How will the UK’s new right to work scheme affect the creative industry?

The new expanded illegal working regime applies to employers (under the wider definition) who employ individuals to carry out work in the UK. This is broken down in the Employer’s guide to right to work checks into three types of work arrangement.

To see who is exempt from the expanded illegal working regime, see ‘Who is NOT caught?’ in our previous article.

A traditional contract of employment

A TV/film/theatre production company will be treated as a direct employer and responsible for performing a right to work check on a person who is employed under a contract of employment for the duration of the production. Examples include Director, Production Executive, Screen/Script Writer, and Stage Manager.

A worker’s contract

Production companies, theatres and music/arts venues will usually be treated as a direct employer and responsible for performing right to work checks on individuals who are engaged under a worker’s contract.

A worker’s contract is defined as a contract under which an individual undertakes to perform work or services personally for another person, where that person is not a client or customer of a profession or business undertaking carried on by the individual.

This is likely to capture many crew who work on production schedules set by the production company, such as camera operators, sound engineers, and other crew where their contracts meet the definition of a worker’s contract (for example, where there is no right of substitution). This includes any workers who may have engaged with the production company or venue through their own sole trader business or through a Personal Services Company (PSC).

For further analysis on the treatment of freelancers who contract via PSCs, see ‘What about individual freelancers who contract via PSCs?’ in our previous article.

Individual subcontractors

An individual sub-contractor is defined as an individual who has entered into a contract with a person to provide work or services, where that person has itself contracted with a third party to provide or arrange for the provision of the work or services, but the individual has not contracted directly with that third party.

In practice, this captures the triangular arrangement where, for example, a creative agency is contracted by a brand to deliver an immersive experiential event and engages a freelance lighting designer as a sole trader to design and rig the installation. The lighting designer has no contract with the brand, only with the agency. The agency is the direct employer responsible for performing a right to work check on the lighting designer.

Online matching service

An online matching service keeps a register of service providers with a view to matching them with clients or customers. Clients or customers can submit enquiries to see if a match can be made with a service provider. The online matching service will charge a fee per match.

This arrangement will apply where a business wants to hire a photographer for a corporate event and uses an online matching service that supplies photographers. The platform matches a photographer to the client, sets the terms of engagement, handles payment and allocates the work. The photographer then personally carries out the photography services for the client. The online matching service is the photographer’s direct employer and responsible for the right to work check.

The new rules introduce three scenarios in which liability for illegal working can extend beyond the direct employer of an individual worker. The practical consequence is that certain subcontracts and supplier agreements will need to contain specific written terms before work starts, or the upstream business risks losing its statutory excuse against extended liability (explained further below).

1. Subcontracting delivery of services

Where a business is under a contract to provide work or services to a third party, and enters into a contract with another “employer” to provide or arrange workers to carry out that work, the upstream business may have extended liability for an illegal working civil penalty in respect of any individual who personally provides the work or services in the supply chain – even though it has no direct relationship with that individual.

Example

A broadcaster contracts with a production company to deliver a television series. The production company subcontracts post-production to a VFX house, catering to a facilities company, and unit transport to a logistics provider. Each of those sub-contractors in turn engages individuals including compositors, runners, chefs, and drivers who personally carry out the work.

Under the extended liability provisions, the production company may have extended liability for a civil penalty if any individuals who personally carry out the work don’t have the right to do so. This is because it is under a contract to provide services to the broadcaster client and has subcontracted delivery to another employer.

To establish a statutory excuse against extended liability, the production company must comply with the prescribed requirements before the work commences, including having appropriate contractual terms and conditions in place (a written statement) and identity verification systems.

2. Online matching services

Where an “online matching service” (i.e. a platform) matches a corporate service provider with a client, and the corporate service provider enters into a contract with that client, the platform may have extended liability for an illegal working civil penalty in respect of any individual who personally carries out the work.

Example

An online marketplace platform matches a brand with a corporate video production company. The production company contracts directly with the brand and sends members of its own crew to deliver the shoot. Because the production company is a business that engages its own workers, the platform may have extended liability for an illegal working civil penalty if any of the crew don’t have the right to work.

3. Substitution controls

Where a business employs an ‘individual sub-contractor’ or is an online matching service engaging a ‘service provider’ under a contract that permits substitution – i.e. allows another person to carry out the work in their place – the business/online matching service may have extended liability for an illegal working civil penalty in respect of the substitute as well as the worker it has directly engaged.

Example

A venue is contracted to provide a live event to a ticket-buying audience and enters into a contract with an artist's management company which in turn supplies the performing and technical personnel. An ill backing vocalist is replaced overnight. The contract permits a singer to ask a substitute to complete work on their behalf. Under the new rules, the management company may be treated as employing any individual who personally provides the work or services, even if there is no direct contractual relationship between the management company and that individual, and even if the management company does not know the individual's identity.

A lack of awareness of the substitution would not, by itself, establish a statutory excuse for the management company. The Home Office will consider whether the prescribed substitution controls and identity verification systems were in place and operating effectively in practice.

For businesses caught by the extended liability provisions, establishing a statutory excuse requires compliance with three prescribed requirements where the relevant contractual arrangements were entered into on or after 1 October 2026:

1. Written contractual terms – specific prescribed terms must be in your contract with the downstream supplier.
2. Substitution controls – where the contractual arrangements with a worker allow substitution, you must have processes in place to control this, including to ensure any substitute's right to work is checked before they start.
3. Identity verification – you must maintain proportionate systems to ensure the individual doing the work is the same person whose right to work was checked.

The initial draft guide would have required existing contracts to be updated. The updated and finalised guidance confirms this is no longer the case. Template contracts will still need to be issued in a compliant format from this date for a statutory excuse to be established.

Based on the Employer’s guide to right to work checks published 1 October 2026 and the Code of practice on preventing illegal working, you should:

1. Review your existing right to work arrangements, policies and processes for compliance. This will help ensure a smoother transition to the expanded illegal working regime.
2. Map your subcontracting arrangements. Identify where your business is contracted to provide services to a third party and then subcontracts delivery.
3. Prioritise high-volume or high-risk supplier relationships – particularly those involving individuals rather than large corporate suppliers with established compliance programmes.
4. Review and update contracts to include the prescribed terms  for relevant contracts concluded on or after 1 October 2026.
5. Agree template clauses for standard supplier and subcontractor agreements that can be rolled out at scale.
6. Coordinate across teams. This is not just an HR or immigration issue. Procurement, legal, business affairs, operations and contract management all need to understand the new requirements.
7. Take legal advice early, particularly for complex supply chains, platform models, arrangements involving substitution, freelancer and influencer engagements, and any situation where it is not clear whether an arrangement falls inside or outside scope. The boundary between a genuine business-to-business services arrangement and an engagement that is "in substance" personal service is fact-sensitive and may require careful analysis.