Ltd versus Sole Trader for Musicians

Introduction

‍

Choosing a legal vehicle is one of the most consequential decisions a working musician or music business owner will take. The choice between operating as a sole trader or incorporating a private company limited by shares goes to the heart of liability, tax, ownership of rights, bargaining power, and succession. It affects how you sign contracts, how you tour, how you employ or engage other people, how you raise finance, and how you defend yourself if anything goes wrong. This article provides a practitioner’s guide to the decision with reference to leading cases and with practical applications drawn from the everyday lives of professional musicians.

‍

Legal framework in outline

‍

United Kingdom company law rests on the Companies Act 2006 and the common law of separate corporate personality. The cornerstone authority is Salomon v A Salomon and Co Ltd from 1897. The House of Lords confirmed that a registered company is a separate legal person distinct from its shareholders. That principle underpins limited liability for directors and shareholders. The corporate veil will be respected except in tightly defined circumstances such as sham or evasion. The modern Supreme Court considered the doctrine in P rest v Petrodel Resources Ltd where it made clear that veil piercing is not a general device for achieving justice. It applies only where a person interposes a company to evade an existing obligation or to conceal wrongdoing. Adams v Cape Industries shows a related point. A corporate group may structure affairs to limit liability. The court will respect separate personality absent sham.

‍

For sole traders, there is no separate legal person. The individual owns the business assets, enters contracts in their own name, and bears personal liability for debts and claims. Partnership law may apply where two or more individuals carry on business in common with a view to profit. Some bands fall into partnership by conduct. That can have serious implications for liability, tax, and ownership of rights. A limited liability partnership can be considered in some scenarios although it is less common in the music sector than a company limited by shares.

‍

Liability and risk

‍

The single biggest legal difference is liability. A limited company owns the business obligations. If the company becomes insolvent, liability is generally limited to the value of its assets. Directors may face personal exposure for wrongful trading, fraudulent trading, or breach of fiduciary duty. Claims for negligence or breach of contract will usually be brought against the company. That separation can be decisive for touring activities, production budgets, and large scale live events where venue damage or audience claims could be significant. Insurance remains vital either way. The corporate form improves the starting position.

‍

By contrast, a sole trader is personally liable for all debts and claims. If a promoter refuses to pay a festival fee or if third parties allege infringement arising out of a production, the individual can be sued directly. Personal assets are at risk, subject to insolvency protections. For many working musicians this risk is acceptable during the earliest stages of a career. As turnover and contract values increase, the risk profile usually points toward incorporation.

‍

Corporate veil, sham, and personal guarantees

‍

No structure is bulletproof. Courts will not permit the corporate form to be used as a device to evade existing obligations. Gilford Motor Co Ltd v Horne remains a classic example where an injunction prevented the use of a company to circumvent a non solicitation covenant. In a music context, a manager who signs a personal management agreement cannot avoid post termination restrictions by interposing a new company as the contracting party. Lenders and venues also commonly require personal guarantees for credit or for venue hire risk. Those guarantees cut through the protection of limited liability. Advisers should test the guarantee language carefully, including limitations, caps, and time periods.

‍

Tax comparison in overview

‍

Tax should never be the sole driver. It remains a material factor. Sole traders are charged to income tax on business profits with Class 2 and Class 4 National Insurance contributions. Companies pay corporation tax on profits. Directors drawing salaries pay income tax and employee National Insurance. Employer National Insurance is also due. Dividends are taxed in the hands of shareholders at dividend rates. That combination can, above certain profit levels, produce a lower overall tax burden for companies. Where profits are retained for reinvestment the company can achieve further efficiency. Where the owner needs to extract most profits for living costs the difference may narrow.

‍

Value added tax is neutral across structures in principle. The compulsory registration threshold applies either way. Many music businesses benefit from voluntary registration in order to reclaim input tax on touring costs, equipment, and production. Cross border live work brings additional VAT complexity regarding place of supply rules for cultural services. Professional advice on VAT is often decisive when touring in the European Union.

‍

Intellectual property ownership

‍

The strategic advantage of a company is the ease with which it can hold intellectual property. Copyright in compositions and recordings, trade marks for artist names and logos, domain names, and image rights related contracts can be vested in the company. The company can then license those rights to third parties. That allows clean contracting and ring fencing of key assets. If the trading company faces claims, the intellectual property can sit in a separate holding company with intercompany licences. That protects catalogue value and improves options for finance.

‍

A sole trader can own rights personally. That is valid in law. The risk is concentration of personal exposure. If claims are brought against the individual, rights may be reachable by creditors. Personal ownership also complicates collaboration. Bands and production collectives often benefit from a company or partnership agreement that sets out clear ownership and licensing terms at the outset. Clarity on splits, administration rights with PRS and MCPS, and decision making authority avoids disputes later.

‍

Contract formation and signature mechanics

‍

A company can sign contracts through an authorised signatory or two directors or a director and the company secretary in accordance with the Companies Act formalities. Execution as a deed is available where consideration is absent or where longer limitation periods are desired. For a sole trader, the individual signs in a personal capacity. Where an artist operates under a stage name, the signature block should still identify the legal person. Confusion here can create enforcement risk. If a contract names the act only, then the counterparty may contest who is bound.

‍

Warranties, indemnities, and limitation

‍

Labels, promoters, and brands expect warranties and indemnities in most agreements. A company can give these without automatically exposing the owner to personal liability. The warranty is given by the company. If the company cannot meet a claim, the counterparty is left with a claim against an insolvent entity unless a guarantee is in place. Many counterparties now require personal guarantees or escrow for high value obligations. A sole trader gives warranties in a personal capacity. That concentrates risk on the individual. Where possible, limit warranties to matters within knowledge, include reasonable qualifications, and align indemnities with available insurance.

‍

Employment status and payroll

‍

A company can employ crew and administrative staff within Pay As You Earn. It can also engage contractors. IR35 applies where personal service company arrangements exist. Session musicians and touring crew often work through their own companies. Careful status assessment is required to reduce payroll risk. A sole trader can employ staff, although administration is often heavier relative to scale. Many workers in music operate as self employed. The Ready Mixed Concrete case and later authorities set out the multi factor test for status. Mutuality of obligation, control, and the right of substitution remain key considerations. Written contracts help, evidence of working practices matter smore.

‍

Banking, finance, and credit

‍

Banks and finance partners often prefer incorporated borrowers. A company can grant security over assets, assign receivables, and issue shares to investors. Tour financing, invoice discounting for live fees, and catalogue backed facilities are easier to structure within a company. A sole trader can borrow. Personal credit limits and security constraints often apply. For royalty backed lending, lenders prefer a clean revenue assignment from a company that holds or administers rights. Credit insurers and collection account management are simpler when a company sits at the centre of the cash flows.

‍

Governance and decision making

‍

A company imposes governance discipline. Directors owe statutory duties undersections 171 to 177 of the Companies Act. They must act within powers, promote the success of the company, exercise independent judgment, show reasonable care skill and diligence, and avoid conflicts. That framework helps professionalise decision making. Bands using a company benefit from board structure and shareholder agreements that record voting rights, deadlock mechanisms, and exit provisions. A sole trader is agile. Decisions can be taken quickly. The tradeoff is lack of formal checks. Where significant value is at stake, formal process usually improves outcomes.

‍

Record keeping and compliance

‍

Companies must file annual accounts and a confirmation statement. They must maintain statutory registers and record persons with significant control. Privacy concerns can be managed through service addresses and corporate directors for some roles. A sole trader has lighter compliance obligations. Tax filings remain. Professional presentation of accounts is still recommended, particularly where the musician seeks tour funding, grants, or investor support. Grant bodies and public funders often expect incorporated counterparties with audited or at least reviewed financial statements.

‍

Dispute resolution posture

‍

In practice, a company provides a sturdier litigation posture. Claims are directed to the company. Directors can change without interrupting the continuity of the contracting party. Settlement agreements can be signed by the company without dragging owners into personal undertakings. Mediation and arbitration clauses should be considered in the standard form agreements used by the business, regardless of structure. Many music disputes resolve through settlement once leverage is tested. A corporate vehicle can hold settlement obligations without tethering the owner’s personal assets.

‍

Applying case study context from the music industry

‍

Ownership and control of masters has dominated recent years. Taylor Swift created a template for re recording in response to a sale of masters. That strategy relied on careful contract drafting and the absence of restrictions after a set period. A company vehicle can hold re recorded masters and control licensing. That keeps revenue streams within a corporate structure that can pay dividends or invest in catalogue marketing. Prince spent years pushing for control of masters. His eventual arrangements relied on sophisticated corporate and licensing structures. Those examples sit at the global end of the market. The same structural lessons apply to an independent artist with a growing catalogue.

‍

Sampling and clearance disputes such as the Kraftwerk decision show how a few seconds of audio can carry legal weight. A limited company that commissions sampling heavy productions should hold liability cover and adopt clearance protocols as aboard controlled process. That reduces the chance that an individual producer assumes risk informally. It also creates an audit trail for musicologists and lawyers if a dispute arises. For live shows, the Led Zeppelin litigation on alleged similarity confirms how high profile claims can run for years. Corporate discipline around documentation, composition notes, and version control of demos gives a better evidential position if claims surface.

‍

Touring brings risk of injury, venue damage, visa issues, and consumer law complaints. Companies can standardise contract terms across venues, manage cancellation exposure through force majeure clauses, and centralise insurance. The Metallica experience around digital rights confirmed the value of forward compatible contract drafting. A company can develop a rights policy that becomes a consistent baseline for all outbound contracts. A sole trader can do the same in principle. In practice, company discipline often makes execution more reliable across a team.

‍

Tax and cash flow modelling

‍

Advisers should model three scenarios at a minimum. First, a sole trader at low to moderate profits. Second, a company paying a modest salary and dividends with profits retained for reinvestment. Third, a company that employs a small team and seeks external finance. For a self releasing artist who draws most profits for living costs, the benefit of incorporation may be marginal at first. For a touring operation with meaningful retained profits, company status can smooth tax and allow pension planning through employer contributions. Timing of dividend declarations, the use of directors loan accounts, and the interaction with personal allowances require careful planning. The point is not headline rate shopping. The point is net cash after tax across the full year with risk taken into account.

‍

Intellectual property holding structures

‍

Many music businesses place core rights in a holding company. Trading risk sits in a separate operating company that contracts for tours and merchandise. Licences run from hold co to opco. Royalties flow back to hold co. This approach mirrors film and television structures. It protects catalogue value if the operating company faces claims or insolvency. For small teams, the complexity must be justified by scale. Where a catalogue begins to attract third party interest for synchronisation or brand partnerships, ring fencing rights early usually pays off.

‍

Employment and equity participation for collaborators

‍

A company can issue shares to key collaborators such as producers, managers, or long serving band members. Vesting schedules and leaver provisions can align incentives while protecting the founders if relationships end. A sole trader cannot issue equity. Profit share arrangements or bonus agreements can replicate some incentives, although they lack permanence. Where a band chooses a partnership, a written partnership agreement with capital accounts, profit shares, and retirement terms is essential. Without it, disputes over ownership and payouts on exit are almost inevitable.

‍

Insurance and indemnities

‍

Regardless of structure, insurance is critical. Public liability, employers liability, equipment cover, and cancellation cover form the basics. A company can centralise policies and set group levels of cover. Contractual indemnities should dovetail with insurance. Avoid indemnities that exceed policy scope. Ensure notification provisions in policies arediarised so that claims are notified in time. A sole trader needs the same discipline. The difference lies in the ability to separate risk across group companies and in the negotiating leverage that sometimes comes with corporate scale.

‍

Compliance culture and reputation

‍

The corporate form helps create a culture of compliance. Modern promoters, brands, and broadcasters run due diligence on counterparties. A company with clear governance, clean accounts, and written policies on safeguarding, equality, and data protection will convert more opportunities. A sole trader can maintain high standards. The presentation hurdle is higher where buyers expect institutional grade counterparts. For larger shows and public sector funded events, incorporated status is often a procurement requirement.

‍

Practical decision matrix for advisers

‍

The following questions guide most recommendations. What is the realistic risk profile over the next two years. What is the expected profit level and cash extraction need. Are there collaborators who will need equity or profit shares. Will the project pursue external finance. Is there a catalogue to protect. Will the business tour internationally. Is there a need to employ staff. If more than three answers push toward scale and risk, a company is usually advised. If answers indicate modest activity and limited risk, a sole trader may be appropriate for another season, subject to review.

‍

Implementation checklist for incorporation

‍

Advisers should carry out a simple sequence. Choose a name that clears trade mark searches. Incorporate at Companies House with appropriate share classes. Put in place a shareholders agreement that covers decision rights, transfers, leavers, and dispute resolution. Open bank accounts and accounting software. Register for VAT if appropriate. Register for payroll if staff will be employed. Assignor license intellectual property to the company. Update contracting templates with the company as counterparty. Put insurance in place. Create a calendar for compliance filings. Write basic policies that counterparties expect to see.

‍

When sole trader status remains appropriate

‍

There are many situations where remaining a sole trader is rational. A songwriter who sells works occasionally and who has minimal touring risk may prefer simplicity. A part time musician who performs locally may accept personal risk as minimal. Where a musician has significant personal allowances unutilised, income tax treatment may be benign at low profits. If there is no need for staff, finance, or brand licensing, the administrative burden of a company may not be justified at first.

‍

How structure intersects with dispute strategy

‍

If a client anticipates contentious issues such as a dispute with a former manager or a partner, structure can support the strategy. A company can ring fence new income while negotiations proceed. Settlement can involve a share buy back, a royalty override from corporate revenues, or a licence of catalogue. Sole traders lack that flexibility. They can still settle disputes. They often end up with personal undertakings and payment schedules that are harder to manage if income fluctuates. The choice of structure changes the toolkit.

‍

Conclusion

‍

No single structure suits every musician. The analysis is situational. The legal tests are stable. Salomon confirms the value of separate personality. P rest limits veil piercing to true evasion or concealment. Employment status remains fact sensitive. Tax rules evolve. The strategic thread is constant. Identify risk, model cash, protect rights, choose the vehicle that supports growth without unnecessary complexity. For many musicians, the journey begins as a sole trader then moves to a limited company once contracts, touring, and catalogue value reach a level where risk and scale demand corporate structure.

‍

References to legal authorities and guidance

‍

Salomon v A Salomon and Co Ltd 1897 AC 22. P rest v P etrodel Resources Ltd 2013 UKSC 34.Adams v Cape Industries plc 1990 Ch 433. Gilford Motor Co Ltd v Horne 1933 Ch935. Ready Mixed Concrete South East Ltd v Minister of Pensions and National Insurance 1968. Companies Act 2006. HMRC guidance on employment status for tax. HMRC VAT notices for cultural services. PRS, MCPS, and PPL membership guidance for rights administration.

‍

Real world application scenarios

‍

A self releasing artist with two million monthly streams wants to raise finance for marketing a new record. A company can issue shares to an investor and license the masters to a distributor. Security can be granted over receivables. A sole trader would need to borrow personally with higher risk. A touring production engages dancers, musicians, and backline crew. A company can employ some roles and contract others with clear health and safety policies and risk assessments. A sole trader can manage this in principle. Execution risk is higher without corporate systems. A composer who collaborates with two producers on a library album wants to retain control of publishing administration. A company can hold the publishing and sign an administration agreement with a publisher while granting fair writer shares to collaborators. The same outcome is harder for a sole trader where rights and obligations all sit on the individual.