Uber does not pay wages, court rules
Make us a preferred source
Make us a preferred source on Google
More news: Uber does not pay drivers wages, but acts as a "payment collection agent", remitting money paid by riders, Supreme Court of New South Wales Judge David Hammerschlag said in his judgment today.
Uber has won its lawsuit disputing a New South Wales payroll tax assessment that was sparked by a payroll tax audit of the company in 2018 for the 2015 financial year that led to a $81.5 million bill.
Uber must account to the driver the money it receives as an agent, but by the time it does that, Hammerschlag ruled, riders have discharged their obligation to pay the driver for their ride.
What they said: "There is undoubtedly some form of relationship between Uber’s payment and the work which the driver performed, not least of all because, had the driver not driven, there would no money for which Uber would have to account to the driver by paying the driver," Hammerschlag said.
"But I do not consider that that relationship is one which can fairly be described as being 'in relation to' the work.
"What the rider pays the driver is for or in relation to the work done by the driver. What Uber pays the driver is in relation to the payment Uber has received, not in relation to the work itself."
Uber wins payroll tax dispute
The news: Uber has won its lawsuit disputing a New South Wales payroll tax assessment, after Judge David Hammerschlag revoked an assessment of the 2015 financial year in the Supreme Court of New South Wales today.
Hammerschlag is yet to publish his full reasons in the case.
The numbers: The case was sparked by a payroll tax audit of the company in 2018 for the 2015 financial year that led to a $81.5 million bill issued to the ride share company in 2021.
The context: Despite disputing the tax assessment, Uber had been executing a confidential payment plan agreed upon with the chief commissioner of state revenue.
At the heart of the case has been the question of whether the payments Uber drivers receive are “for or in relation to the performance of work”, or whether Uber is simply remitting money collected from passengers to drivers, acting as an agent of sorts.
The case is seen by lawyers as a test of how 1980s tax laws apply to the modern gig economy and in particular, digital platforms.
Ashurst acted for Uber in the case and Hammerschlag has scheduled the matter for a further hearing next Friday over cost payments.
The sources: Supreme Court of New South Wales, ABC news
