Compensating marketers, whether employees or independent contractors, requires careful structuring to avoid violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS), Stark Law, and Florida’s specific anti-referral laws. These include the Florida Patient Brokering Act (F.S. §817.505), which broadly prohibits paying or receiving remuneration for patient referrals, the Florida Anti-Kickback Statute (F.S. §456.054), which defines “kickback” as remuneration to induce referrals for services or items when not tax-deductible as an ordinary expense, and the pharmacy-specific anti-rebate statute (F.S. §465.185), which prohibits paying or receiving any commission, bonus, or kickback for referrals to a pharmacy. We analyze proposed compensation arrangements for compliance, advising on the applicability of safe harbors, such as the bona fide employee safe harbor under the federal AKS, which may permit certain commission structures if specific criteria are met. It is critical to understand the distinction between these laws: the federal AKS is an intent-based criminal statute, requiring proof that remuneration was “knowingly and willingly” offered or received to induce referrals. Conversely, the Stark Law is a strict liability civil statute, meaning an improper referral due to a financial relationship can lead to penalties even without intent to violate the law. This difference significantly impacts compliance planning and defense strategies; for Stark, meticulous adherence to exceptions is key, while for AKS, avoiding any appearance of intent to induce referrals is paramount. We draft marketing employment contracts that clearly define roles, responsibilities, compliant compensation structures, and strict adherence to all legal and ethical standards. Florida’s rules on payments to unlicensed health insurance agents for referrals may also offer analogous principles if marketers are involved in steering patients to services tied to specific insurance reimbursements.