By: Money Navigator Research Team
Last Reviewed: 06/02/2026
FACT CHECKED
Quick Summary
Tide’s published eligibility is primarily aimed at sole traders/freelancers and directors of UK limited companies, with several organisation types and business models explicitly listed as not currently supported.
For many applicants, the deciding factor is less about “size” and more about legal structure and whether the account would be used to hold or manage third-party funds.
This article is educational and not financial advice.
What “eligibility” actually means (and why it’s not just a tick-box)
Eligibility is often discussed as a single yes/no question, but in practice it usually breaks down into three layers:
Legal structure: what the business is in law (sole trader, limited company, partnership, LLP, charity, trust, etc.).
Applicant constraints: basic onboarding requirements (age, mobile number, address status, app access).
Business model constraints: what the account would be used for and how money moves through the business.
Tide explains who it offers accounts to and the baseline applicant requirements in Who can apply for a Tide account?. It also sets out activity and organisation-type exclusions in Can I open an account? (our eligibility criteria).
For background on how UK business structures differ at a high level (and why the legal wrapper matters), GOV.UK’s overview is a useful reference point at Set up a business.
Common business types Tide says can apply
Sole traders and freelancers
Tide’s published criteria states it offers accounts to sole traders (and references freelancers in the same eligibility context) in Who can apply for a Tide account?. It also lists additional conditions for this route (including UK address requirements and HMRC registration references on its support pages).
A practical implication is that a trading name does not usually change this category: a sole trader trading as “Studio X” remains a sole trader for onboarding purposes, even if branding looks “company-like”.
Directors of limited companies
Tide’s published criteria also covers directors of limited companies in Who can apply for a Tide account?, and ties this route to Companies House registration in Can I open an account? (our eligibility criteria).
In UK law and administration, a limited company is separate from the individual, which is one reason providers often treat “sole trader” and “limited company” as distinct onboarding tracks.
Common business types Tide says can’t apply (or aren’t currently supported)
Tide’s own published support pages list organisation types it says it does not currently support, including (as examples) partnerships, LLPs, PLCs, CICs, CIOs, trusts, and non-profit organisations including charities.
This appears in Tide’s eligibility and “who can apply” content, including the exclusions list on Who can apply for a Tide account?.
This matters because “business type” here is about structure, not perceived legitimacy. A well-run partnership can still fall into a structure category Tide lists as not currently supported, regardless of turnover or trading history.
The “quiet blockers” that affect otherwise eligible businesses
Overseas directors and non-UK day-to-day presence
Tide addresses applying from outside the UK in Can I apply from outside the UK?. The key point is that “director lives abroad” and “company is UK-registered” are not the only variables; Tide’s published criteria still references specific onboarding prerequisites.
In practice, eligibility can hinge on whether the stated onboarding conditions can be met (for example, the combination of residency/address and device/app store constraints described in Tide’s support pages).
Holding or controlling third-party money
One of the most common eligibility misunderstandings is “we’re a normal business, but we handle client money sometimes”. Tide explicitly calls out holding/managing/controlling third-party funds as an excluded use case in its eligibility material, including within Can I open an account? (our eligibility criteria).
This is less about the business being “good” or “bad” and more about what the account is being used for. A business that invoices for its own services is different from a business whose account is used to hold money on behalf of others.
Evidence and ongoing checks can still happen after “eligible in principle”
Eligibility pages explain who can apply, but onboarding and periodic checks can still require evidence. Tide describes the idea of supporting documents for eligibility and onboarding in How to provide your supporting documents.
Across the UK market more broadly, providers may also conduct compliance reviews or re-checks over time. For a neutral explainer of how that typically shows up for UK business accounts, see our guide Bank compliance reviews explained: why UK business accounts get restricted.
Summary Table
| Scenario | Outcome | Practical impact |
|---|---|---|
| Sole trader / freelancer | Tide lists this as eligible in principle | Application route typically aligns with the sole trader path, subject to stated onboarding conditions |
| UK limited company (director applying) | Tide lists this as eligible in principle | Application route typically aligns with the limited company path, subject to stated onboarding conditions |
| Partnership | Tide lists this as not currently supported | Structure itself can prevent applying via the standard route |
| LLP | Tide lists this as not currently supported | Structure itself can prevent applying via the standard route |
| PLC | Tide lists this as not currently supported | Structure itself can prevent applying via the standard route |
| Charity / non-profit | Tide lists this as not currently supported | Organisation type can prevent applying regardless of trading history |
| CIC / CIO | Tide lists this as not currently supported | Organisation type can prevent applying regardless of trading history |
| Trust | Tide lists this as not currently supported | Structure itself can prevent applying via the standard route |
| Eligible structure + third-party funds model | Tide lists this as not supported | Business model can block eligibility even if structure fits |
| Eligible structure + compliance review triggers | Not an eligibility “type”, but a real-world pathway | Additional evidence requests can affect access even after onboarding begins |
Scenario Table
| Scenario-level | Process-level | Outcome-level |
|---|---|---|
| Legal structure fits Tide’s stated eligible categories | Onboarding checks validate identity, address status, and business details | Can proceed only if checks are satisfied |
| Legal structure is on Tide’s “not currently supported” list | Application is filtered by organisation type before deeper checks | Often blocked due to structure alone |
| Activity matches an excluded category | Review focuses on how funds move and what the account would be used for | Often blocked due to business model rather than structure |
| Overseas director or non-UK presence elements | Review weighs Tide’s published overseas application constraints | Outcome depends on meeting the stated conditions |
| Higher-risk pattern detected during onboarding | Supporting document requests may be raised during onboarding | Outcome depends on whether eligibility and checks can be completed |
| Business changes after opening (structure/activity) | Periodic reviews may reassess account use against criteria | Outcome can change if use no longer fits published criteria |
Tide Business Bank Account
Our hub page Tide business account overview covers the product positioning and common feature areas in one place, without treating eligibility as a substitute for wider fit.
For regulatory context on app-based business accounts (including how “bank” vs “e-money” models are typically checked), our explainer is App business accounts: bank or e-money? Check the FCA register.
Frequently Asked Questions
Tide’s published “who can apply” information includes “Partnership” in a list of organisation types it says it does not currently support, alongside several other structures. That framing treats eligibility as a legal-structure filter, not a quality judgement about the business.
Partnerships can also have different responsibility and control patterns (for example, nominated partner responsibilities and partnership tax returns). Even if operations look similar to a small limited company, the legal wrapper can change what a provider is willing to support operationally.
Tide’s published information includes LLPs in the organisation types it says it does not currently support. That means an LLP can be excluded even where the underlying business activity feels “standard”.
An LLP is structurally different from both a limited company and a general partnership, and it can introduce different governance and registration expectations. Providers often map onboarding policy to these structure-level differences rather than to turnover or years trading.
Tide’s published list of organisation types it says it does not currently support includes PLCs. In practical terms, that can make the answer “no” before any deeper onboarding checks begin.
A PLC also tends to imply a different governance and reporting environment compared with a typical small private limited company. Some providers segment eligibility accordingly, even if the PLC is relatively small in practice.
Tide explicitly lists non-profit organisations (including charities) among the organisation types it says it cannot currently support in its published eligibility material. This is presented as a policy constraint rather than a case-by-case statement about individual charities.
Non-profits can also have funding patterns (including grants and donations) and signatory controls that differ from commercial trading entities. Providers sometimes treat those characteristics as materially different from standard SME current account use.
Tide’s published eligibility content includes CICs and CIOs among the organisation types it says it does not currently support. This is useful because it removes ambiguity: these are not simply “non-profit-ish”, they are specific legal forms.
In edge cases, some applicants operate a trading subsidiary alongside a CIC/CIO or alongside a charity. Where multiple entities exist, eligibility often turns on which legal entity is actually applying, and whether the account would be used for that entity’s own trading rather than for third-party or umbrella flows.
Not automatically. Tide addresses overseas applications in Can I apply from outside the UK?, and frames eligibility around being a director of a UK-registered company plus meeting the stated onboarding constraints.
The practical edge case is that “company is UK-registered” may not be sufficient on its own if other stated onboarding requirements cannot be met. Tide also notes that additional checks may be required in some cases, which can affect timelines and outcomes.
A trading name typically describes branding rather than legal form. Eligibility assessments generally follow the underlying structure (for example, sole trader versus limited company) rather than the name printed on invoices.
An edge case is where branding implies a structure that is not reflected in registrations or documentation. In those situations, onboarding questions can arise because the provider is trying to match the applicant’s real legal status to the correct onboarding pathway.
Tide’s published eligibility criteria includes wording that excludes accounts used for holding/managing/controlling third-party (client/customer) funds. That is a different model from receiving payment for your own goods or services.
Edge cases often arise in agency, marketplace, or intermediary setups, where money is received and then passed on. Even where the business is legitimate and UK-based, providers may treat third-party funds handling as a distinct risk category.
“Eligible in principle” and “accepted after checks” are not the same thing. Tide’s published pages describe who can apply, and its onboarding documentation explains that applicants may need to provide supporting documents as part of meeting eligibility and safety requirements.
In practice, outcomes can depend on whether the business details and supporting evidence align with the stated criteria, and whether the use of the account matches what the provider can support.
Eligibility criteria are about onboarding, but providers can reassess risk and account use over time if patterns change. That is separate from legal structure alone, and can relate to how funds move through the account, counterparties, or changes in business model.
For a neutral explanation of how compliance re-checks commonly appear in UK business accounts, our overview is Bank compliance reviews explained: why UK business accounts get restricted. This is about process mechanics rather than predicting outcomes.
Eligibility is best understood as a boundary around what the provider’s operating model is designed to support:
- Entity types
- Control structures, and money flows
When a provider explicitly lists excluded organisation types, it is usually signalling that the structure itself creates constraints that are hard to reconcile with standardised onboarding and monitoring.
The most common mismatch is conceptual: many applicants think in terms of “small business versus large business”, while the eligibility language is often about “own-funds trading versus third-party funds handling”, and “simple ownership/control versus multi-party governance”.
Reading eligibility through that lens tends to explain why some businesses are excluded even when they look low-risk on the surface.
Related Content
