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.

I thank Deputy Bacik for raising this. Of course I am aware of it. I would appreciate further engagement with her on it. It will probably require longer engagement than we have here today. As she said, it arises from the Supreme Court judgment of October 2023 in the case of Revenue Commissioners v. Karshan (Midlands) t/a Domino’s Pizza Limited. There has been a period of time since then. It goes without saying that Revenue is independent of me, as it should be, in relation to how it applies tax law in Ireland. Obviously, it cannot ignore the Supreme Court judgment and I cannot interfere with its application of the judgment. However, I have heard directly from some of the sectors that have expressed concern about this. To be truthful, the immediate solution does not seem apparent but I am happy to have engagement on this. Revenue would make the point that it has engaged extensively, set out criteria and so on but I would welcome further engagement.