Header logo
Log in
Listing News Opinion Generic

IPSE responds to the Taylor Review

IPSE has responded to the Matthew Taylor Review of Modern Working Practices by stating that a new ‘dependent contractor’ status doesn’t negate the need for a statutory definition of self-employment.

About us simpler
IPSE Press Office
11 Jul 2017
1 minutes
Share

IPSE welcomes the report’s acknowledgement that self-employment is a really positive decision for most people who work in this way, and believes government should do everything in its power to support people’s decision to work flexibly.  

IPSE agrees that the self-employed should be clearly differentiated from the other employment statuses and calls for a statutory definition of self-employment. However, IPSE believes reforming the current worker status into a new ‘dependent contractor’ status should look beyond control and direction as indicators.

IPSE also agrees with the report’s concern that not enough self-employed people are saving for their retirement or insuring against illness, and solutions to encourage both must be investigated.

Chris Bryce, IPSE chief executive said:

“We welcome Matthew Taylor’s recommendations which protect the flexibility of self-employment, but any changes to employment status should bring clarity and not add to the confusion around how government treats the way people choose to work. Mr Taylor’s recommendation to align tax and employment status would be a clearly positive step, as this is an issue that currently causes a great deal of confusion.

“When people talk about the gig economy, there is often the mistaken assumption that the services operating in it are all the same. Each relationship has to be judged on its own particular merits, and it would have been a huge error to simply place everyone in the gig economy within the revised worker status. This is why it’s essential to enshrine what it means to be self-employed in law.

“Renaming workers ‘dependent contractors’ might bring some benefits, but government will have to be absolutely clear who falls into this group. It will still be up to the courts to rule on employment status. We also have a serious concern that it is far too reductive to only look at direction and control as indicators of worker – or ‘dependent contractor’ – status. In reality, things are a lot more complicated than that. You should still also consider the ability to choose when and where you work, whether the role is project based and whether you have the right to send a substitute.”

Latest self-employed news and opinions

Listing advice Payment practices
What are the UK's new late payment rules and when will they come into force?
+2 more

IPSE's Josh Toovey explains the UK's new late payment rules, what they mean for the self-employed, and when they could become law.

27 May 2026
Josh Toovey Headshot
Josh Toovey
Listing advice Why budgeting is important
What's the difference between Public Liability insurance vs Professional Indemnity insurance?
+1 more

Whether you are a freelancer, contractor or consultant, understanding the difference between public liability insurance and professional indemnity insurance could...

26 May 2026
About us simpler
IPSE
Listing News Opinion - CDV Protection
Common professional indemnity insurance claims against self-employed professionals
+1 more

No matter how you make your living as a self-employed professional, understanding the potential consequences of a claim against you is essential. Professional ind...

26 May 2026
About us simpler
IPSE
IPSE-LOGO-HEADER

Join our newsletter

Registered in England and Wales, no 03770926. 4th Floor, 95 Gresham Street, City of London, London EC2V 7AB