50. In summary, the ACTU makes the following recommendations in relation to the proposed reporting regime:
(a) Create one reporting regime for the commercial sharing economy and one for the gig economy;
(b) Define the commercial sharing economy as follows:
The commercial sharing economy consists of consumers purchasing temporary access to other consumers’ under-utilised physical assets via platforms (ie digital interfaces, apps or online portals).
(c) Define the gig economy as follows:
The gig economy consists of consumers purchasing the temporary on-demand services of workers to perform discrete jobs (ie tasks or “gigs”) via platforms (ie digital interfaces, apps or online portals).
(d) In relation to the gig economy reporting regime:
– Implement it concurrently with measures to raise the pay and conditions of gig economy workers, and eliminate sham contracting and gig economy platforms’ non-compliance with workplace laws; for example,
– Require gig economy platforms to report on:
(a) Financial payments made to workers;
(b) Worker’s nominal employment status;
(c) Hours worked in relation to each payment, where available; and
(d) Whether the work was low skilled, trade qualified or professional;
(e) In relation to the sharing economy, consider further measures to prevent the erosion of the taxation revenue base, disemployment, and, where relevant, avoidance of building and safety standards; and
(f) Close loopholes that allow companies to avoid paying their fair share of tax.
51. The proposals need to distinguish between the commercial sharing economy and the gig economy and take into account the circumstances of the gig economy and gig workers, particularly sham contracting and evasion of minimum entitlements, in designing and implementing a special reporting regime for these ‘sectors’. A dedicated gig economy reporting regime with further reporting requirements can aid in addressing sham contracting but platform operators themselves should remain the focus of tax compliance enforcement action and low paid gig workers should not be aggressively pursued until the low pay and entitlement avoidance and tax law contraventions by employers in the gig economy are also addressed.