We do both, so we have no reason to push you either way. Here is where each genuinely wins — including the cases where an EOR is the wrong answer.
If you only need to employ people, an EOR is almost always faster and cheaper to start. If you need to trade — invoice Philippine customers, hold assets, claim incentives — you need your own entity, and no EOR can substitute for it.
Plenty of clients do both in sequence: start on an EOR, register the entity in parallel, then move staff across.
A shaded cell marks the stronger option on that row.
| Employer of Record | Your own entity | |
|---|---|---|
| Time until someone can start | Days, once terms are agreed | Two to four months through SEC, BIR and the LGU |
| Money down before day one | None beyond the first invoice | Paid-in capital, filing fees, professional fees |
| Per-head running cost | Salary, statutory load, plus a service fee | Salary and statutory load only |
| Fixed overhead | None — it scales with headcount | Bookkeeping, audit, annual renewals regardless of headcount |
| Invoicing customers in the Philippines | Not possible — the EOR is not your trading entity | Yes, with BIR-registered official receipts |
| Holding assets or signing local leases | Not in your name | Yes |
| Who carries labour-law exposure | The EOR | You |
| Brand on the employment contract | Ours, not yours | Yours |
| Statutory filings each month | Handled for you | Your responsibility, in-house or outsourced |
| Winding down | Serve notice on the service agreement | Formal dissolution — months of filings and clearances |
| Perception with local candidates | Some candidates prefer a direct employer | A registered local employer reads as more permanent |
| Room to grow into | Comfortable to roughly 10–15 people | No ceiling |
Tell us the headcount you are planning, whether you will invoice locally, and your timeline. We will tell you which route we would actually recommend — including when that means not using our EOR.