30%. That is the statutory rate an American brand must withhold on payments for independent personal services performed in the United States by a nonresident alien, under the Internal Revenue Service's Publication 515, unless the person enters into a withholding agreement or receives a final payment exemption. It is also a number that attaches only once one fact is settled, because the rule that decides whether it applies is not about the creator's passport, the brand's bank or the contract: it is about where the camera was. Publication 515 states it plainly. If the income is for personal services performed in the United States, it is from U.S. sources, and the place where the services are performed determines the source of the income, regardless of where the contract was made, the place of payment, or the residence of the payer.
Paying creators inside the United States is the subject of this cocoon's hiring guide, which reads the contractor test and the Form 1099-NEC, and of the marketplace comparison, which says who files when a platform carries the money. This guide is about the case those two leave open: an American brand paying a creator who is not a US person, for a video filmed somewhere else, or filmed here.
Where the camera was
The sourcing rule, in one sentence
Publication 515's sourcing rule for personal service income is the first thing to read, because everything else follows from it. Services performed in the United States produce US source income. Services performed outside the United States do not, whoever paid and wherever the contract was signed. A creator in Lisbon who films a product the brand shipped to Lisbon, edits in Lisbon and uploads the file has performed the service in Portugal, and the payment is foreign source income for which the brand has no chapter 3 withholding to do. The same creator, flown to Austin for a two-day shoot, has performed the service in the United States for those two days, and the payment for them is US source income. The publication attaches its own reserve to the rule, that under certain circumstances payment for personal services performed in the United States is not considered income from sources within the United States, and points to its section on pay for personal services for that exception.
The 30% rate, and who it reaches
When the income is US source and the person is a nonresident alien contractor, Publication 515 puts the payment in what tax treaties call independent personal services, income code 17: personal services performed by an independent nonresident alien contractor as contrasted with those performed by an employee. For that category the guidance is the number above: withhold at the statutory rate of 30% on all payments, unless the alien enters into a withholding agreement with the Commissioner or his delegate as to the amount required, or receives a final payment exemption. The publication also describes treaty claims, which can reduce or remove the rate for residents of countries with a convention. This guide does not read any particular treaty; what it can say is that the treaty question only arises once the income is US source, which is the first question, not the second.
The forms on each side
Where the creator is not a US person, the brand collects a Form W-8 BEN rather than a Form W-9, as the getting-paid guide describes from the creator's side. Where the payment is US source income subject to withholding, the brand reports it on Form 1042-S, which the IRS titles Foreign Person's U.S. Source Income Subject to Withholding, rather than on the Form 1099-NEC it files for a US contractor. Publication 515 puts Forms 1042 and 1042-S together and asks for the report even if no amount is deducted and withheld, so a treaty that removes the rate does not remove the filing. The two files are different files, and the one that applies is decided by the sourcing rule, not by the invoice's currency.
| What the brand is paying for | What the sourcing test looks at | What the rule makes of it | What the brand collects and files |
|---|---|---|---|
| A video filmed by a creator at home in Lisbon, Toronto or Manila | Outside the United States | Foreign source income under Publication 515 | A Form W-8 BEN for the file; no chapter 3 withholding on that payment |
| The same creator flown in for a shoot in Austin | In the United States | US source income for the services performed here | Form W-8 BEN, withholding at the statutory 30% unless an agreement or exemption applies, Form 1042-S |
| A creator who is a US person, filming anywhere | Not the test for this creator | Reportable by the brand as contractor pay | Form W-9, Form 1099-NEC from $2,000 per the instructions |
| A shoot split between a week abroad and two days here | Partly in the United States | Publication 515 asks for an accurate allocation based on the facts and circumstances, in most cases on a time basis: the days of service performed in the United States over the total days of service the pay covers | Form W-8 BEN, then the allocated US source share treated as above, with Form 1042-S |
| A license paid for rights, not for filming | A different income type from personal services | Not personal service income under the sourcing rule above | Counsel's question |
Why the passport is the wrong question
The instinct is to ask whether the creator is American. Publication 515's sentence does not ask that, and neither does the brand's file: the residence of the payer, the place of payment and the place where the contract was made are all named in the rule as things that do not determine the source. What decides is where the person was standing when they did the work. That is why a brand that runs creators in six countries has almost no withholding to do, and why the same brand's first flown-in shoot is the one that changes its year-end filing. What usually stops a brand from seeing this is that the money moves in dollars from a US bank, whereas the rule looks past the money at the shoot.
What the brief and the contract should record
Because the test is factual, the record is factual too: where the creator filmed, and on which days. A brief that names the city the shoot happens in, and a contract that separates a fee for a shoot performed abroad from a fee for days performed in the United States, give the brand the file the rule asks for. Publication 515 gives the arithmetic for the split case: an accurate allocation on the facts and circumstances, in most cases on a time basis, which means the total pay multiplied by the number of days of service performed in the United States over the total number of days of service the pay covers. Two days of a nine-day engagement is two ninths, and a contract that records the days is a contract that can do that division. The ownership guide in this cocoon covers what the same contract has to say about rights, which is a separate question with its own signature requirements.
The brief for paying a creator abroad
- Ask where the creator will film before the first payment, and write the answer into the brief, because it is the fact the sourcing rule turns on.
- Collect a Form W-8 BEN from every creator who is not a US person, as the creator-side guide describes, and keep it with the campaign file.
- Treat a payment for a video filmed abroad as foreign source income, and do not build a withholding step the rule does not ask for.
- Treat a flown-in shoot as services performed here, and take the 30% question to counsel before the trip, with the treaty question after it, not before.
- Keep the two year-end paths apart in the accounting: Form 1099-NEC for US contractors, Forms 1042 and 1042-S for US source income paid to a foreign person, filed even where a treaty or an exemption brought the withholding to nothing.
Sources
- IRS, Publication 515 (2026), Withholding of Tax on Nonresident Aliens and Foreign Entities
- IRS, About Form 1042-S, Foreign Person's U.S. Source Income Subject to Withholding
- IRS, Withholding on specific income
- IRS, Instructions for Forms 1099-MISC and 1099-NEC (12/2026)
Checked on 22 September 2026. This guide is not legal or tax advice. Where this guide and the official source disagree, the official source prevails.
