under Setting A, you need to take those hours under a licensed architect and would need to be a genuine employee (regular and contracted employee).
ANTACE95, even if you are working for an architectural firm, you would still be working for a business entity but the work would need to be done under the architect (either a firm owner or a higher ranking employee that is an architect as architect of responsible charge. The architect will need to be in direct supervision and control over the project. Architectural firms may or may not have any special firm registration or license to practice architecture. Not all states require firms to be registered/licensed by the architect board. However, the firm must be engaged in the lawful practice of architecture and your supervisor being duly licensed. No credit for unlawful practice of architecture.
ANTACE95, Please reach out to your NCARB directly for things like this, or at least your local AIA chapter. I'm not a big AIA fan but they have their purpose. Reallynotmyname gives you good guidance, look at the source AXP guidelines. You wouldn't take our word on a code question would you? As an architect, you should get used to this protocol as much of our work involves pushing paper and producing documentation that must comply with many separate jurisdiction requirements.
1) read the source requirements (in this case, NCARB)
2) ask a senior registered architect on staff for clarification (particularly the PA/PM on the project)
3) if still unsure, schedule a meeting with the authority having jurisdiction and get their take in writing
From an NCARB blog:
"NCARB has updated its rules and requirements for the AXP to allow for contract work, as well as 100 percent remote work to qualify as 'direct supervision'.”
https://www.ncarb.org/blog/a-g...
Get it in writing from NCARB and the relevant state architects' board, though, since they are the ones who have to sign off on this. I've read NY state does not accept independent contract work hours for AXP credit against the national norm, so verify that if you're seeking licensure in NY. Good luck!
To address confusion. Do NOT confuse contract work (CONTRACT EMPLOYMENT) with independent contractors. Contract employment would still be W-2. 1099-MISC applies in genuine independent contractor relationship. The legal definition of independent contractor relationship and the meaning of AXP/IDP and the condition of being under direct supervision and responsible control preclude independent contractor relationship.
When you consider the rules and laws of the practice of architecture, an architect must exercise a level of control over the AXP 'intern'/'designer aspiring to be an architect' when it comes to the practice of architecture that precludes the AXP 'intern' from being "independent" but a subordinate. While it is true that most remote work / contract employment would be with those who need a little less hand holding and has some level of self-initiative and can think, but they can't legally just design it and then go to the architect to review and stamp. That has been a no no in the profession for some time now.
Meeting one condition of an independent contractor relationship just isn't enough to qualify as an independent contractor in federal law and many states' laws. Contracted employees are still employees. They work FOR the employer. This doesn't mean an employee only can work as an employee for one employer.
You can work for McDonalds, work for Safeway, and work for a gas station, and be an employee in every one of those places of employment. 1099-MISC would be like a construction contractor is to a client. Like the architect is to a client. Like an consultant may be to the architect (like engineering or other outside consultants may be to the architect).
AXP and the architectural licensing laws requires the supervisor architect to have a supervision level and control by the architect that fundamentally precludes the intern from legally being an independent contractor. You should be treated as an employee, taxes accordingly, etc. Employer should bear the burden of the intern as employee even if it is under a contractual arrangement that is different than it may be for traditional employment contract. Technically, all employees are under a contract of some form with the employers but there is the default traditional employee (W-4). You will find a lot of confusing shit on the internet. Contract employees are employees but usually under a contract for a short term like project long but are not actually independent contractors. If you are under AXP training to get licensed, you would be an employee (regular or contractual) on fundamental levels. This is because to get the hours, you must not be in a position where you can fire your supervisor architect or override him or her and must be subordinate to. If you are an independent contractor to the architect, then it wouldn't count for AXP. If you were left to decide the design without the architect holding responsible control, it might be considered unlawful practice of architecture. This is why you still need to actually be an employee. This can be contractual based or regular employment.
Now, also do not conflate contract employment and remote work. Remote work has nothing to do with whether you are a regular employee or a contracted employee.
Fundamentally, independent contractors are almost always inherently remote working (in other words, they have their own office/business locations). Basically, an independent contractor would be a business with either a home office or a commercial office / shop / (place of business). So other than visiting a project site or doing work on a project site of your client, you would be basically remote. You have control over the deliverables and means and methods of doing the work, etc. AXP and architect's supervision and responsible control responsibility would cut into the control over means and methods of doing the work and so forth. They must have a degree of control.
We all heard of this or that instance, which are almost always misrepresenting the relationship for tax purposes and such. We all heard of those. This doesn't change the law and what it says. There are key elements of what makes you "independent". This is why you should still be properly taxed and treated as employees and be paid a pay check in a similar manner with the tax withholdings, and all that. However, when you get the pay check (is it every two weeks or monthly) would be based on the contract terms and can be different than the regular employees. However, contract employees are still subject to minimum wage and labor laws as employees employers are subject to vicarious liability and worker comp requirements (as applicable per the applicable laws) and so forth. People confuse contract employment with independent contractors because of the word contract is used. That kind of cognitive conflation is common but leads to misconceptions.
Well Richard, that was quite a mansplain. As a matter of fact I had emailed and called NCARB and my relevant state architects' board for clarification before posting my prior comment.
They confirmed the current NCARB options for entering AXP experience hours in setting A include work performed as an: employee, consultant, partner/principal/corporate director, or contract worker. They confirmed full credit is given for these hours equally. HOORAY!
They also do not distinguish between the terms "independent contractor" and "contract worker."
In their view, according to another NCARB blog, anyone not licensed as an architect is by definition learning from/being supervised by the architect of record when they are doing architectural work on architectural projects. Because, they assume, an unlicensed worker in any employment category, even a principal of a firm, has less knowledge of architecture than a licensed architect.
Lets not go down this "mansplaining" crap, ok. I don't know the gender of people on a forum unless it is indicated in a public fashion. Explaining is explaining. Mansplaining is liberal bullshit except when it is intentionally done to explain in a condescending manner to women because they are women. Okay.
That said, I have talked to NCARB but the manner and how you ask the question really does matter. The problem with the Boards and NCARB is they may not fully comprehend the scenario because they only grasp well what they given as pre-canned responses. AXP training hours are valid under LAWFUL practice of architecture.
To be lawful, the architectural licensing/title/practice laws must not be broken at any point in time. In other words, if the law is broken even for a minute (albeit that would be extreme but legally a technical point of law), that minute could be invalid. However, it is more important than just a minute where an architect's license was lapsed. Whatever. The work prepared by a non-architect (a trainee) must be prepared under the responsible charge of the architect.
You can not legally be considered under the responsible charge of the architect if the relationship is an independent contractor relationship between the non-architect trainee and the Architect (AXP supervisor). The meaning and legal definition of independent contractor and degree of independent control over the means & methods and decisions made for an independent contractor to meet the definition of independent contractor under the various federal and state laws would violate the law as the work would not have been prepared under the Architect's responsible control. The level of control for an architect to legally be in responsible control negates the AXP trainee being actually an independent contractor for the AXP hours for work setting A.
You are not in the same degree of independent control over the preparation of your work as an Professional Engineering consultant or a Landscape Architect or an outside historic preservation consultant, or an third-party interior design consultant on their respective work, are you? Are you exercising that level of independent control over design decisions for architectural projects for work that constitutes the practice of architect?
Legal stuff does in fact legally matter because A) it can be invalidated ANY time. There is no statutes of limitations on the experience being invalidated. You can even been licensed for a decade and then the experience is questioned and invalidated and that would invalidate your license and if found that you have a fault in the matter can amount to significant fines as well. Things can happen. This depends on part how extensive and thorough any such investigation goes to. State law definition of architect's responsible control, stamping requirements, etc. all matters.
NCARB is not a licensing board. They have their GUIDELINES but the guidelines yields to state laws and what constitutes lawful practice of architecture and what doesn't. NCARB can invalidate AXP hours for work that constitutes unlawful practice of architecture. This is why the legal relationship is that the AXP trainee has to be an actual employee.
In fact it says it right in the AXP Guidelines on page 17. Independent contractor (1099-MISC although called self-employment does not mean being employed as an employee). Self-employment means you work for yourself and employed for yourself and applies to IRS tax code but you cut through that to the labor laws and what IRS tax code is referring to, you are not an employee. The amalgamation of various state and federal laws (which NCARB bases it meaning from) means actual employment not independent contractor relationship.
When you are an independent contractor, you are by legal definition engaged in business as a sole-proprietorship (unless you formulate a business entity like an LLC, LLP, Corporation for certain other reasons) whether or not you use your real name or an assumed business name of some form.
As a business and I have been doing this for some 20 years now, if I merely hire an architect, I would not get AXP training hours in Setting A even if I yielded in practice effectively so the architect made the design decisions, because I legally would be in the situation of being able to hire and fire that person and is his or her boss. However, I might be right on the razor's edge of "maybe" getting AXP hours IF the architect was a co-owner. The only reason I *might* be able to get the AXP hours is I wouldn't technically be able to really fire that architect. That would be a weird scenario where I might squeak by because I can be a business owner and functionally an employee of the business as well AND yield to subordinate. Only work while I yield to subordinate would constitute qualifying as AXP but certain time I spend as co-owner as equal in a laterally equal role with the architect would not count.
Yes, NCARB has its practical limits in its investigative practices and there is a long history of people getting AXP hours for dubious credits. However, if you are an independent contractor to the Architect, that would be essentially a consultant role. This would be like the architect is in relationship to the project client. The architect isn't an employee of the client and is not really a client's subordinate. The client doesn't control the architect's means and methods of delivering the services and the deliverables. They have a voice but having a voice does not mean having supervisory control. However, the independent contractor relationship isn't quite valid.
Contract employment as an employee under a special contract (different than standard employment contract) would count. Take note of Direct Supervision definition on page 18 of the AXP Guidelines. Yes, regular and contracted employees can work in traditional in the office setting or remotely or some hybrid fashion. "Direct supervision” of an AXP participant must occur either through personal contact and/or remote communication (e.g. email, online markups, webinars, Internet), provided that your supervisor maintains control over your work and has sufficient professional knowledge to determine the competency of your performance." Key words..... MAINTAINS CONTROL OVER YOUR WORK.
This means, the supervisor must have control over the means and methods of the work prepared and control over the life, health, safety, and welfare related decisions. I say this not just to explain to you but also to others who comes across this thread in the future that are also AXP interns.
In fact, you really do WANT to be deemed an employee even as a contracted employee. You have more protections and potential benefits even if laid off or something on that front You also are guaranteed minimum wage where there isn't a minimum wage for independent contractor and can be as low a $0.01 for 2000+ hours of work and be technically legal, albeit profoundly stupid if you did. You aren't legally entitled minimum wage, in general, as an independent contractor. You won't have healthcare benefits unless you pay for it. Employees are at least guaranteed some things. Even legal recourses that isn't available to independent contractors.
There are a lot of architects that are shady and loves to get you working your ass off for pennies on the dollar and not have to cover things like worker's comp, social security, healthcare benefits, etc. all that shit because they are counting on you willing to whore yourself out for peanuts just because they think they can get you to do all that for next to nothing so they can pocket that cash into their pocket and buy a yacht or fancy car at your expense. This is just the reality of the world of assholes that exists.
I am not saying all or most architects are these kinds of assholes but they do exist. Take note of AXP Supervisor on page 18 to the left of Direct Supervision. Yes, we can have remote work situations where the worker is an employee (regular or by contract). That is why it must be clear. NCARB has a history of while trying to make clarification has in their profound way of confusing themselves in unbelievable ways. Just saying.
I have contacted several people on this. I believe, even Harry M. Falconer and others not just the regular NCARB customer service representative level "front desk" individuals.
In fact, I was more or less responding to the thread. As you noticed from NYS does not accept independent contract work for AXP. Legally, that's pretty much the case in most states. If you are labeled as independent contractor for AXP setting A work, either there is a violation of the practice of architecture law in some manner or it is a violation of IRS tax and can be some serious problems in either case.
There is reason for the basis of AXP experience falling under some form of employment relationship between supervisor (employer) and the AXP trainee (employee). This is a fundamental basis of responsible control. Part of reason why my independent experience as a building designer (in most states, it is legal) would count for AXP.
If I hired an architect as an employee, it would still be dubious for me to get AXP training hours if I have power to terminate the architect's employment. I would have to bring the person to an owner level status where I can't just fire the person. Details of the arrangement becomes VERY important. Under Oregon's law as recently amended, I could hire an architect as an employee or bring the architect in as a co-owner and the architect be placed in control of "architectural service" (services that constitute the practice of architecture). The business entity would need to be registered with the Board. I would have to yield or effectively yield to be functionally subordinate to the architect on those projects which the architect would be stamping and signing even if I were the "Project Designer", the AOR would be the architect. To make things work more respectfully, that architect would be a co-owner and treated on an equal level with functional assurance the architect can not be "fired" just because I disagree with the architect. Reassigning or pulling an architect off a project and reassigning it to another architect can be done with good cause but that is why I would aim to have more than one architect added to team among other practical reasons.
The important thing is, the architect has control over the work prepared. An AXP trainee being an independent contractor to the Architect or architectural firm would not really be subordinate and the architect wouldn't really have the control over the work -- the means and methods of the work prepared so how can the architect really be supervising?
The point of being an independent contractor and the definition of an independent contractor is that the independent contractor is not under the direct supervision and control of someone else. That is the meaning of "INDEPENDENT" in "independent contractor". Without the independence of supervision and control, it isn't independent. If you are not actually independent in that relationship, it violates the a number of laws such as but not limited to the tax laws to be classified as an independent contractor. This can be a legal quagmire in its own right. In addition, there could be a violation of the Architectural Act laws in the various states.
You seem fun! Technically, "mansplaining" is not "liberal bullshit" as you claimed, but rather, sexist bullshit. And technically "mansplaining" does not require that a man is certain that he's talking to a woman, just that he's a condescending ass who feels unduly privileged by gender to overexplain the world to the world.
If that's not your intent, settle down with the overeager gatekeeping and tax law diatribe. While W2 employment may have been the rule in the past, apparently NCARB has offered the option to document AXP hours as an employee, consultant, partner/principal/corporate director, or contract worker since at least 2019.
The real question is, why are you so worked up about it? Though there are certainly some greedy architects out there who ab/use and underpay lower-level workers, there are also many very small firms that can't reliably employ a full-time worker, so contract out specific tasks or jobs.
And there are plenty of talented workers who can't find a full-time employee position all the time in architecture, especially in a fluctuating economy, pandemic, etc. There are also plenty of people, most often women, who have competing eldercare/childcare obligations that don't allow them to work as full-time employees.
Also, all evidence on the subject shows that flexible work modes--- including part-time work, remote work, and independent contracting---majorly benefit women and people of color. Why wouldn't we all want to support that??
manspaining is literally about man explaining something to a woman in a condescending manner because she is a woman. That is where the term came from. It has to be with a misogynistic manner. Otherwise, we are just replacing the word explaining with mansplaining. I'm an equal opportunity asshole to anyone regardless of gender. People on this forum could attest to me being this way. Secondly, your use of mansplaining is BULLSHIT and liber political bullshit at that. Your own words falls on its ass. Your words: "he's a condescending ass who feels unduly privileged by gender to overexplain the world to the world. " That assumes that I feel PRIVILEGED BY GENDER to be that way. That assumes I feel privileged on the basis of my gender. I am not a condescending ass because I am a condescending asshole. I feel I am privileged to be that because of something called the FREEDOM OF SPEECH which I believe applies to ALL persons regardless of gender. I do not take this privilege on some notion of gender superiority.... whatever the fuck that suppose to mean. Your whole use of mansplaining is on false pretenses against me on your own feelings of gender inferiority which I do not think you should feel your gender is inferior. You see, your own words proved my point. It is a political portmanteau of two words used for a political purpose. I am not politically correct nor do I give a fuck about it because the very phrase politically correct is a fucking paradox. Politics is full of shit... a lot of bullshit. Politicians are professional liars. They learn that mostly because of law school which trains lawyers to be liars and the art of lying. Many politicians are lawyers. They lie or bend the truth like a pretzel as required to represent their clients and make arguments hoping to be convincing at it. Politicians continues that beyond the courtroom to keep the public baffled with bullshit that they just don't bother caring about what is said. I'll split the response to the NCARB, employee, etc.
Contract workers (employees) has to be taxed the same as W-2. 1099-MISC is for independent contractors not employees. An architect may not stamp drawings by independent contractors representing that it is prepared under their responsible control because an independent contractor is not supervised by definition in order to be legally defined as an independent contractor which you have to be to be properly classified for using 1099-MISC forms. If you are supervised under someone else's responsible control, you are an employee and must be taxed as an employee and paid according to employment laws subject to withholdings and subject to minimum wage laws. If you are being taxed and treated as an independent contractor and sent 1099-MISC instead of a W-2/W-4, then you are being misclassified as an independent contractor. Intentional misclassification for taxes can result in serious tax ramifications and CAN also result in at least one party being sent to prison. That would be called TAX EVASION. Being an employee doesn't require being full-time. Contract employees as with any employee can be part time, full-time, whatever. Regardless, employers would still be required to not require contracted employees to violate labor laws including taking appropriate breaks. IRS's word "worker" is generic and can be either but if they are supervised in the manner as an Architect would be to exercise responsible control, the supervised person is an employee not an independent contractor. I've worked part-time as an employee before. It is not a 1099-MISC situation. It is employment. Even under a contracted fashion for a short-term. What I do as an independent practicing building designer and as a business would be a 1099-MISC type arrangement as an independent contractor and I have to file the filings where that money is recorded as business income and not as income as an employee per se. When working for someone else under their supervision and control, I get paid as an employee with the withholdings taken out. That is how it is done. If I contracted you to do draw up technical drawings and other stuff, and I was exercising supervision and control as an architect would be, I would have to pay you like any employee even if it is part time even as low as like 15 minutes (a fraction of one hour). As may be required by the laws of my state, I would have to pay you at Oregon or State of Washington minimum wage or possibly New York state minimum wage, and apply withholding as required. Even if you are on contract. You would be on payroll even for a temporary duration. Even if it was for two weeks. It would be temporarily on payroll as a form of temporary worker. The situation may be different if I was using a temp worker service thing.
"Also, all evidence on the subject shows that flexible work modes--- including part-time work, remote work, and independent contracting---majorly benefit women and people of color. Why wouldn't we all want to support that??" I agree. I am not against that. However, firms have a responsibility to properly classify those workers who do work for them. Whether that be workers who are employed (supervised, including those on contract for a specified period or permanent), or those who are independent and independent of direct supervision and control (responsible control) that are called independent contractors. Such independent contractors to architects would be called consultants or subconsultants or even subcontractor. An independent contractor that is contracted by an Architect would be essentially a "subcontractor" like the subcontractor to a general contractor. The subcontractor would have control over the means and methods of fulfilling their contract to the general contractor meeting the criteria and conditions of the contract. The GC is the subcontractor's client with yet the project client (property owner for example) is the GC's client. In which case the GC has indirect supervision as would a the project client. Their supervision is indirect. Direct supervision requires a direct level of control and supervision and power to direct orders in the manner like an employer has with an employee. This is why the point is made. NCARB may be operationally confused in some manner on this topic which can be profoundly confusing. NCARB can not negate or override federal and state laws. NCARB is not really a government agency or department. It is a private entity that is controlled collectively by the state boards.
You don't have to be working a minimum number of hours a week to be considered an employee. It can be as little as a fraction of an hour. The idea that you have to be full-time to be considered an employee or at minimum half-time to be an employee is a misnomer and false concept. I could hire you for an hour or two or eight hours a week for a week with regards to a project and pay accordingly. I may have special terms where the pay is paid after the project is completed or at different pay intervals than a regular employee but still have to pay you and take out any required withholdings and other such matters that employers have to do. If the work is such that it doesn't need or require supervision then yeah, it could be a 1099-MISC matter of independent contractor stuff. However, AXP requires work performed by the AXP 'intern' be performed under the architect's responsible control and direct supervision. Such work would customarily constitute practice of architecture because it is non-exempt or it is being prepared under the architect's supervision and control and be stamped and signed by the architect. That work must be under a form of employment and be classified as employment and taxed accordingly. Proper designation is the key here.
Take note of the following: Misclassification of employees Consequences of treating an employee as an independent contractor.
If you classify an employee as an independent contractor and you have no reasonable basis for doing so, then you may be held liable for employment taxes for that worker (the relief provisions, discussed below, will not apply). See Internal Revenue Code section 3509 for more information. ( https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/independent-contractor-self-employed-or-employee ).
Jail time is rare but it can reach that level in some cases.
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1779.pdf
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pd...
https://www.irs.gov/businesses...
You can check your state for state specific stuff.
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employed/behavioral-control
https://www.irs.gov/businesses...
https://www.irs.gov/businesses...
If you look at the licensing laws of most states, they would state very similarly wording about supervision and control. This is virtually the case of all states. If you look at AXP and the nature of what it is, it is TRAINING. Everything points to non-licensed persons aspiring to be architects undergoing the AXP training program (because it is essentially what it is), points to the supervisor (especially in Setting A) would be in a role giving detailed instructions on how the work is to be performed, control over the means and methods of the work performed, the order and sequence, when the work is to be delivered to the supervisor to review, etc. Instruction and training in how to do the job and/or authority to instruct and train in how the work is done is all indicators of employer-employee relationship. AXP experience is generally part of key activities of the firm (business). Generally, the main element is control over what the work is to be done and how it is to be done is a major core element of determining if a person is an employee or an independent contractor. Clients may indicate what the project is but doesn't control how I do the work as a building designer. Often resulting in me being classified as an independent contractor.
The way the laws are and with IRS, you are to be presumed an employee unless you can prove otherwise to be an independent contractor. You have to meet criteria to be an independent contractor otherwise if you perform a service for someone else, you are an employee falling back to common law definition of employee.
There is an arguably higher bar to meet the criteria of independent contractor versus meeting the definition of employee.
Can a person be both an employee and an independent contractor? Yes. Like, you can run a business in the day and work part-time in the evening/night and on the weekend.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.