False self-employment and fines from the tax authorities, what exactly does it mean?

If the tax authorities discover false self-employment, the client will receive an additional tax assessment. The tax authorities see the rate paid to the freelancer as the net salary. The client - as employer - must still pay the following premiums:

• Wage tax / national insurance premiums: This can amount to 52% via the anonymous rate. 

• Employee insurance premiums: Approximately 25% on the wages. 

The tax authorities will levy taxes from January 1, 2025. However, if malicious intent is proven, this can go back up to 5 years. 

There are two types of fines: the default fine and the misdemeanor fine. The administrative default fine has been postponed (and therefore 0%), but the misdemeanor fine is imposed if there is intent or gross negligence to evade the rules. The amount of the misdemeanor fine in the case of gross negligence is 25% on top of the amount of the additional assessment. In the event of intent and/or malicious intent, this is 50 to 100% on top of the amount of the additional tax.  

The additional assessments are primarily deposited with the client. Yet the freelancer himself also runs financial risks. The freelancer retroactively loses the right to the self-employed person's deduction and the SME profit exemption. This may lead to a correction (additional payment) in income tax. If there is deliberate intent, the freelancer may receive a separate fine. The Tax Authorities do not simply impose this fine on freelancers. The burden of proof lies entirely with the tax authorities. There must be malice. This means that the inspector must prove that the freelancer knew (or should have known) that there was employment, but deliberately set up the construction to evade tax. The fine is a percentage of the tax disadvantage. For the self-employed, this concerns the underpaid income tax and health insurance premiums for the years in which the entrepreneurial facilities were wrongly applied. In the case of deliberate intent and/or malicious intent, the fine is 50% of the tax amount that the freelancer still has to pay. In case of devious tricks (fraud) - if the freelancer has deliberately lied or falsified, the fine increases to 100% of the subsequent amount to be paid.  

The Tax Authorities will use a 'growth model' in 2026. This means that an additional assessment is rarely imposed immediately and unexpectedly.  

1. The tax authorities first visit to assess the work situation; 

2. If false self-employment is discovered, the organization is given the opportunity to adjust the situation or offer the freelancers an employment contract. 

3. Only if this is not responded to, or If an audit reveals that deliberate abuse has taken place, the formal additional tax assessment will be imposed.

The Tax Authorities currently deploy 80 inspectors for company visits and inspections. The focus is on sectors where the risk of bogus self-employment is statistically the highest. These are:  

• Construction sector: Freelancers who operate under exactly the same working conditions and management as salaried staff; 

• Transport & Logistics: Parcel deliverers and truck drivers who drive exclusively for one client;

• Childcare & Education: Freelancers who are structurally deployed to fixed groups or classes;

• Care and Welfare (such as hospitals, the VVT ​​sector, care for the disabled and youth care): Freelancers who are deployed to regularly available services. 

The amount of the claims varies greatly by company size and the number of bogus self-employed people. In construction, levies have been imposed ranging from 1 million to 10 million, and for SME companies with smaller numbers of bogus self-employed people, the additional levies are often between tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of euros. Larger listed companies in the infrastructure sector have now had to make millions in reserves (provisions) in their annual financial figures because they expect ongoing investigations or claims from the tax authorities.

If there is a disguised temporary employment arrangement in which false self-employment is established, the liability for additional assessments depends entirely on the legal structure of the triangular relationship. 

Situation A: The agency is a traditional intermediary (and not a work platform) 

In this situation, the agency functions purely as an intermediary that links freelancers to clients. The agency does not claim to be an employer and the freelancer invoices to the client or via the agency. In the case of a disguised temporary employment structure, the Tax Authorities basically impose additional tax on the material employer. This is the party where the workplace and the actual authority lie: the client. The client receives the additional tax for payroll taxes and employee insurance premiums. However, if the agency has imposed a mandatory rate on the freelancer, dictates the planning and did not leave the freelancer any freedom, the tax authorities can judge that the agency itself has acted as a (waadi) employment agency. In that specific case, the additional assessment (primary or secondary) can shift to the agency as the formal employer. 

If the Tax Authorities submit the additional assessment to the agency and this agency cannot pay (for example due to bankruptcy), the tax authorities can still pass the missed payroll taxes directly to the hirer through the hirer's liability. claim. 

Situation B: The agency is a digital work platform (such as Temper) 

The legal reality is fundamentally different with digital platforms. Platforms such as Temper have now been qualified by the courts and the Tax Authorities as a temporary employment agency / employer, regardless of what they call themselves in their general terms and conditions. The tax authorities view the platform workers as temporary employees employed by the platform. In this situation, the work platform is the formal and tax employer. The Tax Authorities therefore primarily impose the additional tax on the platform. 

Disclaimer: The information in this article is intended for informational purposes only and reflects the personal opinion of the author. This is not legal advice. If you have a specific legal problem, always consult a qualified lawyer or attorney.

The information provided in this article is for general informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal, tax, or employment advice. Labor and classification regulations (such as the Dutch Wet DBA and EU directives) are highly complex, fact-specific, and subject to frequent changes and changing administrative policies. Reading this content does not create an attorney-client or advisory relationship with Zooly. Before making any decisions regarding contractor engagement, compliance frameworks, or classification policies, you should always consult a qualified local employment lawyer or tax professional. Zooly accepts no liability for any actions taken or decisions made based on the information provided on our website.

In compliance with Article 50 of the EU AI Act, we disclose that artificial intelligence (AI) tools were utilized to assist in compiling, legal screening, and drafting this content. However, to ensure absolute legal precision and contextual accuracy regarding compliance topics, the final text has undergone full human editorial review and rigorous manual verification by the Zooly compliance team before publication.