Few policy debates matter more to the structure of American trucking than how the federal government defines an independent contractor. Owner-operators haul a large share of the nation’s freight, and the lease-on model that connects them to motor carriers depends on clear rules about who is a contractor and who is an employee. In late February 2026, the U.S. Department of Labor proposed rescinding the 2024 independent contractor rule and returning to a framework close to the one adopted in 2021. For the third time in five years, the pendulum is swinging.
What DOL proposed
The proposal would bring back the “economic reality” test with two core factors weighted most heavily: the degree of control the company has over the work, and the worker’s opportunity for profit or loss. If those two factors point in the same direction, the analysis is generally done. Other factors only come into play when the core factors conflict.
The 2024 rule, by contrast, used six factors with no single factor outweighing the others, a “totality of the circumstances” approach that DOL now says set a broader and higher bar than courts use. The proposal would apply the same analysis under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act.
The public comment period closed April 28. As of this writing, DOL has not issued a final rule, though one is expected before the end of the year. DOL has said it will not enforce the 2024 rule while rulemaking is pending.
How we got here
The back-and-forth has been dizzying. In January 2021, DOL finalized a rule built around the two core factors. In 2024, a new administration replaced it with the six-factor totality test, and several trucking groups sued. Now, in 2026, DOL is proposing to return to something close to the 2021 approach. Each swing has forced carriers to revisit contracts, retrain managers and second-guess long-standing relationships with owner-operators who have driven for them for years.
How trucking groups reacted
It is rare for the American Trucking Associations and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association to agree, but both welcomed the proposal. ATA called the 2024 rule opaque and deliberately confusing. OOIDA said the proposal largely mirrors the 2021 rule and would allow owner-operators to keep their existing arrangements, while noting it would review the details to make sure drivers are not controlled like employees. OOIDA has also pointed out that an example in the 2021 rule suggesting carriers could require speed limiters or particular technology on contractors’ trucks has been removed.
What does not change
This is the part that gets lost in the headlines. A federal rule does not override state law. California’s AB 5 and its “ABC test” still apply to trucking in California, and the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the industry’s challenge. New Jersey and Illinois also apply stricter tests. Private misclassification lawsuits under the FLSA can still be filed regardless of DOL’s enforcement posture. And every relationship will still be judged on its own facts.
In other words, a carrier with poorly structured lease agreements is not suddenly safe because DOL changed its framework.
Why I care about getting this right
I have spent most of my career around carriers, drivers and the technology that connects them. The owner-operator model is one of the few paths in this industry where a driver can build real equity and run their own business. It is also a model that has been abused, through predatory lease-purchase programs and arrangements where “independent” drivers have no real independence at all.
Good policy should protect both things: the freedom of legitimate small-business truckers and the drivers who are misclassified to cut costs. It is worth noting that the House highway bill, the BUILD America 250 Act, would ban predatory lease-purchase agreements. Paired with a clearer contractor test, that could be a meaningful step toward fairness for owner-operators.
What carriers should do now
- Review your lease agreements against the two core factors. Can the owner-operator accept or reject loads, set their own schedule, use their own equipment and pursue other customers? Does pay depend on their own business decisions?
- Know your state rules. If you lease drivers in California, New Jersey or Illinois, the federal change may not help you much.
- Be careful with technology mandates. Safety technology is valuable, but how you require and control it can affect classification. Document the safety rationale and federal requirements behind any equipment standards.
- Watch for the final rule. The details in the final version, and any litigation that follows, will matter.
The bigger picture
Regulatory whiplash is its own cost. Rules that change with every administration make it harder for carriers and owner-operators to plan, invest and build durable business relationships. Ultimately, Congress could provide the stability the industry needs by clarifying the standard in statute. Until then, the safest strategy is the same one it has always been: build contractor relationships that are genuinely independent, and treat drivers as the business partners they are.