A performance-based, install-weighted compensation structure for Facebook marketing.
A proposal to restructure my Facebook marketing compensation from a fixed W-2 salary to a 1099 base-plus-commission arrangement tied directly to installed HVAC work — grounded in four months of real performance data.
At a glance
SummarySupporting documents
AppendicesMeta ad spend vs Facebook-attributed revenue
Month-by-month spend, closed-job revenue, and gross ROAS for 2026 YTD. Establishes the baseline the pay models are evaluated against.
Open reportRevision 01 — volume-weighted model
First draft: a $1,200 base with per-lead and per-job bounties. Retained for transparency, but it rewarded volume over outcomes — why it was revised.
Open reportRevision 02 — install-weighted with ROAS-gated commission
The actual ask. $1,200 base, $25 per non-install job, marginal $200/$400/$600 per-install flat, and install commission gated by trailing 90-day ROAS (0% / 2.5% / 3.5%).
Open reportNet ROAS across all three pay models
Four charts comparing ad spend plus compensation against revenue. Shows Revision 02 produces the highest return per dollar of combined marketing cost.
Open reportTwo sides of the table
AnalysisElevate (Owner)
- Hard-dollar overhead savings of roughly $3,000–5,000/year — employer FICA (~$2k), workers comp, unemployment insurance, PTO/sick/holiday obligations.
- Operational flexibility — no HR compliance burden (I-9, W-2, Oregon paid leave), no unemployment exposure on termination, clean one-line vendor invoice instead of payroll complexity.
- Variable cost matches seasonal revenue — pay flexes with install output, so slow months cost less and busy months earn their keep.
- Risk transfer — marketing performance risk shifts to the subcontractor. If ad performance drops, the cost automatically drops with it.
- Loss of control, by design — IRS and Oregon rules require the contractor to set their own hours, methods, and tools. Cannot dictate schedule, demand on-site presence, or require exclusivity without triggering reclassification.
Me (Marketing Lead)
- Deductible business expenses — equipment, software subscriptions, home office, mileage, phone and internet portions. Realistic tax offset of $1,500–3,000/year at current scale.
- Retirement & QBI access — Solo 401(k) or SEP-IRA eligibility plus the 20% qualified business income deduction (under threshold).
- Legal freedom to take other clients — B2B freelance and Crewsive development time become structurally clean, with no employer IP claim issues.
- Career credibility — "ran Meta acquisition for an HVAC contractor as an independent" is a legitimate B2B case study. Builds real operator experience: invoicing, contracts, client management.
- Relationship reframe — paid specialist rather than employee. Expertise is valued differently when it comes with an invoice.
- Self-employment tax hit — 15.3% on net earnings vs 7.65% employee side. At current scale, roughly $700/year before deductions offset.
- No benefits floor — no PTO, sick pay, paid holidays, employer health contribution, matched retirement, workers comp, or unemployment insurance.
- First-year tax complexity — budget for a CPA ($400–800) year one. DIY is possible but error-prone.
IRS & Oregon BOLI misclassification exposure
The IRS and Oregon's Bureau of Labor & Industries scrutinize W-2 → 1099 conversions hard — especially when the work, location, and relationship look identical to the day before the change. If audited and reclassified, the employer owes back payroll taxes, penalties, and interest, potentially $5–15k+ in exposure depending on duration. Oregon is particularly aggressive on this.
Mitigation requires real operational change, not just a new paystub: contractor sets own hours, uses own equipment (already true), works from own space, is free to take other clients, and invoices rather than receives payroll. This proposal is written with that separation built in.
Move my Facebook marketing role from W-2 at ~$2,700/month to a 1099 subcontractor arrangement of $1,200 base, marginal tiered bonuses on every closed install, and a ROAS-gated commission (0% below 3× trailing install ROAS, 2.5% from 3× to 5×, 3.5% above). Against actual Jan–Apr 2026 data the new structure would have cost the company $1,084 less year-to-date, improved net ROAS from 1.71× to 1.90×, and paid me $3,415 in a four-install month versus $1,925 in a one-install month.
The structure turns my pay into a lagging indicator of install output — exactly what you've said you want more of.
The net picture
SynthesisNet positive — with one condition.
Real overhead savings, real flexibility, and a performance-linked marketing cost that follows install output. The condition: the working relationship must actually change — not just the pay structure. Treating a 1099 contractor like a W-2 employee is what triggers misclassification exposure. The proposal is designed to make that separation real.
Net positive — with discipline.
The 1099 structure pays off only when I actually act like a contractor: multiple clients, own hours, own workflows, deducted expenses, retirement contributions at scale. Stay doing the same work the same way and I pay higher taxes for no gain. The structural shift is bigger than the numerical one.
The ask
Next stepsReview the four supporting documents, then a 30-minute conversation.
If the structure, the numbers, and the tradeoffs look right, the remaining work is a written scope-of-work agreement, a transition date, and a short list of operational changes to back up the classification (work location, hours, equipment ownership, scope boundaries). I can draft the SOW and send it in the same format as these reports.
If the structure is directionally right but specific knobs need tuning — base, commission rate, tier amounts — the analysis is modeled so adjustments take minutes, not days. The numbers are defensible; the structure is the conversation.