Am I a false self-employed (schijnzelfstandige)? ZZP vs employee rules

Short conclusion

Under current Dutch law you are a schijnzelfstandige if your day-to-day working relationship with your client meets the legal definition of an arbeidsovereenkomst (employment contract) in Artikel 7:610 BW, even though you and your client call it a freelance or overeenkomst van opdracht. The label on the contract is irrelevant: the Belastingdienst and the courts look at what actually happens in practice. Since the Deliveroo judgment of the Hoge Raad (24 March 2023, ECLI:NL:HR:2023:443), they weigh nine non-exhaustive gezichtspunten (criteria). If, on balance, you perform work personally, against payment, under your client's authority and for a certain period, you are in law an employee – with all the protection that goes with it (paid sick leave, dismissal protection, pension, etc.).

---

1. The statutory starting point: what is an employment contract?

Article 7:610(1) BW defines the arbeidsovereenkomst as the agreement under which one party (the employee) undertakes to perform work in dienst van (in the service of) the other party (the employer), tegen loon (for pay), gedurende zekere tijd (for a certain period of time). Four cumulative elements must be present:

Source: Burgerlijk Wetboek Boek 7, Artikel 610 (wetten.overheid.nl).

If even one of these four elements is missing, there is no arbeidsovereenkomst. The most common "escape route" for genuine self-employed people is the absence of gezag: a true ZZP'er chooses how to deliver the result and cannot be told by the client how, when or where to do it.

Article 7:400 BW defines the overeenkomst van opdracht as the agreement under which the opdrachtnemer undertakes, otherwise than on the basis of an employment contract, to perform activities. The two regimes are mutually exclusive in concept, but the law looks at substance, not name.

---

2. The "presumption" of employment (Artikel 7:610a BW)

If you work for one client for at least three consecutive months, weekly or for at least 20 hours per month, you are presumed to be doing so under an employment contract (Artikel 7:610a BW). The client then has to rebut this presumption with facts showing genuine independence. In practice this presumption is rarely decisive on its own, but it shifts the evidential burden in tax and court proceedings.

Source: Burgerlijk Wetboek Boek 7, Artikel 610a (wetten.overheid.nl).

---

3. The nine gezichtspunten from the Deliveroo arrest

The Hoge Raad confirmed in FNV/Deliveroo (ECLI:NL:HR:2023:443) that there is no single decisive element: the court weighs all the circumstances together. The judgment lists nine non-exhaustive criteria:

1. The nature and duration of the work (long-term, structural engagement points to employment).
2. The manner in which the work and working hours are determined (set by the client → employment).
3. The extent to which the work and the worker are embedded in the client's organisation (performing core activities of the client's business, alongside employees, on site → employment).
4. Whether there is an obligation to perform the work personally (no free substitution right → employment).
5. The way in which the agreements came about (negotiated at arm's length or simply accepted → points toward self-employment or employment respectively).
6. The manner in which the remuneration is determined and paid (paid like a wage on the client's payroll → employment; paid against the contractor's invoice → self-employment).
7. The level of the remuneration (a low hourly rate, or only marginally above minimum wage, can indicate that the worker is in substance an employee).
8. The degree of commercial risk the contractor bears (no investment, no profit-and-loss risk, no own customers → employment).
9. The degree to which the contractor behaves – or can behave – as an entrepreneur (own business, multiple clients, own tools, marketing, BTW turnover, Chamber of Commerce registration).

None of these points is decisive on its own. The court weighs them in combination. In Deliveroo, points 3 (embedding in the organisation), 1 (long-term structural engagement) and 6 (wage-like payment via the Deliveroo platform) carried decisive weight, even though the riders formally had a right to substitute (point 4).

Source: Hoge Raad 24 maart 2023, ECLI:NL:HR:2023:443 (rechtspraak.nl).

---

4. What about "vrije vervanging" (free substitution)?

Until 1 January 2024 the Belastingdienst had an approved modelovereenkomst "vrije vervanging" – a contract where the worker could freely send a replacement. The model gave the parties a safe harbour from payroll taxes. After the Deliveroo judgment, the Belastingdienst declared this model no longer valid, because the Hoge Raad held that free substitution is one factor and not in itself decisive. Since 6 September 2024 the Belastingdienst also stopped assessing new model contracts. Existing models may still be used as a guide, but they offer no guarantee: the actual performance of the work is what matters.

Sources: Belastingdienst announcement on modelovereenkomsten; FNV ZZP, "Wet DBA, VBAR en Zelfstandigenwet uitgelegd" (fnvzzp.nl).

---

5. The Belastingdienst's self-test: the Webmodule beoordeling arbeidsrelatie

You can do an indicative self-check via the Webmodule beoordeling arbeidsrelatie on the Ministry of SZW website. Since April 2026 the module has been updated and now gives explicit weight to extern ondernemerschap – i.e. the way you behave as an entrepreneur outside the single engagement you are testing. The output is an indication, not a legal guarantee, but in practice the Belastingdienst uses essentially the same criteria.

Source: Webmodule beoordeling arbeidsrelatie (Ministerie van SZW; CultuurSchakel, "Update Wet DBA, VBAR en Zelfstandigenwet", 2026).

---

6. Current and upcoming legislation: Wet DBA, Wet VBAR and the Zelfstandigenwet

Until any new act enters into force, the law applied is the Wet DBA, and the substantive test for arbeidsovereenkomst continues to be Articles 7:610 and 7:400 BW, interpreted in the light of the Deliveroo criteria.

Sources: KVK, "Wet DBA: voorkom schijnzelfstandigheid"; Stellicher, "Zzp'ers, rechtsvermoeden en wetgeving in 2026"; Randstad, "Schijnzelfstandigheid en zzp-regels in 2026"; CultuurSchakel, "Update Wet DBA, VBAR en Zelfstandigenwet"; Jongbloed Fiscaal Juristen, "Boetes en naheffingen bij schijnzelfstandigheid vanaf 2026".

---

7. Typical cases where the courts found schijnzelfstandigheid

These patterns come up again and again in case law after Deliveroo:

• Platform workers (meal delivery, ride-hailing): the platform dictates price, routes, ratings and bonuses; work is the platform's core activity → employment (FNV/Deliveroo).
• Long-term secondment: a self-employed professional performs the same core activity as employees of the client, on site, for an indefinite period, for years → employment (Rechtbank Midden-Nederland, intensivist case, 2024).
• Single-client dependence with low hourly rate and no real commercial risk: the worker bills weekly, has no other clients, no own materials, no marketing → likely employment (Rechtbank Noord-Holland, portier/gastheer, ECLI:NL:RBNHO:2024:4468).

And the flipside – situations where genuine self-employment was upheld:

• A construction worker who ran his own one-man business, had multiple clients, used his own tools, bore profit-and-loss risk and was paid by project (Gerechtshof 's-Hertogenbosch 19 June 2024, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2024:2002 – the Belastingdienst's near-heffing of €310,668 was reduced to €7,500).
• A director/shareholder who was free to organise his own work and clearly behaved as an entrepreneur.

Sources: Rassers, "Voorbeeld lagere rechtspraak na het Deliveroo-arrest"; Vanhier, "Interessante uitspraak hof: wél zelfstandige" (ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2024:2002).

---

8. Practical self-test

Answer honestly: the more "yes" answers you give, the higher the risk of schijnzelfstandigheid.

• Do you work predominantly or exclusively for one client?
• Does that client decide when, where and how you work?
• Do you perform the same core activity as the client's own employees?
• Are you required to do the work yourself, with no real right of free substitution?
• Are you paid on a periodic (weekly/monthly) basis, like a wage, rather than against your own invoice per project?
• Do you have no business premises, no BTW number, no Chamber of Commerce registration, no marketing of your own, and no other clients?
• Is your hourly rate close to or below €38 (the threshold proposed in the surviving part of the Wet VBAR)?
• Do you bear no commercial risk (no investment, no risk of loss, no liability for results)?

If most answers are "yes", you are at meaningful risk of being reclassified as an employee. The consequences for your client are severe: back-payment of wage tax and employee-insurance contributions (up to 5 years), plus from 2026 possible vergrijpboetes. For you, reclassification brings entitlement to the protections of an employment contract (paid sick leave, dismissal protection, pension accrual, transitievergoeding).

---

9. What can you do?

• Run the Webmodule beoordeling arbeidsrelatie on the SZW website.
• Check whether your work passes at least three of the nine Deliveroo criteria in your favour.
• Document your independence: own contracts with multiple clients, own means, own quotes and invoices, real profit/loss risk.
• Make sure the opdrachtovereenkomst is realistic – the Belastingdienst and courts look past labels, but a well-drafted opdrachtovereenkomst still helps evidence the parties' intent.
• Note that simply signing a "modelovereenkomst" is no longer a safe harbour.
• For your own position, consult a labour-law or tax-law adviser – this article is general information, not legal advice for your specific situation.

---

Sources

• Burgerlijk Wetboek Boek 7, Artikel 610 – wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0005290
• Burgerlijk Wetboek Boek 7, Artikel 610a – wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0005290
• Burgerlijk Wetboek Boek 7, Artikel 400 – wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0005290
• Hoge Raad 24 maart 2023, ECLI:NL:HR:2023:443 (FNV/Deliveroo) – rechtspraak.nl
• Webmodule beoordeling arbeidsrelatie, Ministerie van SZW
• KVK, "Wet DBA: voorkom schijnzelfstandigheid" – kvk.nl
• Stellicher, "Zzp'ers, rechtsvermoeden en wetgeving in 2026" – stellicher.nl
• Randstad, "Schijnzelfstandigheid en zzp-regels in 2026" – randstad.nl
• CultuurSchakel, "Update Wet DBA, VBAR en Zelfstandigenwet" – cultuurschakel.nl
• Jongbloed Fiscaal Juristen, "Boetes en naheffingen bij schijnzelfstandigheid vanaf 2026" – jongbloed-fiscaaljuristen.nl
• PIANOo, "Handhaving Wet DBA" – pianoo.nl
• FNV ZZP, "Wet DBA, VBAR en Zelfstandigenwet uitgelegd" – fnvzzp.nl
• Vanhier, "Wél zelfstandige en juist geen werknemer" (Hof 's-Hertogenbosch 19-6-2024, ECLI:NL:GHSHE:2024:2002) – vanhier.nl

This FAQ is general legal information about Dutch law in 2026 and is not a substitute for individual legal advice.