Some years ago, working with Deputy Ged Nash, we steered the Competition (Amendment) Act 2017 into law to protect freelance actors, musicians and writers in bogus self-employment. These were people who should have been designated as employees. A recent Supreme Court decision clarified the test for determining employment status under the Taxes Consolidation Act. The Supreme Court ruled that Domino's Pizza delivery drivers were employees and not independent contractors. Responding to that recent decision, Revenue is updating its code of practice in determining employment status. The decision is welcome, particularly for workers exploited through the gig economy, but recently it has been brought to my attention that unforeseen consequences may follow for a small number of low-earning sole traders, such as journalists who need to contribute to multiple media outlets. There are concerns that a one-size-fits-all approach may not take into account the legitimate practices of genuine freelance contributors who are tax-compliant as sole traders. I am raising this with the Tánaiste to see if it has been brought to his attention. I am happy to correspond with him further on it. I have engaged with the NUJ on it. There are concerns that a blanket ruling from Revenue might inadvertently have the impact of restricting a diversity of voices in our media. I stress that it is very welcome that we see the Supreme Court decision in the Karshan, or Domino’s Pizza, case. For most people in a scenario where it is not clear, particularly in the gig economy, it is very welcome to see their employment status designated as that of an employee. However, there is concern about this unforeseen consequence, specifically in the media.

Sentiment score: 0.25