Is it worth incorporating, when working in Canada as a contractor for an employer in the US?
"Interesting as I am in the exact same situations as yourself.  I, in fact, just incorporated.  You will be able ""save"" more in taxes in the end.  The reason I put ""save"" in quotes, is that you don't necessarily save on taxes, but you can defer taxes.  The driving factor behind this is that you specify your own fiscal calendar/year.  Incorporating allows you to defer income for up to 6 months.  Meaning that if you make your fiscal year starting in August or September, for example, you can claim that income on the following year (August + 6 months = February).  It allows you to keep the current year taxes down.  Also, any income left over at year end, is taxed at 15% (the Corporation rate) rather than the 30-40% personal rate you get with a sole-proprietorship.  In a nutshell, with sole-proprietorship, all income is taxable (after write-offs)... in a corporation, you can take some of that income and keep it in the corporation (gives your company a ""value""), and is only taxed at 15% - big saving there. I primarily work with US businesses.  I am, however, a dual-citizen, US and Canadian, which allowed me as a sole-proprietor, to easily work with US companies.  However, as a sole-proprietor or a Corporation, you simply need to get an EIN from the IRS and any US company will report earnings to that number, with no deductions.  At year end, it is your responsibility to file the necessary tax forms and pay the necessary taxes to both countries.  Therefore you can solicit new US business if you choose, but this is not restricted to corporations.  The real benefit in incorporating is what I mentioned above. My suggestion to you is to speak with you CA, who can outline all benefits.  Revenue Canada's website had some good information on this topic as well. Please let me know if you need anything else explained."
"I know this is a little late but here is my answer. No. You do not ""need"" to incorporate. In fact, incorporating in your situation will cost you in legal fees, administrative headaches, and a fair bit in taxes. The CRA would probably look at your corporation as a personal services corporation and it would not be allowed to claim a number of tax reductions. The tax rate would end up being over the top range (unless you are in Quebec where it would be just under the top marginal range)." You're doing business in the US and derive income from the US, so I'd say that yes, you should file a non-resident tax return in the US. And in Connecticut, as well, since that's where you're conducting business (via your domestic LLC registered there). Since you paid more than $600 to your contractor, you're probably also supposed to send a 1099 to him on that account on behalf of your LLC (which is you, essentially, if you're the only member). The benefits and taxes thing, in my opinion is the biggie. Most people don't realize that the cost to the company for a full-time employee with benefits can be 2x or even 3x the amount they see in their paycheck.  Health plans are extremely expensive. Even if you are having money taken from your check for health insurance, it is often just a fraction of the total cost, and the employer is subsidizing the rest.  More expensive benefits that contractors don't typically get are 401K matches and paid vacation days. When contractors call in sick or don't work because it is a national holiday, they don't get paid for that day. Also, see that line on your paycheck deducting for Social security and Medicare? That is only half of the tax. The employer pays an equal amount that is not shown on that statement. Also, they pay taxes that go towards unemployment benefits , and may be required to pay higher taxes if they churn through a lot of full-time employees. You can usually let contractors go with relative impunity . For the unemployment tax reasons, not paying for people's days off or benefits, a lot less paperwork, and less risk to the business associated with committing to full-time employees all provide value to the company. Thus companies are willing to pay more because they are getting more.  Think of it like a cell phone-contract. If you commit to a three year contract it can be a pain/expensive to get out of the deal early, but you will probably get a better rate in exchange for the risk being shifted to your end of the deal. They believe that it reduces the risk that Revenue Canada will deem you to be an employee and make them pay a whole pile of tax, EI, CPP and so on that should have been paid if you had been hired as an employee. It's my recollection that the employer gets dinged for both the employee and employer share of those withholdings (and generally the employer's share is larger than yours) so they really want to prevent it. There's a Revenue Canada publication about whether you're an employee or not. There's nothing on it about being incorporated, but still employers feel more protected when their contracts are incorporated.  We did work as a sole proprietorship at the very beginning, so that we could deduct our losses against employment income earned earlier in the year, before we started the business. You can find clients who will take you on. We incorporated once the losses were over with (basically we had bought the equipment and office supplies we needed to get started.) It's a simple and relatively inexpensive thing to do, and gives clients a sense of protection. It won't protect you from your own poor decisions since you'll be a director of the firm. This sounds very like disguised employment. You act like an employee of the company, but your official relationship with them is as a contractor. You gain none of the protection you get from being an employee, and this may make you cheaper, less risky and more desirable for the company who is hiring you.  Depending on your country you may also pay corporation tax rather than income tax, which may represent a very significant saving. Also, the company hiring you may not have to pay PAYE, national insurance, stakeholder pension, etc. This arrangement is normal and legal providing you genuinely are acting as a subcontractor. However if you are behaving as an employee (desk at the company, company email, have to work specific hours in a specific location, no ability to subcontract, etc.) you may be classified as a disguised employee. In the UK it used to be common practice for highly paid employees to set up shell companies to avoid tax. This will now get you into hot water. Google IR35 It sounds like your relationship in this case is directly with the recruiter. You will have to consider if the recruiter is acting as your employer, or if you remain a genuinely independent agent. The duration of your contract with the recruiter will have a bearing on this. In the UK there are a whole series of tests for disguised employment. This is a good arrangement provided you go in with your eyes open and an awareness of the legislation.  However you should absolutely check the rules that apply in your country before entering into this agreement. You could potentially be stung very badly indeed. "First, point: The CRA wants you to start a business with a ""Reasonable expectation of profit"". They typically expect to see a profit within 5 years, so you may be inviting unwanted questions from future auditors by using a breakeven strategy. Second point: If the goal is to pay as little tax as possible, you may want to consider having the corporation pay you as little as possible. Corporate income taxes are much lower than personal income taxes, according to these two CRA links: How it works is that your company pays you little as an outright salary and offers you perks like a leased company car, expense account for lunch and entertainment, a mobile phone, computer, etc. The company owns all of this stuff and lets you use it as part of the job. The company pays for all this stuff with corporate pre-tax dollars as opposed to you paying for it with personal after-tax dollars. There are specifics on meals & entertainment which modify this slightly (you can claim 50%) but you get the idea. The actual rate difference will depend on your province of residence and your corporate income level.  There is also a requirement for ""Reasonable Expenses"", such that the expenses have to be in line with what you are doing. If you need to travel to a conference each year, that would be a reasonable expense. Adding your family and making it a vacation for everyone would not. You can claim such expenses as a sole proprietor or a corporation. The sole-proprietorship option puts any after-expense profits into your pocket as taxable income, where the corporate structure allows the corporation to hold funds and limit the amount paid out to you.  I've seen this strategy successfully done first-hand, but have not done it myself. I am not a lawyer or accountant, consult these professionals about this tax strategy before taking any action." Another thing to consider, however, is the deductibility of business expenses.  Let's assume that the employer can legitimately hire you as a 1099 contractor.  (Would you be able to telecommute? Would you have a high degree of control over when you worked and when you didn't?  These factors also affect whether you're a true independent 1099 contractor or not.)  As a legit 1099 contractor, you're able to deduct certain business expenses directly from your income. (You can find a list of the rules at irs.gov.)  As a W2 employee, by contrast, can deduct only business expenses that exceed 2% of the your AGI (adjusted gross income).  So, you also have to consider your personal circumstances in making the calculus and comparing whether a legitimate 1099 contractor job is or is not good for you.  It's not just a comparison of what they'd pay W2 employees versus what they'd pay 1099 contractors. As per the Canada-U.S. Tax Treaty (the “Treaty”), a U.S. corporation carrying on business in Canada is only subject to taxation on income earned in Canada through a fixed place of business or permanent establishment. Therefore, if a U.S. company does not have a permanent establishment (PE) in Canada then their Canadian source business income is not subject to Canadian federal tax. https://www.fin.gc.ca/treaties-conventions/USA_-eng.asp "This is an answer grounded in reality, not advice. Most states have no means of enforcing their foreign business entity registration statutes. Some states never even codified consequences. (California is a notable exception.). Some states have 'business licenses' that you need in order to defend your entity in court, but will retroactively apply the corporate veil when you get the license. The ""do I have to register"" question is analogous to asking a barber if you need a haircut. But this doesn't absolve you of looking in the mirror (doing your research). Registration and INCOME taxes are different stories. If a state calls their fee a franchise tax and it is applicable and there are real consequences for not, then you will have to pay that tax. Anyway, this isn't advocating breaking the law, but since it describes ignoring toothless state-chartered agencies, then there are people that will disagree with this post, despite being in line with business climate in the United States. Hope that helps" I'm not missing the point. Canada will still charge you/a corporation income taxes on worldwide income so long as you are resident in Canada. If you are incorporated in Canada but resident elsewhere, you are only subject to tax on Canadian-sourced income. In the US, where you are incorporated is the method of determining liability. Why is one method of determining jurisdiction correct and not the other?  If you are a corporation residing in Canada, you still pay Canadian taxes on worldwide income, even if that income is sourced in another country. "In the United States, with an S-Corp, you pay yourself a salary from company earnings.   That portion is taxed at an individual rate.  The rest of the company earnings are taxed as a corporation, which often have great tax benefits.  If you are making over $80K/year, the difference can be substantial.  A con is that there is more paperwork and you have to create a ""board"" of advisors." "Be careful here: If ACME were in California, I would pay taxes on USD 17,000 because I   had revenue of 20,000 and expenses of 3,000. To CALIFORNIA. And California taxes S-Corps. And, in addition, you'd pay $800 for the right of doing business in the State. All that in addition to the regular Federal and State taxes to the State where you're resident. Suppose that ACME is in Britain (or anywhere else for that matter). My   revenue and expenses are the same, but now my money has been earned   and my expenses incurred in a foreign country. Same thing exactly. Except that you'll have to pay taxes to the UK. There may be some provision in the tax treaty to help you though, so you may end up paying less taxes when working in the UK than in California. Check with a licensed tax adviser (EA/CPA licensed in your State) who won't run away from you after you say the words ""Tax Treaty"". Does it even make sense to use my S-Corporation to do business in a   foreign country? That should be a business decision, don't let the tax considerations drive your business." I'll just re-post my comment as an answer as i disagree with Michael Pryor. According to this article (and few others) you may save money by incorporating. These factors don’t change the general   payroll tax advantage of an S   corporation, however: A S corporation   can often save business owners   substantial amounts of payroll tax if   the business profit greatly exceeds   what the business needs to pay owners   for their work. *Disclaimer: I am a tax accountant , but I am not your professional accountant or advocate (unless you have been in my office and signed a contract). This communication is not intended as tax advice, and no tax accountant / client relationship results. *Please consult your own tax accountant for tax advise.** A foreign citizen may form a limited liability company. In contrast, all profit distributions (called dividends) made by a C corporation are subject to double taxation. (Under US tax law, a nonresident alien may own shares in a C corporation, but may not own any shares in an S corporation.) For this reason, many foreign citizens form a limited liability company (LLC) instead of a C corporation A foreign citizen may be a corporate officer and/or director, but may not work/take part in any business decisions in the United States or receive a salary or compensation for services provided in the United States unless the foreign citizen has a work permit (either a green card or a special visa) issued by the United States. Basically, you should be looking at benefiting only from dividends/pass-through income but not salaries or compensations. "I've been in a similar situation before. While contracting, sometimes the recruiting agency would allow me to choose between being a W2 employee or invoicing them via Corp-2-Corp. I already had a company set up (S-Corp) but the considerations are similar. Typically the C2C rate was higher than the W2 rate, to account for the extra 7.65% FICA taxes and insurance. But there were a few times where the rate offered was identical, and I still choose C2C because it enabled me to deduct many of my business expenses that I wouldn't have otherwise been able to deduct. In my case the deductions turned out to be greater than the FICA savings. Your case is slightly different than mine though in that I already had the company set up so my company related costs were ""sunk"" as far as my decision was concerned. For you though, the yearly costs associated with running the business must be factored in. For example, suppose the following: Due to these expenses you need to make up $3413 in tax deductions due to the LLC. If your effective tax rate on the extra income is 30%, then your break even point is approximately $8K in deductions (.3*(x+3413)=3413 => x = $7963) So with those made up numbers, if you have at least $8K in legitimate additional business expenses then it would make sense to form an LLC. Otherwise you'd be better off as a W2. Other considerations:"