How to Determine Principal vs Agent Considerations for Rev Rec

Under ASC 606 and IFRS 15, you need to determine if your company is the principal (main service provider) or agent (middleman) in each transaction. The key factors are: who's responsible for delivering the service, who bears the risk if things go wrong, and who sets the price. 

Principals record the full transaction amount as revenue, while agents only record their commission or fee. For companies with bundled services, partnerships, or marketplace deals, this gets complicated fast and directly impacts your reported revenue and margins. 

This guide shows you how to make the determination between principal vs agent considerations correctly and document them properly.

Overview of the principal vs. agent framework

The principal vs. agent framework determines who controls goods or services before customer transfer, affecting revenue recognition significantly.

Principal: Controls the product/service, fulfills customer promises, typically sets pricing. Reports gross revenue (total amount billed).

Agent: Facilitates sales for another party without controlling goods/services. Earns fees/commissions. Reports net revenue (commission only).

Principal vs. agent: quick comparison

Why do principal vs agent considerations matter for revenue recognition?

This classification directly impacts:

• Top-line revenue reporting
• Margin calculations
• Growth presentation to investors
• Financial statement interpretation

How does a principal vs. agent relationship look in action?

Let’s consider Company XYZ, a software reseller. It buys enterprise software licenses from a vendor and resells them to end customers. Here’s why XYZ is considered a principal in this arrangement:

• Control: It takes control of the licenses before transferring them to customers.
• Pricing: XYZ sets its own sale price, often adding a markup.
• Responsibility: It manages customer onboarding, support, and even implementation services.
• Risk: If the licenses don’t sell, XYZ bears the cost, not the vendor.

Because XYZ controls the goods and the customer experience, it must recognize revenue on a gross basis. The full amount charged to the customer is reported as revenue, with the vendor’s cost shown separately as an expense.

Example: Is CloudPro a principal or an agent?

CloudPro is a SaaS provider that offers bundled cybersecurity tools to mid-sized businesses. Instead of building its own tools, it partners with third-party vendors who own the software. Here’s how the setup works:

• Sells under its own brand
• Customers contract directly with CloudPro
• Sets pricing and provides support
• Responsible for service uptime and integration
• Absorbs risk when vendor tools fail

As a result, CloudPro is the principal. It reports gross revenue because it controls customer relationships, manages fulfillment, bears risk, and determines pricing.

How do you determine principal vs. agent status?

In revenue recognition, control is the central test to determine if a company is a principal or an agent. Under ASC 606, control refers to having the ability to direct the use of, and obtain substantially all of the remaining benefits from, a good or service.

If a company controls the product or service before it's transferred to the customer, it is typically acting as a principal.

What are the key control indicators?

ASC 606 outlines specific indicators that help evaluate control:

Who’s responsible for fulfillment?

If you’re contractually obligated to fulfill the performance obligation, including dealing with issues, refunds, and replacements, you qualify as a principal.

Does the company take on inventory or pricing risk?

Inventory risk doesn’t just mean physical goods. In software or digital services, it can mean being liable for access, functionality, or performance. If you have full discretion to set the price, it’s a strong signal you control the sale.

What are the accounting implications of principal vs. agent classification?

Revenue recognition and impact on financial statements

• As a principal, you record gross revenue (the entire amount charged to the customer) and separately recognize the cost of goods or services.
• As an agent, you report only your fee or commission, the net amount retained after passing on the primary obligation to a third party.
• Revenue presentation changes even when cash flows remain identical, potentially affecting key metrics.

Impact on profit margins and financial reporting

• Gross margin: Principals show both revenue and COGS, affecting gross profit and margin tracking. Agents, reporting net, may appear to have higher margins, but that's not always the full story.
• EBITDA & topline growth: A switch from gross to net (or vice versa) can lead to artificial dips or spikes in EBITDA and revenue, which may raise red flags during audits, investor reviews, or M&A diligence.
• Cost allocations: Classifying a transaction incorrectly might lead to misallocated fulfillment costs or commissions, distorting operating expense analysis.

What challenges arise when determining principal vs. agent status?

1. Defining principal vs. agent in multi-element arrangements

In bundled contracts (common in SaaS), companies often deliver multiple performance obligations software, implementation, support, and third-party integrations.

• You may control your own software (principal),
• but merely resell a partner integration (agent).

This can result in split treatment, requiring granular allocation of transaction price and separate revenue recognition paths for various SaaS brands.

2. Navigating complexities in Shipping, taxes, and commissions

• Shipping: If you arrange delivery but don’t control the goods in transit, you're likely acting as an agent.
• Sales tax: If you collect it on behalf of a government agency, it's not revenue and shouldn’t be included in gross reporting.
• Commissions: These are usually expenses in an agent setup but could be embedded in COGS if you're a principal paying sub-agents.

Getting this wrong can distort both gross profit and compliance reporting.

3. Judgement challenges in emerging business models

Modern models create complexity:

• Marketplaces often serve as agents for vendors, yet control key customer touchpoints.
• Embedded SaaS or fintech offerings may bundle services they don’t fully own or operate.
• Usage-based pricing models may depend on third-party infrastructure, raising questions about control and fulfillment.
• Judgment matters more than checklists. Evaluate contract substance, delivery flow, and risk profile.

Key accounting standards for principal vs. agent (ASC 606 & IFRS 15)

What does ASC 606 say?

ASC 606 provides a control-based framework, emphasizing contractual rights and obligations, to determine whether an entity is a principal or an agent. 

Principal indicators:

• Controls product/service before transfer
• Responsible for fulfillment with inventory risk
• Sets pricing

Agent indicators:

• Arranges delivery for another party
• No fulfillment or pricing discretion
• Earns commission/fee

What does IFRS 15 say?

IFRS 15 mirrors ASC 606 in spirit but focuses more on performance obligations and contract substance over form.

It provides similar indicators:

• Control of the asset or service
• Primary responsibility for fulfillment
• Inventory risk
• Price setting authority

But in IFRS, more professional judgment is typically applied, especially when reviewing complex arrangements or when there's no clear evidence of control.

‍

How to assess principal vs. agent status?

1. Review the contract in detail: Identify what goods or services are being transferred and who is obligated to deliver them.
   
   
2. Evaluate control indicators: Use ASC 606/IFRS 15 guidance to assess control:
   
   • Who bears inventory risk?
   • Who sets the price?
   • Who is responsible for fulfillment?
     
     
3. Consider contractual rights and obligations: Don’t rely solely on legal form, evaluate whether the company actually controls the product/service before transfer.
   
   
4. Document your judgment: Create a clear paper trail of the rationale, indicators considered, and conclusion reached. This will be critical for auditors and internal reviews.
   
   
5. Use automation to scale: Revenue recognition software like Zenskar can extract performance obligations and pricing terms from contracts, flag relevant control indicators, and help standardize your principal vs. agent assessments at scale. It’s especially useful for companies with high contract volume or recurring updates.

What happens when a principal-agent determination changes?

1. Adjust revenue recognition: Shift from gross to net reporting (or vice versa) from the point of reassessment.
2. Restate financials, if material: If the change impacts prior periods significantly, consider restating or disclosing the impact clearly.
3. Update disclosures: Ensure your financial statement footnotes reflect the new determination, especially if it affects how key metrics like revenue and gross margin are presented.

What are common mistakes in principal-agent assessments?

1. Focusing too much on legal form: Just because a contract says you're an "agent" or "reseller" doesn't mean you are. What matters is who controls the goods or services before transfer.
2. Overlooking control indicators: Ignoring key signals like pricing control, inventory risk, or responsibility for fulfillment.
   Defaulting to net reporting: Assuming it's safer when you're actually the principal. 
3. Inconsistent application across contracts: Using different logic for similar arrangements, especially in high-growth environments.
4. Failing to revisit decisions: A change in contract terms or service delivery can shift your role. Not reassessing when facts change may lead to outdated or incorrect reporting.

What are the best practices for principal-agent determinations?

• Standardize your approach: Use a repeatable framework based on ASC 606/IFRS 15 indicators, control, pricing, fulfillment, and inventory risk.
• Document decisions clearly: Especially when arrangements are complex or judgment-heavy.
• Review periodically: As delivery models evolve (think bundling, marketplaces, etc.), so should your assessments.

With revenue recognition tools like Zenskar, teams can streamline this process. By extracting key contract data and mapping it to control indicators, Zenskar reduces manual judgment and ensures your revenue reporting aligns with evolving principal-agent scenarios.

Scale with Zenskar’s AI-powered RevRec automation software

Zenskar is fully aligned with ASC 606 and IFRS 15, automating the revenue recognition process to ensure businesses can report transactions accurately, whether acting as a principal or an agent. The platform automatically adjusts for control and performance obligation requirements under these standards. 

‍

Take an interactive product tour to see us in action, or book a custom demo to learn how we can automate your revenue workflows.

‍