[vc_row columns=”1″][vc_column link=”%7B%22url%22%3A%22%22%7D”][vc_column_text]
From 1st October 2026, the Right to Work Scheme will cover more than employees working under standard employment contracts.
The expanded rules include people engaged under a worker’s contract, individual subcontractors and certain workers connected through online matching services. Some businesses further up a contractual chain may also face extended civil penalty liability. The civil penalty for getting it wrong has fines up to £60,000 per illegal worker.
The word “contractor” is too broad to determine whether a check is needed. Some contractors will be covered and others will remain outside the scheme.
Which arrangements may be covered?
| Arrangement | Likely position under the draft guidance |
|---|---|
| Permanent or fixed-term employee | Already within scope |
| Temporary worker engaged by an employment business | The employment business is responsible for the prescribed check |
| Individual subcontractor personally carrying out work | May fall within scope from 1st October 2026 |
| Worker found through an online matching platform | The platform may be treated as the employer for Right to Work purposes |
| Genuinely self-employed individual serving several clients | May remain outside scope |
| Consultant working through their own personal service company | Client may remain outside scope where this is a genuine business-to-business arrangement |
| Substitute carrying out work for the original worker | New controls may require the substitute’s Right to Work to be verified before work begins |
The final answer depends on the facts of the arrangement. The Home Office draft guide says that describing someone as self-employed is not conclusive. How the work is arranged, supplied and performed will be more important.
[/vc_column_text][us_separator link=”%7B%22url%22%3A%22%22%7D” show_line=”1″ thick=”2″ css=”%7B%22default%22%3A%7B%22height%22%3A%2250px%22%7D%7D”][vc_column_text]
Worker contracts
A worker’s contract is defined in the draft guidance as an arrangement where an individual agrees to perform work or services personally for another person, provided the other party is not simply a client or customer of the individual’s own business.
The guidance gives the example of an employment business supplying temporary hospitality workers to bars and restaurants. The employment business is treated as the employer for the purposes of the scheme and is responsible for carrying out the check.
Businesses that use casual staff, zero-hours arrangements or temporary labour should establish which organisation has the direct contractual relationship with each worker.
[/vc_column_text][us_separator link=”%7B%22url%22%3A%22%22%7D” show_line=”1″ thick=”2″ css=”%7B%22default%22%3A%7B%22height%22%3A%2250px%22%7D%7D”][vc_column_text]
Individual subcontractors and supply chains
The new rules also cover some individual subcontractors. These are people contracted to provide work or services where another organisation has already agreed to deliver that work to a third party.
Liability may reach beyond the organisation that directly contracts with the worker. The draft guide describes extended liability for some contractual chains, although it states that the direct employer remains responsible for carrying out the prescribed check.
An organisation seeking protection from extended liability may need written contractual terms requiring checks, controls over further subcontracting, rights to audit compliance and provisions allowing action where illegal working is identified.
A standard supplier assurance clause may not be enough if no one checks whether the agreed controls operate in practice.
[/vc_column_text][us_separator link=”%7B%22url%22%3A%22%22%7D” show_line=”1″ thick=”2″ css=”%7B%22default%22%3A%7B%22height%22%3A%2250px%22%7D%7D”][vc_column_text]
Online matching services
The scheme will also cover specified online services that match people providing work with clients or customers.
The Home Office draft guide uses the example of a platform matching a cleaner with a homeowner. The platform is treated as the cleaner’s employer for the purpose of the scheme and may be responsible for the Right to Work check.
More complex arrangements can create extended liability. Where a platform matches a customer with a services company that sends its own worker, the platform may need prescribed contractual controls and evidence rather than carrying out the worker’s check itself.
[/vc_column_text][us_separator link=”%7B%22url%22%3A%22%22%7D” show_line=”1″ thick=”2″ css=”%7B%22default%22%3A%7B%22height%22%3A%2250px%22%7D%7D”][vc_column_text]
Genuine independent businesses
The expansion does not place every supplier or freelancer within the Right to Work Scheme.
The guidance gives an independent plumber serving several members of the public as an example where a check is not required. It also describes a graphic designer supplying a project through their own personal service company as a business-to-business arrangement outside the client company’s checking responsibility.
Those examples should not be treated as automatic exemptions. Similar-looking arrangements can operate differently in practice.
[/vc_column_text][us_separator link=”%7B%22url%22%3A%22%22%7D” show_line=”1″ thick=”2″ css=”%7B%22default%22%3A%7B%22height%22%3A%2250px%22%7D%7D”][vc_column_text]
What businesses should review
HR and procurement teams should work together to map the organisation’s labour arrangements. Recruitment may hold information about workers, while procurement and legal teams are more likely to understand the contracts connecting suppliers, intermediaries and end clients.
The review should cover:
- Who contracts directly with each worker
- Whether personal service is required
- Whether substitution is permitted
- Whether work passes through a platform or intermediary
- Whether the individual operates an independent business
- Whether the organisation sits further up a contractual chain
- Which party carries out and retains the prescribed checks
This exercise should be completed before contracts and onboarding processes are amended. Checking everyone described as a contractor could create unnecessary work, while checking too narrow a group could leave a significant gap.
Join our webinar for a practical explanation of which working arrangements fall within scope and how to prepare contracts, supplier controls and checking processes.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][vc_column link=”%7B%22url%22%3A%22%22%7D”][us_separator link=”%7B%22url%22%3A%22%22%7D” show_line=”1″ thick=”2″ css=”%7B%22default%22%3A%7B%22height%22%3A%2250px%22%7D%7D”][vc_column_text]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]