
2026-10-27 · 8 min read
Most pickleball clubs default to 1099 for coaching pros — but a 2026 DOL rule change and IRS audit patterns in fitness make this the year to review your arrangements.
Most pickleball clubs hand out 1099s the way they hand out paddles — without much deliberation. A teaching pro shows up, runs lessons, collects their share of revenue, and you file the form at year-end. Simple enough.
Until an IRS auditor decides to ask about it.
Sports and fitness facilities are a recurring audit target for both the IRS and the Department of Labor, precisely because the contractor-versus-employee line is genuinely blurry in a club environment.<sup>[1]</sup> In February 2026, the DOL issued a new proposed rule that shifts how federal classification tests work — making this a particularly useful year to review how your coaching pros are currently structured.
Treating coaching pros as independent contractors has real advantages: no payroll taxes, no benefits administration, and a structure that mirrors how many pros prefer to work. A contractor who rents court time from your facility, sets their own rates, and brings their own client list has a genuinely contractor-shaped relationship.
The problem is that many pickleball clubs have an arrangement that looks more like employment in practice. The pro works your schedule, teaches your curriculum, uses your equipment, covers the desk between lessons, and wears your club shirt. Calling that a 1099 relationship is a classification risk — regardless of what the contract says.
Federal and state agencies look at how work actually happens, not the label on the form. A single worker complaint can trigger a review that looks back three years at every contractor arrangement in the building. The financial exposure ranges from back employment taxes and interest to federal and state penalties. One national group fitness operator faced an initial IRS assessment of roughly $4 million before qualifying for safe-harbor relief — a reminder that fitness and sports facilities are not exempt from this kind of scrutiny.<sup>[2]</sup>
The contractor relationship holds up when your coaching pros have genuine independence. Under IRS common-law guidance and the DOL's current framework, the more of these that apply, the stronger the contractor case:
They set their own rates and schedule. The pro decides what to charge for private lessons, which time slots to offer, and how many sessions per week to accept. You provide court access; they manage their calendar.
They bring their own clients. The pro markets to their own following. Club members who want lessons contact the pro directly — your facility doesn't fill their schedule.
They work for other facilities too. A contractor can teach clinics elsewhere, run their own programs, and take clients at other venues without your approval.
You control the when and where, not the how. You book the court and handle check-in logistics. The pro runs the session as they see fit. You don't supervise lesson content, require a specific curriculum, or critique their teaching method.
They supply their own equipment and carry their own insurance. The pro uses their own paddles, ball hoppers, and teaching aids, and holds their own liability coverage.
A flat court-rental model — where the pro pays a set hourly rate for court access and keeps all lesson revenue — generally supports contractor status because the facility isn't directing the work. A revenue-split arrangement where the pro independently sets their lesson prices and the club takes a percentage as a facilities fee also supports this framing.
The employee case builds when the club controls the work, not just the court. These factors push toward employment:
You set their hours. If a pro works a schedule your admin creates — Tuesday through Friday at defined time blocks — and can't deviate without your approval, that's scheduling control.
You define the curriculum. Requiring coaches to follow a specific teaching progression, use club-branded drills, or deliver your beginner program format means they're producing your product, not their own.
They perform other club duties. If coaching pros spend significant time on tasks you assign outside of lessons — open-play management, front-desk coverage, equipment setup — that blurs into employment.
You collect all revenue and distribute a cut. If your club sets the lesson rate, processes all payments, and pays the pro their share, the arrangement looks more like a payroll split than contractor pay.
Most real clubs have arrangements that mix elements of both. The point is to map your actual setup against these factors honestly — not to assume a 1099 form settles the question.
In February 2026, the Department of Labor issued a proposed rule that would rescind the Biden administration's 2024 independent contractor standard and replace it with a five-factor test that elevates two core elements: the worker's degree of control over the work, and the opportunity for profit or loss.<sup>[3]</sup>
For most pickleball clubs, this shift matters. A pro who controls their schedule, sets their own rates, and bears the financial risk of an empty lesson calendar has a meaningfully stronger contractor case under a control-and-profit-centric test than under the 2024 rule, which treated all six factors equally.
Three things to keep in mind as you evaluate your arrangements:
The rule is not yet final. The DOL's public comment period closed April 28, 2026. Check DOL.gov for the finalized rule before making structural decisions based on this proposal.
The 2024 rule still applies in private litigation. While the DOL applies the earlier guidance in federal investigations, plaintiffs' attorneys can still invoke the 2024 six-factor test in civil lawsuits against your facility.<sup>[4]</sup>
State tests remain stricter. California's ABC test, and similar laws in Massachusetts and New Jersey, are not affected by the DOL proposal. A pro who qualifies as a contractor under any federal standard may still be an employee under state law.<sup>[5]</sup> If you operate in one of these states — or have pros who live there even if your facility doesn't — review state-specific guidance separately.
Here's what most operators miss: your booking and scheduling software is evidence.
If your platform shows that a pro's lesson slots are created by club admin, assigned to required time blocks, and linked to facility-controlled tasks — that record supports an employment finding. If the system shows the pro self-scheduling, setting their own rates in the system, and operating without facility-assigned work windows, it supports contractor status.
[Orhuk's](/blog/pickleball-facility-management-software) role-based scheduling access lets you structure this correctly from day one. A contracted pro can manage their own calendar, set their own pricing directly in the booking platform, and take bookings through the customer-facing site without admin involvement. Lesson fees, payout amounts, and court usage records are logged automatically — building a clean documentation trail if your classification is ever questioned. Platforms like CourtReserve and Mindbody offer staff scheduling tools, but operators frequently note that configuring granular independent-contractor access levels and separate pricing layers requires navigating multiple admin screens that weren't built with contractor autonomy in mind.
The practical rule: don't build your scheduling setup in a way that demonstrates control you're not claiming. How the relationship operates in software should match how you're classifying the worker on paper.
See also: [pickleball pro lesson scheduling software](/blog/pickleball-pro-lesson-scheduling-software) and [pickleball staff scheduling software](/blog/pickleball-staff-scheduling-software) for how multi-type compensation setups work in practice.
If you suspect some of your current 1099 arrangements should be W-2, you have options before an audit begins.
Section 530 safe harbor (Revenue Act of 1978) protects businesses from federal employment tax liability if they consistently treated workers as contractors, had a reasonable basis for doing so, and filed 1099s consistently. It's a genuine defense tool — not a magic override — and it doesn't cover state obligations or FLSA civil claims.<sup>[2]</sup>
To audit your current arrangements:
1. Pull the contracts and compare them to the control factors above 2. Check how each pro actually operates day-to-day — not what the paperwork says 3. Consult an employment attorney or CPA, especially if you operate in California, Massachusetts, or New Jersey 4. Document the specific factors that support each classification, including how your software records their schedule, access, and payment structure
Reclassifying doesn't have to be disruptive. Many clubs run a clean mix: a contracted pro who brings their own clients, sets their own rates, and uses the facility independently — and a part-time staff coach who works your beginner program as a W-2 employee. The key is that each relationship is classified on its actual facts, and you can show your work if asked.
See also: [pickleball lesson pricing strategy](/blog/pickleball-lesson-pricing-strategy) for how pro compensation models — court rental, revenue split, hourly — connect to classification risk.
- [Pickleball Club Management Software: The Operator's Guide](/blog/pickleball-facility-management-software) - [Pickleball Lesson Pricing Strategy](/blog/pickleball-lesson-pricing-strategy) - [Pickleball Pro Lesson Scheduling Software](/blog/pickleball-pro-lesson-scheduling-software) - [Pickleball Staff Scheduling Software](/blog/pickleball-staff-scheduling-software)
[1] Netchex — "Personal Trainer Misclassification: Why Fitness Studios Get Audited and How to Stay Compliant" (2025) [2] Locke Lord LLP — Representation of a national group fitness operator; IRS $4M assessment reversed via Section 530 safe harbor (2019 case) [3] DLA Piper — "DOL Proposes Independent Contractor Rule" (March 2026) [4] A.O. Shearman — "Back to the Future: US DOL Proposes Revised Worker Classification Rule" (2026) [5] Ford Harrison — "Worker Classification in Focus: DOL Proposes Rule on Independent Contractor Status" (2026)