1. Introduction
Since 1 January 2025, the Dutch Tax Authorities (Belastingdienst) have resumed active enforcement resumed active enforcement relating to schijnzelfstandigheid following the end of the enforcement moratorium under the Wet DBA (Wet Deregulering Beoordeling Arbeidsrelaties). While there is no exact English equivalent, ‘schijnzelfstandigheid’ is generally understood as ‘false self-employment’, a situation where a working relationship is presented as independent contracting, but in reality has characteristics of employment. For ease of reference, I use the terms schijnzelfstandigheid and false self-employment interchangeably in this article.
In practical terms, this means that the Belastingdienst can once again take action where a working relationship is presented as an independent contractor arrangement, but in reality has the characteristics of employment.
This matters because requalification can have significant consequences. For businesses, this may include wage tax assessments, social security contributions, interest and, in some cases, penalties. For independent professionals, it may create uncertainty regarding their status, business model and ability to continue operating as a ZZP’er (zelfstandige zonder personeel, i.e. a self-employed professional without employees).
As interim legal counsel and ZZP’er myself, I have both a professional and a personal interest in this topic, and have seen these discussions from both sides: as an independent professional and as legal counsel helping organizations structure ZZP engagements. One misconception that continues to exist is that engaging ZZP professionals has become impossible or automatically too risky. In my view, that is not correct.
The current debate has undoubtedly created uncertainty. At the same time, many organizations continue to rely on interim expertise for projects, specialist knowledge, temporary capacity shortages and transitional situations. Genuine interim assignments remain perfectly possible in the Netherlands, provided businesses and contractors consciously structure the relationship in the right way.
This article provides practical guidance for businesses and ZZP professionals who want to work together while reducing the risk of schijnzelfstandigheid. It focuses on practical structuring measures that can help support a genuine independent contractor relationship.
2. Legal Background: Schijnzelfstandigheid and the Current Framework
The legal starting point is simple enough: under Article 7:610 of the Dutch Civil Code (Burgerlijk Wetboek), a relationship may qualify as employment if work is performed for remuneration under a relationship of authority. In practice, however, applying that test to ZZP relationships has been anything but simple.
The Wet DBA was introduced in 2016 to replace the former VAR system (Verklaring Arbeidsrelatie) and to address false self-employment. However, instead of creating the clarity businesses and contractors needed, the Wet DBA led to uncertainty about when a contractor relationship could safely be treated as independent work. This uncertainty resulted in a long enforcement moratorium, under which the Belastingdienst generally limited enforcement.
That changed on 1 January 2025, when the Belastingdienst resumed active enforcement. The result is an uncomfortable combination: businesses face real enforcement risk again, while the underlying legal framework is still not sufficiently clear.
Fortunately, case law has provided some guidance in the meantime. In the much-publicised Deliveroo judgment, the Dutch Supreme Court clarified how the existing legal test should be applied. The Court confirmed that all relevant circumstances must be assessed together, including factors relating to control, integration within the organisation, commercial risk and entrepreneurship. The Uber judgment added an important further clarification. The Dutch Supreme Court confirmed that entrepreneurship is one of the relevant factors and that there is no fixed ranking between the various factors that must be considered.
Meanwhile, the political discussion continues. The proposed Wet VBAR (wetsvoorstel Verduidelijking Beoordeling Arbeidsrelaties en Rechtsvermoeden) was intended to provide more clarity, but in March 2026 the Dutch government announced a different course, including further work on a possible Zelfstandigenwet.
Until new legislation actually enters into force, businesses and ZZP professionals must therefore work with the current framework: Article 7:610 BW, the resumed enforcement by the Belastingdienst, and the guidance provided by Deliveroo and Uber.
The practical message is therefore straightforward: there is no single factor that determines whether a ZZP relationship qualifies as independent contracting or employment. Instead, the overall picture matters. The rest of this article translates the main indicators identified by the courts into practical steps that businesses and ZZP professionals can use when structuring their relationship.
3. Two Pillars of a Well-Structured ZZP Relationship
A well-structured ZZP relationship rests on two pillars. First, the parties should enter into a properly drafted agreement of assignment (overeenkomst van opdracht). Second, the practical reality of the relationship should support the principles reflected in that agreement.
Neither pillar is sufficient on its own. A strong contract offers limited protection if the contractor is treated like an employee in practice. Equally, a carefully structured working relationship should be properly reflected in the contract. The strongest position is created when the agreement and the practical reality support each other.
The practical tips below are derived largely from the indicators identified in Deliveroo and subsequent case law and focus on the second pillar: how businesses and ZZP professionals can structure their working relationship in practice.
4. Practical Tips for Structuring ZZP Relationships
The points below are practical indicators that help support the independent nature of a ZZP relationship when considered as part of the overall picture. They are thus not a checklist that automatically guarantees compliance.
a) Avoid Treating the ZZP’er Like an Employee
One of the most important principles is also one of the simplest: avoid treating an independent contractor like a regular employee. Businesses should therefore be cautious with:
- fixed office hours;
- mandatory office presence;
- approval of holidays;
- performance reviews;
- participation in internal HR processes; and
- intensive day-to-day managerial supervision.
For example, a ZZP’er should generally not have to request holiday approval in the same way as an employee. The parties can, of course, coordinate availability, deadlines and continuity, but that is different from applying internal leave procedures.
Similarly, a business can agree on deliverables, timelines and quality expectations, but should avoid managing the contractor’s daily activities in the same way as an employee’s work.
The focus should be on the agreed result rather than on controlling how every aspect of the work is performed.
b) Keep the Assignment Genuinely Temporary or Project-Based
Interim assignments are generally easier to justify where there is:
- temporary additional workload;
- specialist expertise;
- project-based support;
- temporary replacement needs; and
- a clearly defined start and end point.
The risk profile may increase where a ZZP’er effectively fills a structural role within the organization for a prolonged period, particularly on a full-time basis.
That does not mean that long-term assignments automatically create an employment relationship. Many interim assignments legitimately last for extended periods. The question is whether the overall structure of the relationship continues to support independent contracting. However, if a contractor performs the same role as a regular employee for years on end, the parties should be aware that this may increase scrutiny.
In practice, it helps to define the reason for the engagement clearly. Is the contractor being hired for a project, specialist expertise, a temporary workload issue or a transitional period? If so, record that in the agreement and ensure that the practical setup reflects it.
c) Focus on Deliverables, Not Supervision
A contractor is not – and should not be treated as – an employee within the company hierarchy.
Businesses may of course define:
- deadlines;
- deliverables;
- project scope;
- compliance requirements;
- reporting moments; and
- practical coordination arrangements.
That is entirely normal and does not automatically create an employment relationship.
The important distinction is between steering on the result and exercising employment-style authority over how the work must be performed. For example, it is perfectly reasonable to agree that an interim legal counsel will support a transaction, review contracts or develop templates. It becomes more sensitive if the contractor is managed as part of the normal employee hierarchy, receives detailed daily instructions or becomes subject to employee-style performance management.
The contractor should retain sufficient autonomy regarding how the assignment is carried out.
d) Avoid Unnecessary Integration into the Organization
Businesses should also consider how the contractor is positioned internally and externally. For example, it is generally advisable to avoid situations where a contractor:
- is presented externally as a regular employee;
- participates in employee-only programmes or internal HR training;
- receives a role that is indistinguishable from permanent staff;
- becomes deeply embedded within the company’s management structure;
- has a permanent position in organizational charts without any indication of external status; and
- is given company business cards suggesting employment.
The same applies to practical details such as e-mail signatures and communication. In some assignments, a company e-mail address may be necessary. If so, it may help to make the external status clear, for example by referring to “Interim Legal Counsel”.
This does not mean that a ZZP’er cannot work closely with internal teams. In many interim assignments, close cooperation is entirely normal and often necessary. The aim is not to isolate the contractor. The aim is to avoid unnecessary signals that make the contractor appear indistinguishable from an employee.
e) Commercial Setup Reflects Entrepreneurship
The financial and operational setup should also support the independent nature of the relationship. For example:
- services should be invoiced by the contractor;
- payments should take place against invoices;
- no work should mean no payment;
- arrangements such as paid holidays or continued payment during illness should be avoided;
- the contractor should be responsible for their own tax position; and
- the contractor should carry appropriate professional or business insurance where relevant.
This is not about creating a one-sided relationship. It is about ensuring that the commercial arrangement reflects a business-to-business relationship rather than employment. For example, a fixed salary-like monthly payment combined with paid holidays and continued payment during illness may point in the wrong direction. By contrast, invoicing for services, VAT treatment, commercial responsibility and appropriate insurance are indicators that fit more naturally with independent contracting.
f) The Contractor Should Visibly Operate as Independent Business
A strong ZZP relationship works best when the contractor genuinely presents and operates as an independent entrepreneur, both during the assignment and more broadly in the market. Relevant indicators may include:
- multiple clients;
- a company website or business profile;
- registration with the Dutch Chamber of Commerce;
- invoicing with VAT;
- professional liability insurance;
- investment in the contractor’s own business;
- exposure to commercial risk;
- use of a trade name or business identity; and
- active acquisition of assignments or visibility in the market.
For businesses, this helps support the independent nature of the engagement. For contractors, it helps demonstrate that they genuinely operate as independent entrepreneurs rather than as de facto employees. This is where cooperation between both sides matters. The business can structure the assignment properly, while the contractor’s own entrepreneurial profile contributes to the overall picture.
5. Conclusion
The debate around schijnzelfstandigheid has undoubtedly created uncertainty for both businesses and independent professionals. However, uncertainty should not be confused with impossibility.
Working with interim ZZP professionals remains perfectly possible in the Netherlands. The challenge is not whether businesses can still engage ZZP professionals, but how those relationships should be structured. The key is to ensure that:
- the contract supports an independent relationship;
- the practical collaboration aligns with that setup; and
- the contractor genuinely operates as an entrepreneur in practice.
No structure can completely eliminate risk and no single checklist can guarantee a particular outcome. Dutch courts continue to assess the overall picture. That said, businesses and independent professionals that combine a well-drafted agreement with a consciously structured working relationship are generally in a far stronger position than parties that focus solely on contractual wording or avoid ZZP engagements altogether.
Schijnzelfstandigheid is therefore not a reason to stop engaging interim professionals. It is a reason to ensure that the relationship is structured properly from the outset.
Thoughts, comments or questions? Please get in touch!
Gundo Haacke, Interim Legal Counsel & Owner of Haacke Commercial Legal Services.
Blog article published 8 June 2026.
Image credit: AI-generated by myself.
Disclaimer
The information provided in this blog article is for general informational purposes only. Nothing contained in this blog article constitutes legal advice, nor is it intended to be a substitute for legal counsel on any subject matter. The author disclaims any liability in connection with the use of this information.
