Skip to main content

FRATCH Tools · Compliance Check

Check the false self-employment risk in 5 minutes

18 weighted questions based on § 7 SGB IV, the criteria of the German pension insurance (DRV) and federal case law including the Herrenberg ruling — for companies engaging freelancers and for freelancers themselves. Free, anonymous, with category scores and concrete recommendations instead of a bare yes/no.

Interactive risk check

Step 1/4

0/18 answered

Right of direction — time, place, content

§ 7 SGB IV names work under instructions as the first indicator of dependent employment. How freely does the contractor decide when, where and how the work is done?

The client bindingly determines when the work is performed (fixed working or attendance hours).
The client prescribes the place of work beyond what the task objectively requires.
The client issues detailed instructions on how tasks are carried out — not only which result is owed.
Vacation and absences must be requested or approved, as they are for employees.
The contractor must submit regular activity reports or detailed time tracking like internal staff.

All answers stay in your browser — nothing is stored or transmitted.

The criteria courts actually weigh

§ 7 (1) SGB IV names two statutory indicators of dependent employment — working under instructions and integration into the client's work organisation. Case law adds entrepreneurial counter-indicators. The decision is always an overall assessment (Gesamtwürdigung) in which actual practice outweighs the contract text. This check weights the four categories the same way: 30% instructions, 30% integration, 25% entrepreneurial risk, 15% market presence and contract.

Right of direction — time, place, content

§ 7 SGB IV names work under instructions as the first indicator of dependent employment. How freely does the contractor decide when, where and how the work is done?

  • The client bindingly determines when the work is performed (fixed working or attendance hours).
  • The client prescribes the place of work beyond what the task objectively requires.
  • The client issues detailed instructions on how tasks are carried out — not only which result is owed.
  • Vacation and absences must be requested or approved, as they are for employees.
  • The contractor must submit regular activity reports or detailed time tracking like internal staff.

Integration into the work organisation

Since the Herrenberg ruling of the Federal Social Court, integration into the client's organisation alone can tip the overall picture. How deeply is the contractor embedded?

  • The contractor is a fixed part of internal team routines (daily stand-ups, jour fixe, duty or shift rosters).
  • The contractor uses a company email address and internal accounts and appears like an employee.
  • The work is performed mainly with the client's hardware and software, provided free of charge.
  • Tasks are assigned ad hoc from day-to-day operations — like for employees — rather than following the agreed scope.
  • The contractor must perform personally and may not use own staff or substitutes.

Entrepreneurial risk & opportunity

Genuine self-employment shows in real profit opportunities and loss risks. The following statements describe entrepreneurial behaviour — answer how strongly they apply.

  • The contractor sets prices independently and negotiates rates per engagement.
  • The contractor bears typical business expenses (equipment, licences, insurance, training, marketing).
  • The contractor carries a real risk of loss (fixed-price elements, rework at own cost, unpaid idle time).
  • The contractor can decline orders or individual tasks without consequences.

Market presence & contract setup

Formal indicators carry less weight than practice — but courts do look at market presence, client structure and the history between the parties.

  • The contractor actively markets their services (own website, platform profiles, ongoing acquisition).
  • The contractor works for several clients per year, in parallel or consecutively.
  • The contractor performs essentially the same work for the same company as previously under an employment contract.
  • More than 5/6 of the contractor's revenue comes from this one client long-term, and the contractor employs no own staff.

What is at stake if the engagement is reclassified

For companies

  • Back payment of both halves of all social contributions for up to 4 years — 30 years in case of intent (§ 25 SGB IV)
  • Late-payment surcharges of 1% per month (§ 24 SGB IV)
  • Recourse against the worker only via the next three salary payments (§ 28g SGB IV) — the client effectively pays almost everything
  • Criminal liability for withholding contributions (§ 266a StGB), payroll tax liability and VAT unwinding
  • In agency triangles additionally: unlicensed labour leasing with a deemed employment relationship (§§ 9, 10 AÜG)

For freelancers

  • Retroactive employee status: vacation, continued pay and dismissal protection — but the end of the self-employed setup for this engagement
  • Possible VAT corrections on issued invoices and fee clawback discussions
  • Own employee share of contributions going forward
  • Collapsed client relationships and lost follow-up engagements after audits

Herrenberg ruling, status determination and the 2026 reform

Case law

The Herrenberg ruling (2022)

The Federal Social Court classified a fee-based music-school teacher as dependently employed because she was integrated into the school's organisation — despite limited content instructions. Since then, integration alone can tip the overall picture, and audits have become markedly stricter (B 12 R 3/20 R).

Read the BSG decision

Binding route

Status determination (§ 7a SGB IV)

Either party can ask the DRV Clearingstelle to bindingly determine the status — free of charge, around three months. Since 2022 with an up-front prognosis decision before the engagement starts and a group determination for identical contract setups.

§ 7a SGB IV in full text

Outlook

Reform planned — not yet law

The coalition has announced a faster, more legally certain status assessment; a ministry draft from March 2026 proposes positive criteria for a "new self-employment" (genuine substitution right plus entrepreneurial indicators). Until enacted, current § 7 SGB IV case law fully applies — this check reflects the law in force.

DRV guidance on false self-employment

False self-employment — FAQ

Quick answers on criteria, consequences, the one-client myth, the status determination procedure and the planned 2026 reform.

False self-employment exists when someone formally works as a self-employed contractor but is in reality a dependent employee. § 7 (1) SGB IV names the two statutory indicators: working under instructions and integration into the client's work organisation. The label of the contract is irrelevant — what counts is the overall picture of how the engagement is actually carried out.

Courts and the German pension insurance (DRV) weigh indications for dependency — instructions on time, place and content, integration into teams, tools and processes, personal performance — against entrepreneurial counter-indicators: real profit and loss risk, own equipment and investments, free pricing, a visible market presence and the right to decline orders. The decision is always a Gesamtwürdigung (overall assessment): actual practice outweighs the contract text.

No — this is the most common myth. The number of clients is not a status criterion; even with one client an engagement can be genuinely self-employed. But a separate trap applies: contractors who earn more than 5/6 of their revenue from one client long-term and employ no staff become pension-insurable as "employee-like self-employed" (§ 2 sentence 1 no. 9 SGB VI) — with their own contributions, independent of any false self-employment question.

The client owes both halves of all social insurance contributions retroactively for up to 4 years — up to 30 years in case of intent (§ 25 SGB IV) — plus late-payment surcharges of 1% per month (§ 24 SGB IV). Recourse against the worker is limited to wage deductions in the next three payments (§ 28g SGB IV), so the client effectively pays almost everything. Intentional withholding of contributions is a criminal offence (§ 266a StGB), and payroll tax liability (§ 42d EStG) plus VAT unwinding come on top.

The contractor retroactively becomes an employee — with vacation entitlement, continued pay and dismissal protection, but also the end of the self-employed setup for that engagement. Issued invoices may need VAT corrections, fee clawbacks are possible, and the worker owes the employee share of contributions going forward. Many freelancers also lose flexibility and follow-up engagements when a client relationship collapses in an audit.

A voluntary, free procedure at the Clearingstelle of the German pension insurance that bindingly determines the employment status. Either contract party can apply; the procedure takes about three months. Since the 2022 reform it offers an up-front Prognoseentscheidung before the engagement starts and a Gruppenfeststellung for identical contract setups. It is the only way to get binding legal certainty — online checks like this one provide a structured initial assessment.

In the Herrenberg case (BSG, 28 June 2022, B 12 R 3/20 R) the Federal Social Court classified a music-school teacher working on a fee basis as dependently employed — because she was integrated into the school's organisation, despite limited content instructions. Since then, integration alone can tip the overall picture, and audits have become noticeably stricter. For teaching activities, a transitional rule (§ 127 SGB IV) defers mandatory insurance until the end of 2026 under documented mutual agreement.

Reform is planned but not yet in force (status: June 2026). The 2025 coalition agreement promises a faster, more legally certain status assessment. A leaked ministry draft from March 2026 proposes a "new self-employment" category with positive criteria — a genuine substitution right plus at least two of: loss risk, active market presence, entrepreneurial expenses, more than one client — coupled with pension insurance for the self-employed. Until a law passes, the current § 7 SGB IV case law fully applies.

The check mirrors the criteria catalogue of § 7 SGB IV, DRV practice and federal case law, and weights the categories the way courts do — instructions and integration carry the most weight, formal indicators the least. It delivers a structured initial assessment with concrete recommendations, not a legal evaluation of your individual case. Binding certainty only comes from the DRV status determination procedure or qualified legal advice.

Define engagements by deliverables and acceptance criteria instead of attendance; keep externals out of standing team routines, internal systems and approval workflows; let them use their own equipment where possible; preserve their pricing freedom and right to decline; and document that contractual setup and daily practice match. Project-based engagement of independent specialists — the model FRATCH is built around — structurally supports exactly this separation.

Your next freelancer is only one prompt away

FRATCH GPT 2.0

FRATCH GPT