Contractor, COR, EOR or your own entity?

Five questions, one honest recommendation. This tool applies the same logic we use across our guides — it's about the substance of the relationship, not a vendor pitch. It runs entirely in your browser; nothing is sent anywhere.

1. Who controls how and when the work is done? The worker — they set their own methods, hours and tools You do — set hours, supervise, integrate them like staff

2. How long is the engagement? A project or short/one-off piece of work Ongoing / indefinite (6 months or more)

3. Are you effectively their only client / full-time? No — they have (or can have) other clients Yes — near-full-time for us, we're their main income

4. Where is the worker based? CIS, Caucasus, Central Asia or the Gulf (low reclassification enforcement) Western EU, Brazil or similar (aggressive reclassification)

5. Do you need to run local payroll / offer employee benefits or equity? No — compliant payment for services is enough Yes — statutory benefits, payroll taxes, employee status

6. Are you building a whole team in this one country? One or a few people A sizeable, long-term team in this country

How this decides

If you control the work, or it's a near-full-time single-client role with statutory benefits, that's employment — a contractor label won't hold. An Employer of Record employs them compliantly without your own entity; at real team scale, your own local entity can be cheaper long-term.
If the relationship is genuinely independent, you can engage a contractor directly. When it's ongoing and single-client in a high-enforcement country, a Contractor of Record takes on the misclassification liability.
This is general information, not legal advice. The substance of the relationship — not the label on the contract — is what tax authorities test.