Blog Layout

Are Your Contractors Really Employees?
Liz Gibbs • March 20, 2022

Are Your Contractors Really Employees?

Two landmark cases before the High Court highlight the problem of identifying whether a worker is an independent contractor or employee for tax and superannuation purposes.


Many business owners assume that if they hire independent contractors they will not be responsible for PAYG withholding, superannuation guarantee, payroll tax and workers compensation obligations. However, each set of rules operates a bit differently and in some cases genuine contractors can be treated as if they were employees. Also, correctly classifying the employment relationship can be difficult and there are significant penalties faced by businesses that get it wrong. 


Two cases handed down by the High Court late last month clarify the way the courts determine whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor. The High Court confirmed that it is necessary to look at the totality of the relationship and use a ‘multifactorial approach’ in determining whether a worker is an employee. That is, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck, even if on paper, you call it a chicken.


In CFMMEU v Personnel Contracting and ZG Operations Australia v Jamse, the court placed a significant amount of weight on the terms of the written contract that the parties had entered into. The court took the approach that if the written agreement was not a sham and not in dispute, then the terms of the agreement could be relied on to determine the relationship. However, this does not mean that simply calling a worker an independent contractor in an agreement classifies them as a contractor. In this case, a labour hire contractor was determined to be an employee despite the contract stating he was an independent contractor.


In this case, Personnel Contracting offered the labourer a role with the labour hire company. The labourer, a backpacker with some but limited experience on construction sites, signed an Administrative Services Agreement (ASA) which described him as a “self-employed contractor.” The labourer was offered work the next day on a construction site run by a client of Personnel Contracting, performing labouring tasks at the direction of a supervisor employed by the client. The labourer worked on the site for several months before leaving the state. Some months later, he returned and started work at another site of the Personnel Contracting’s same client. The question before the court was whether the labourer was an employee.


Overturning a previous decision by the Full Federal Court, the High Court held that despite the contract stating the labourer was an independent contractor, under the terms of the contract, the labourer was required to work as directed by the company and its client. In return, he was entitled to be paid for the work he performed. In effect, the contract with the client was a “contract of service rather than a contract for services”, as such the labourer was an employee.


The second case, ZG Operations Australia v Jamse produced a different result.

In this case, two truck drivers were employed by ZG Operations for nearly 40 years. In the mid-1980’s, the company insisted that it would no longer employ the drivers, and would continue to use their services only if they purchased their trucks and entered into contracts to carry goods for the company. The respondents agreed to the new arrangement and Mr Jamsek and Mr Whitby each set up a partnership with their wife. Each partnership executed a written contract with the company for the provision of delivery services, purchased trucks from the company, paid the maintenance and operational costs of those trucks, invoiced the company for its delivery services, and was paid by the company for those services. The income from the work was declared as partnership income for tax purposes and split between each individual and their wife.


Overturning a previous decision in the Full Federal Court, the High Court held that the drivers were not employees of the company.


Consistent with the decision in the Personnel Contracting case, a majority of the court held that where parties have comprehensively committed the terms of their relationship to a written contract (and this is not challenged on the basis that it is a sham or is otherwise ineffective under general law or statute), the characterisation of the relationship must be determined with reference to the rights and obligations of the parties under that contract.


After 1985 or 1986, the contracting parties were the partnerships and the company. The contracts between the partnerships and the company involved the provision by the partnerships of both the use of the trucks owned by the partnerships and the services of a driver to drive those trucks. This relationship was not an employment relationship. In this case the fact that the workers owned and maintained significant assets that were used in carrying out the work carried a significant amount of weight.


For employers struggling to work out if they have correctly classified their contractors as employees, it will be important to review the agreements to ensure that the “rights and obligations of the parties under that contract” are consistent with an independent contracting arrangement. Merely labelling a worker as an independent contractor is not enough if the rights and obligations under the agreement are not consistent with the label. The High Court stated, “To say that the legal character of a relationship between persons is to be determined by the rights and obligations which are established by the parties' written contract is distinctly not to say that the “label” which the parties may have chosen to describe their relationship is determinative of, or even relevant to, that characterisation.”


A genuine independent contractor who is providing personal services will typically be:


·  Autonomous rather than subservient in their decision-making;

·  Financially self-reliant rather than economically dependent upon the business of another; and,

·  Chasing profit (that is a return on risk) rather than simply a payment for the time, skill and effort provided.


Every business that employs contractors should have a process in place to ensure the correct classification of employment arrangements and review those arrangements over time. Even when a worker is a genuine independent contractor this doesn’t necessarily mean that the business won’t have at least some employment-like obligations to meet. For example, some contractors are deemed to be employees for superannuation guarantee and payroll tax purposes.

-End-


Quote of the month

“The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.”

Martin Luther King, Jr.


Keep up-to-date.

If you would like to keep up-to-date with all the latest developments in the tax space, we can help to ensure your business doesn’t miss a single opportunity. With the Federal Budget coming up it is more important than ever to stay on top of new measures that could benefit your business.


Email us at Robert Goodman Accountants at reception@rgoodman.com.au . © Copyright 2022 Knowledge Shop. All rights reserved. Brought to you by Robert Goodman Accountants.


Office open
By Liz Gibbs March 10, 2025
With thanks to all Energex and Emergency services Crew, our electricity has been reconnected and our office is open from today 11 March. We hope you and your loved ones are safe and well following cyclone Alfred. These past few days have been challenging for many, and our thoughts are with everyone affected.
By Liz Gibbs March 10, 2025
Due to a power outage affecting the entire Samford area, the RGA Practice will be operating remotely today, 10 March, until electricity is restored. Please be assured that our team remains available and can be reached at 07 3289 1700. We appreciate your understanding and support during this time. Stay safe, and we look forward to seeing you soon.
Cyclone Alfred
By Liz Gibbs March 5, 2025
As Tropical Cyclone Alfred approaches, we want to remind everyone to take necessary precautions and ensure their safety. We have received some important information that we believe is crucial to share with you to help you prepare for the severe weather conditions ahead.
Work Health and Safety (Sexual Harassment) Amendment Regulation 2024
By Liz Gibbs February 26, 2025
In a significant move to combat workplace sexual harassment, Amendments to the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 (as per the Work Health and Safety (Sexual Harassment) Amendment Regulation 2024) will soon commence on 1 March 2025.
By Liz Gibbs February 25, 2025
The amount of money that can be transferred to a tax-free retirement account will increase to $2m on 1 July 2025.
What happens to your super when you die?
By Liz Gibbs February 25, 2025
The Government has announced its intention to introduce mandatory standards for large superannuation funds to, amongst other things, deliver timely and compassionate handling of death benefits. Do we have a problem with paying out super when a member dies?
By Liz Gibbs February 25, 2025
If credit card surcharges are banned in other countries, why not Australia? We look at the surcharge debate and the payment system complexity that has brought us to this point. In the United Kingdom, consumer credit and debit card surcharges have been banned since 2018. In Europe, all except American Express and Diners Club consumer surcharges are banned. And in Australia, there is a push to follow suit. But, is the issue as simple as it seems?
Babyboomer wealth
By Liz Gibbs February 25, 2025
“Succession planning, and the tax risks associated with it, is our number one focus in 2025. In recent years we’ve observed an increase in reorganisations that appear to be connected to succession planning.” ATO Private Wealth Deputy Commissioner Louise Clarke.
Penalty for False R&D claims
By Liz Gibbs February 25, 2025
A joint investigation involving the ATO found that, between 2014 and 2017, a Sydney business coach promoted unlawful tax schemes encouraging clients to lodge over-inflated, inaccurate or unsubstantiated research and development ('R&D') tax incentive claims
SMSF lodgement due dates
By Liz Gibbs February 25, 2025
All trustees of SMSFs with assets (including super contributions or any other investments) as at 30 June 2024 need to lodge an SMSF annual return ('SAR') for the 2023/24 financial year.
More Posts
Share by: