No tool can tell you whether your relationship will be reclassified. That question belongs to the judge, and he looks at how you work, not at what the contract says.
You can, however, find out straight away where you stand. Since 1996, judges have looked for three powers on your client's side: giving orders, controlling, sanctioning. You will see which ones your situation touches.
Two common beliefs are wrong. Your registration covers you with a presumption, and it is for the other side to rebut it. As for the client threshold beyond which you would be reclassified, there is none.
Since 1996, the Cour de cassation has recognised legal subordination by three powers: giving orders, controlling their execution, sanctioning failures. Tick what describes your relationship with this client. Ticking nothing is an answer.
Nothing leaves this tab: your answers stay in your browser, and everything is erased when you close it.
Information verified on October 1, 2026. Indicative assessment with no legal force. The rules it applies are taken from official sources and dated, but it knows of your situation only what you tell it: only the authorities can settle your case.
The official pages where we read the rules and amounts applied here.
Article L. 8221-6 of the labour code presumes that a person registered as a self-employed worker, holding a SIRET, is not bound to their client by an employment contract. It is a rebuttable presumption: it falls if permanent legal subordination is established. But it is for whoever claims an employment contract to rebut the presumption, never for you to prove your independence.
Since the Cour de cassation's ruling of 13 November 1996, legal subordination is recognised by three powers exercised by the client, and by those alone:
No statute sets a minimum number of clients, or a share of turnover beyond which reclassification would follow. The thresholds circulating on blogs and forums are invented. Working for a single client is lawful, and it is the ordinary situation of many first years. Conversely, having ten clients protects you from nothing if subordination is characterised with one of them: the number of clients is only one indicator among others, that of having your own customer base, and it weighs only alongside the rest.
A service contract stating in as many words that no subordination exists between the parties counts for nothing if the facts say otherwise. What the judge examines are the facts: quotations describing a result and a deadline rather than attendance, exchanges, deliverables, invoicing by result rather than by days spent on site. None of these points protects you on its own, and no clause can replace them.
| Who acts | What they judge | What they can decide |
|---|---|---|
| The labour court, on your application | The nature of the contract | Reconstruct an employment contract, order back pay, paid leave and overtime |
| The labour court, on the end of the assignment | The termination | Treat it as dismissal without real and serious cause |
| URSSAF, during an audit at your client's | The contribution base | Recalculate employer and employee contributions on a salary basis |
| The criminal court, in case of concealment | The client's intent | Find concealed employment, with a flat-rate indemnity for the worker |
Before the labour court, invoices already paid are deducted from the sums due. The compliance certificate your clients ask for covers them on the payment of your contributions, never on the nature of the relationship. Rules recorded on 8 September 2026.
Camille leaves her developer job in January. Three weeks later, her former employer calls her back.
Same desk, same badge, same Monday morning meeting, same manager approving her time off.
The only difference: she sends an invoice instead of receiving a payslip.
All three powers are present, and the client is her former employer: that is the first situation a judge examines.
Here, her self-employed status counts neither for nor against her: the judge will look at how she actually works.
Invoice a deliverable and a deadline rather than days of attendance. It is one of the few points that change overnight.
Work with your own tools and from your own workstation, whenever the assignment allows it.
Write in the quotation what you deliver, not when you are available.
Keep the freedom to turn down an assignment, and use it at least once. A freedom never exercised is hard to demonstrate.
Keep the quotations, the exchanges and the deliverables. That is the material a judge examines, and it cannot be reconstructed after the fact.
A clause declaring the absence of subordination counts for nothing against contrary facts. Do not rely on it.
If your client is your former employer, keep a record of what has changed in how the work is organised since you left.
In case of serious doubt, have the relationship read against the documents by someone who does this for a living: no online content replaces that reading.
No, it is perfectly lawful, and it is the ordinary situation of many first years. No statute sets a minimum number of clients or a share of turnover: the thresholds in circulation are invented. The number of clients is only one indicator among others, and it weighs only alongside the rest.
No. Qualification depends neither on the parties' intention nor on the title written at the top of the document, but on the facts in which the work is carried out. A contract asserting the absence of subordination counts for nothing if the facts say otherwise.
Yes, nothing forbids it, and combining employment with a micro-enterprise is lawful, subject to any exclusivity clause. But invoicing the same tasks to the person who was your employer is the most exposed situation, and the first a judge examines. Keep a record of what has changed in how the work is organised since you left.
It is for whoever claims the existence of an employment contract to rebut the presumption attached to your registration. You do not have to prove your independence: it is the facts of how the work is carried out that must reveal subordination, and it is for the other party to establish them.
No, they are three different things. Reclassification is civil: it changes the nature of a contract and creates debts. Concealed employment is criminal and requires the client to have intentionally evaded their obligations. Economic dependence is not a labour law matter: a client who abruptly ends an established relationship incurs liability on commercial grounds, without employment coming into play.
Free, no account needed. Paste this code into your page: the tool shows in full and adjusts to its height. The figures are kept up to date on our side, with nothing to do on yours.
<iframe src="https://believemy.com/embed/en/employment-reclassification" title="Employment reclassification" width="100%" height="720" style="border:0;max-width:760px" loading="lazy"></iframe> <script async src="https://believemy.com/static/embed-v1.js"></script> <p>Employment reclassification, a tool by <a href="https://believemy.com/en/tools/employment-reclassification">Believemy</a></p>
By embedding this tool, you accept our terms of use for the tools.
Invoicing properly is half the work.
Believemy is the school for solopreneurs. You learn to build, to raise your game with AI, and to sell.
See the courses