Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 701.035 (2026)

Applicant required to be independent contractor to be eligible for license; classes of licenses

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

701.035 Applicant required to be independent contractor to be eligible for license; classes of licenses. (1) An applicant must qualify as an independent contractor under ORS 670.600 to be eligible for a license with the Construction Contractors Board.

(2) The board shall establish two classes of independent contractor:

(a) The nonexempt class is composed of the following entities:

(A) Sole proprietorships, partnerships, corporations and limited liability companies:

(i) With one or more employees; or

(ii) That utilize one or more workers supplied by a worker leasing company.

(B) Partnerships, corporations and limited liability companies with more than two partners, corporate officers or members, if any of the partners, corporate officers or members are not part of the same family and related as parents, spouses, sisters, brothers, daughters or sons, daughters-in-law or sons-in-law or grandchildren.

(b) The exempt class is composed of all sole proprietorships, partnerships, corporations and limited liability companies that do not qualify as nonexempt.

(3) If a person who is licensed as exempt under subsection (2)(b) of this section hires one or more employees, utilizes one or more workers supplied by a worker leasing company or falls into any of the categories set out in subsection (2)(a)(B) of this section, the person is subject to penalties under ORS 701.992 for improper licensing. If a person who is licensed as exempt under subsection (2)(b) of this section hires one or more employees, or utilizes one or more workers supplied by a worker leasing company, the person is also subject to licensing sanctions under ORS 701.098. The person must reapply to the board in the correct class.

(4) The decision of the board that a person is an independent contractor applies only when the person is performing work of the nature described in ORS 701.021.

(5) A person that is within the exempt class described in subsection (2)(b) of this section and is licensed as a commercial contractor shall procure and maintain workers’ compensation insurance as authorized by ORS 656.128. [1989 c.870 §4; 1995 c.216 §1; 1999 c.402 §13; 2007 c.836 §15; 2009 c.408 §§2,3; 2013 c.300 §10]

Note: The amendments to 701.035 by section 19, chapter 78, Oregon Laws 2025, become operative July 1, 2027. See section 23, chapter 78, Oregon Laws 2025. The text that is operative on and after July 1, 2027, is set forth for the user’s convenience.

701.035. (1) An applicant must qualify as an independent contractor under ORS 670.600 to be eligible for a license with the Construction Contractors Board.

(2) The board shall establish two classes of independent contractor:

(a) The nonexempt class is composed of the following entities:

(A) Sole proprietorships, partnerships, corporations and limited liability companies:

(i) With one or more employees; or

(ii) That have a PEO relationship.

(b) The exempt class is composed of all sole proprietorships, partnerships, corporations and limited liability companies that do not qualify as nonexempt.

(3)(a) If a person who is licensed as exempt under subsection (2)(b) of this section hires one or more employees, enters into a PEO relationship or falls into any of the categories set out in subsection (2)(a)(B) of this section, the person is subject to penalties under ORS 701.992 for improper licensing.

(b) If a person who is licensed as exempt under subsection (2)(b) of this section hires one or more employees, or enters into a PEO relationship, the person is also subject to licensing sanctions under ORS 701.098.

(4) The decision of the board that a person is an independent contractor applies only when the person is performing work of the nature described in ORS 701.021.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2021 · leading case: Randall v. Ocean View Constr. Co., 100 P.3d 1088 (Or. Ct. App. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Randall v. Ocean View Constr. Co., 100 P.3d 1088 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 77× “"(b) Sole proprietors * * * licensed under ORS 701.035. When labor or services are performed under contract for remuneration, notwithstanding ORS 656.”

HDG Enter., Inc. v. Filings of the Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 856 P.2d 1037 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 4× “Employer points to evidence in the record that all of the installers, with the exception of Thomas, were registered with the CCB under ORS 701.035(1) and contends that DIF erred as a matter of law in finding that the installers were not in compliance with subsection (7).”

Stamp v. Dep't of Consum. & Bus. Servs., 9 P.3d 729 (Or. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “" [7] The dissent also argues that the hearings officer's conclusion that Roy retained the right to control Gary's work does not rationally follow from the hearings officer's characterizations of Gary as a subcontractor.”

Parthenon Constr. & Design, Inc. v. Neuman, 999 P.2d 1169 (Or. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “I agree with plaintiff that ORS 701.035 et seq. is a statutory scheme designed to protect consumers from unscrupulous builders.”

Bannister v. Longview Fibre Co., 894 P.2d 1259 (Or. Ct. App. 1995). “600,” which ORS 701.035 requires as a precondition to registration.”

Allied Structural v. CCB, 492 P.3d 642 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 5× “* * * “(h) That the number of licensed contractors working together on the same task on the same job site, where one of the contractors is classed as exempt under ORS 701.035 (2)(b), exceeded [statutory limits.”

Indep. Contractors v. Constr. Contractors Bd., 899 P.2d 1216 (Or. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 9× “We address only the argument that the rule violates ORS 701.035 and hold that the rule is invalid.”

Edwards v. Perry, 880 P.2d 507 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 4× “See ORS 701.035(2) and (3). 2 *169 Defendant does not contend that plaintiff failed to register, failed to keep his registration current, or registered in the wrong class under ORS 701.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 701.035(1) — 2 cases

HDG Enter., Inc. v. Filings of the Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 856 P.2d 1037 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “Employer points to evidence in the record that all of the installers, with the exception of Thomas, were registered with the CCB under ORS 701.035(1) and contends that DIF erred as a matter of law in finding that the installers were not in compliance with subsection (7).”

Randall v. Ocean View Constr. Co., 100 P.3d 1088 (Or. Ct. App. 2004). “"(b) Sole proprietors * * * licensed under ORS 701.035. When labor or services are performed under contract for remuneration, notwithstanding ORS 656.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 701.035(2) — 3 cases

Edwards v. Perry, 880 P.2d 507 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). “See ORS 701.035(2) and (3). 2 *169 Defendant does not contend that plaintiff failed to register, failed to keep his registration current, or registered in the wrong class under ORS 701.”

Indep. Contractors v. Constr. Contractors Bd., 899 P.2d 1216 (Or. Ct. App. 1995). “We address only the argument that the rule violates ORS 701.035 and hold that the rule is invalid.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 701.035(2)(a) — 1 case

Indep. Contractors v. Constr. Contractors Bd., 899 P.2d 1216 (Or. Ct. App. 1995). “We address only the argument that the rule violates ORS 701.035 and hold that the rule is invalid.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 701.035(2)(b) — 1 case

Indep. Contractors v. Constr. Contractors Bd., 899 P.2d 1216 (Or. Ct. App. 1995). “We address only the argument that the rule violates ORS 701.035 and hold that the rule is invalid.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 701.035(3) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 701.035(4) — 1 case

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.