Most founders assume non-compete agreements work the same for contractors as they do for employees. They don't. In many states, including one in your contractor agreement could backfire spectacularly—making it unenforceable, exposing you to legal fees, or worse, providing ammunition for a misclassification lawsuit.
The reality is harsh: independent contractors are supposed to be independent. Courts know this. When you try to restrict where an independent business can operate next, judges tend to side with the contractor.
Enforceability varies dramatically by state. Some ban contractor non-competes outright. Others allow them with strict limitations as regulators crack down on restrictive covenants.
This guide breaks down which states prohibit contractor non-competes, where they might hold up, what courts actually examine when evaluating them, and what actually works to protect your business without relying on a clause that might be void from day one.
Don't rely on clauses that won't hold up in court. Get contractor agreements built to actually protect your IP and confidential information.
Get Your Contractor Agreement TemplateHere's what you need to know upfront: non-compete enforceability for independent contractors is a function of two things—where you operate and whether the working relationship actually looks like true contractor status.
The core distinction matters because courts apply different standards to employees versus contractors. With employees, there's an employment relationship with consideration built into ongoing employment. With contractors, you're dealing with independent businesses who theoretically have bargaining power, multiple clients, and the freedom to work when and where they choose.
That independence is exactly why courts scrutinize contractor non-competes more aggressively. A non-compete clause fundamentally restricts where someone can do business. For contractors—who by definition should be running independent operations—it's often seen as restraint of trade.
Classification also plays a major role. If a court determines your "contractor" was actually misclassified, that non-compete might be evaluated under employment law standards. But the non-compete itself can become evidence against you—proof that you were exerting employee-level control.
Independent contractors, by legal definition, are supposed to operate as separate business entities. They set their own hours, use their own tools, serve multiple clients, and control how they deliver the work. That independence is the foundation of contractor classification under IRS rules, Department of Labor guidelines, and state employment laws.
Non-compete agreements undermine that foundation. They limit where contractors can work, who they can serve, and what services they can offer. In doing so, they create a relationship that looks less like arm's-length contracting and more like employer control.
This is why courts are skeptical. When evaluating contractor non-competes, judges look for economic coercion and restraint of trade. Did the contractor have a real choice, or were they forced to accept the clause to get the work?
The enforcement risk is real. A poorly drafted non-compete doesn't just fail in court—it can actively backfire. If a contractor later sues for misclassification, your own contract language becomes Exhibit A.
Red Flag
⚠️ A non-compete that looks like employee control can trigger misclassification audits, expose you to back taxes, and open the door to wage-and-hour claims. The IRS, DOL, and state agencies all scrutinize these relationships closely.
Non-compete enforceability varies dramatically across the United States. Some states have near-total bans, others permit them under narrow circumstances, and many fall into a gray zone where enforceability is entirely fact-specific.
California Business and Professions Code § 16600 voids non-compete agreements except in very limited contexts (sale of business, dissolution of partnership). This applies to contractors with the same force as employees. Attempting to include one can expose you to fee awards and penalties under California labor law.
North Dakota Century Code § 9-08-06 prohibits agreements that restrain anyone from exercising a lawful profession, trade, or business. This sweeping prohibition covers contractors as strictly as employees. Non-competes are void on their face in North Dakota.
Oklahoma follows a similar approach under 15 O.S. § 217-219A, voiding non-competes with narrow exceptions for sale of business goodwill and protection of trade secrets tied to employment relationships. Contractors typically fall outside even those exceptions. Enforcement is nearly impossible.
What happens if you include one anyway? The clause is void and unenforceable. In California specifically, contractors can recover attorney's fees if you attempt enforcement. Including a non-compete can still be used against you as evidence of misclassification.
Texas Business and Commerce Code § 15.50 allows non-competes that are reasonable in scope, time, and geography, ancillary to an otherwise enforceable agreement, and designed to protect a legitimate business interest. For contractors, courts require adequate consideration beyond the base contract value, reasonableness in duration (typically 1-2 years) and geography (limited to actual business territory), and a legitimate protectable interest such as trade secrets or confidential information.
Can independent contractors have a non-compete in Texas? Yes, technically. But most still fail due to overreach, lack of consideration, or because NDAs and IP assignment clauses provide adequate protection.
Florida Statutes § 542.335 presumes non-competes are reasonable if they protect legitimate business interests like trade secrets, confidential information, or substantial relationships with specific customers. For contractors, courts require clear proof that the restriction is necessary and that the contractor actually had access to genuinely protectable information.
Duration matters in Florida: six months or less is presumed reasonable, over two years is presumed unreasonable, and everything in between requires factual justification.
Georgia Code § 13-8-50 et seq. allows non-competes that are reasonable in time, geographic area, and scope of prohibited activities. Georgia's 2011 constitutional amendment made enforcement somewhat more predictable, but contractor non-competes still face heightened scrutiny. Courts examine whether the contractor was truly independent or functionally an employee, and whether less restrictive alternatives (like NDAs) would adequately protect the business.
New York applies a "reasonableness" standard with no specific statute governing contractor non-competes. Courts use a multi-factor balancing test: Is the restriction necessary to protect a legitimate interest? Is it reasonable in scope and duration? Does it impose undue hardship on the contractor? Does it harm the public interest?
New York courts frequently recharacterize or strike down contractor non-competes as overbroad. Recent legislative proposals would further restrict enforceability, particularly for lower-income workers and contractors.
The Illinois Freedom to Work Act (820 ILCS 90) prohibits non-competes for employees earning below certain thresholds but doesn't explicitly address contractors. Courts apply common-law reasonableness standards and tend to view contractor non-competes skeptically unless they protect clearly defined trade secrets or customer relationships that wouldn't be protected by an NDA alone.
Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 149, § 24L regulates employee non-competes but excludes independent contractors from its definition. This creates uncertainty. Courts increasingly disagree with broader contractor restrictions, especially where the contractor relationship resembles employment or the restriction lacks clear protectable interests.
The practical reality in gray-zone states? Contractor non-competes are heavily fact-specific and expensive to enforce. Courts often rewrite them, narrow their scope, or strike them entirely. NDAs and IP assignment clauses perform better because they protect specific assets without restricting where someone can work.
When a contractor non-compete lands in court, judges examine several key factors to determine enforceability. Understanding these can help you draft agreements that have a fighting chance. Or recognize when a non-compete is doomed from the start.
Why NDAs are safer and more enforceable: they protect your confidential information without restricting where contractors can work. Learn more about NDAs and how they protect your business here.
Most businesses reach for non-competes when they're actually worried about three things: contractors disclosing confidential information, contractors claiming ownership of deliverables, and contractors poaching clients or employees. The good news? There are better, more enforceable tools for each concern.
| Tool | What It Protects | Enforceability |
|---|---|---|
| Non-Compete | Prevents contractor from working in same field/location | Weak to moderate; varies by state, heavily litigated |
| NDA | Prevents disclosure of trade secrets and confidential info | Strong; enforceable in all 50 states when properly drafted |
| IP Assignment | Transfers ownership of all work product to you | Strong; clear ownership without restricting contractor's future work |
| Non-Solicitation | Prevents poaching of clients or employees | Moderate; enforceable in many states as less restrictive than non-compete |
A properly drafted Non-Disclosure Agreement protects what actually matters: your confidential information and trade secrets. Unlike non-competes, NDAs don't restrict where contractors can work or who they can work for. They simply prevent disclosure or use of specific, defined confidential information.
Courts enforce NDAs because they're narrowly tailored to protect legitimate business interests without imposing unreasonable restraints on trade. An NDA says "you can't share our customer list, pricing models, or proprietary processes." A non-compete says "you can't work in this industry for two years."
Most businesses are better protected by a properly drafted NDA. It covers your actual vulnerabilities—information disclosure—without the enforceability risks and misclassification exposure that come with contractor non-competes.
Stop relying on non-competes that won't hold up. Get enforceable NDAs and contractor agreements built for your business.
After reviewing hundreds of contractor agreements, we see the same errors repeatedly. These mistakes don't just weaken enforceability. They create active legal exposure.
You don't need a non-compete to protect your business from contractors. You need the right combination of contractual protections tailored to your actual risks.
💡 Our contractor agreements are built to protect IP without illegal restraints. They combine NDAs, IP assignment, and tailored protective provisions that courts actually enforce.
It depends on your state. California, North Dakota, and Oklahoma largely prohibit them. States like Texas, Florida, and Georgia allow limited enforcement if reasonable in scope. Even where technically legal, courts scrutinize contractor non-competes more heavily than employee agreements because they undermine contractor independence.
Yes, but with significant limitations. Texas courts will enforce contractor non-competes only if they're reasonable in time, geography, and scope, protect a legitimate business interest, and don't impose undue hardship. Most importantly, the contractor must receive adequate consideration beyond the base contract. Many Texas non-competes still fail in court due to overreach.
The clause becomes void and unenforceable. In some states, attempting to enforce an illegal non-compete can expose you to fee awards or penalties. Worse, including one in your contractor agreement can be used as evidence of misclassification—arguing you treated the contractor like an employee.
In most cases, yes. NDAs protect your confidential information and trade secrets without restricting where contractors can work. They're enforceable in all 50 states when properly drafted, don't trigger misclassification concerns, and courts view them as reasonable protection rather than restraint of trade.
Not directly in most states. You can't prevent contractors from taking other work—that's the essence of being independent. However, you can use NDAs to prevent disclosure of confidential information, IP assignment clauses to own the work product, and in some states, non-solicitation provisions to prevent poaching your clients or employees.
Non-competes feel safe. They create the illusion of control. They make it seem like you've locked down your competitive advantage and protected your business from contractors who might turn around and compete with you.
But in practice, they're often the weakest clause in your contract. They fail in court, trigger misclassification risk, and distract from the protections that actually work. Ownership clauses and confidentiality provisions secure your IP and trade secrets without restricting where someone can do business.
The businesses that are genuinely protected aren't the ones with the broadest non-competes. They're the ones with clear IP ownership, enforceable NDAs, and contracts that align with the reality of contractor relationships.
If you don't own the work and can't enforce the clause, you're not protected—you're exposed.
Stop relying on non-competes that won't hold up in court. Get templates built with enforceable IP assignment, NDAs, and state-compliant protections.
Attorney-drafted • Fully customizable • State-compliant protections
Legal Disclaimer: This article is provided for educational and general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Laws and non-compete enforceability rules vary by jurisdiction and may change over time. You should consult a licensed attorney for advice specific to your situation.
SMVRT Legal is a legal-technology platform that provides contract templates, tools, and access to general legal guidance. Read our full Legal Disclaimer.
Need help reviewing or creating a contractor agreement? Create a free account to get started.