9 ms·

Uber drivers in Norway must pay back all earnings and lose their license

101 points by sprite 10y ago

hartator 10y ago
Google transalte has bacame really good. I didn't notice it was a translation until looking at the domain. [Edit] Now, I have re-read looking for mistakes, it's obvious it's a translation. Still, it can rank as a weird english dialect written in a hurry.
- Y_Y 10y ago
  One could say the same about your post. I think if Google can pass for a non-native speaker that's pretty good.
- kqia040 10y ago
  I was also genuinely impressed with the translation work done by google, I didn't realise it was translated until the second sentence. Edit: ironically a typo
d33 10y ago
Could someone from Norway provide a comment on this? How credible is e24.no?
- thomasnno 10y ago
  Norwegian here. I belive that e24.no is highly credible, I have been reading it for a number of years. The news of the harsh penalties for these uber drivers have also been mentioned in the radio news.
  - thatwasunusual 10y ago
    Harsh?
    - mschuster91 10y ago
      I'd certainly classify a driver license revocation as "harsh". Even more so if it's complex/impossible to get it back...
- abrkn 10y ago
  Norwegian here. dn.no is more credible and appears to be running a similar story[1] [1] https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dn.no%2Fnyheter%2F2017%2F03%2F07%2F1738%2FUber%2Foslo-politiet-aksjonerte-mot-uber-sjaforer&edit-text= https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&pr...
  - mreftel 10y ago
    ...with e24 as the sole source. Not saying it's not true, just that dn.no repeating it is not /that/ much of confirmation.
    - abrkn 10y ago
      I stand corrected
- thatwasunusual 10y ago
  I'm from Norway, and e24 is credible enough in this particular case. I'd like to shed some background on why the story, though: In Norway, transporting passengers is extremely regulated. As in most other countries, taxi drivers need to have a license, go through certain tests etc., to be allowed to transport passengers. The problem is that Uber (in Norway) won't cooperate with the government in regards to a number of standards we have; it goes all from how the drivers are paid (taxation) to (more importantly) if the insurance covers any damages other than the car and/or its owner, not the passenger(s). Also, how well do Uber do background checks on their drivers? I guess it's easy to give a negative rating on a driver after you've been raped, or hit in the head with a hammer, but - hey - that could happen to anyone? I've lived in San Francisco, and used Uber, and I must say that I feel a lot safer in a taxi. I know that their insurance will cover me in case something happens, even though my Norwegian travel insurance is worth more than gold in US hospitals (tried that, different discussion). I know that my taxi driver represents a company more than an Uber driver represents him-/herself. Said that, I've met some fantastic Uber drivers over the years, and I hope that - over time - Uber (and the likes) and the licensed taxi/cab business can meet in the middle somewhere. The priority shouldn't be price, IMO, but the safety of the passengers AND the drivers.
  - gtirloni 10y ago
    I've been in a few Lyft and Uber rides and at some point I just stopped counting how many traffic laws were being broken (red light, no turn signal, improperly overtaking another car, driving on the bike lane to cut traffic, turning left wher eits was prohibited, etc). Never mind the loud music too. I don't have the same careless experience when I take a taxi. Of course, this is anecdata only, but the fact that there are virtually no requirements make me worried. I only take Uber/Lyft if someone else is ordering it (when we're in a group), otherwise I'll find other options with actual professional drivers or public transportation.
    - blakes 10y ago
      That's interesting, because anecdotally I have had essentially the opposite experience. Taxis in my area (Seattle) drive fast and loose, at least they did 4 to 5 years ago. No signals, always about 10MPH over the limit. Music always on, not loud, but usually always on. Lyft/Uber drivers in the area were/are a little more gentle (the ones that weren't taxi drivers before). Interestingly, sometimes I'll get a Lyft driver that asks if I care about how fast I need to get to my destination and how I'd like them to drive. Also, I took taxis in Prague during vacation, and that system is amazing and I'd choose those taxi services over Uber/Lyft any day. Clean, quick, stupid simple, and the drivers were pros.
tyingq 10y ago
Wow...One of the drivers has to pay back close to 1M kroner. Close to $118k USD.
holydude 10y ago
EFTA socialism. I really really hate European govs.
zeveb 10y ago
How terrible for them — all they did was drive people to their destinations in return for money: the passengers and the drivers benefitted alike. And how cruel of the Norwegian Crown.
- myowncrapulence 10y ago
  Yeah, I understand not wanting Uber in your country and going after the company, but to hit bottom-tier employees is just wrong. Reminds me of the US justice system in the finance sector.
  - astrange 10y ago
    They aren't employees.
    - gtirloni 10y ago
      That's the weak argument Uber is trying to make everywhere.
    - simonh 10y ago
      Even if they were employees, it should not matter. They knowingly personally broke the law. Being paid by someone to do it is no excuse.
  - masklinn 10y ago
    > I understand not wanting Uber in your country Norway wants Uber and its drivers to follow Norwegian laws, namely fulfil the requirement of a license for paid passenger transportation. > to hit bottom-tier employees is just wrong. Uber sells them as independent contractors, and regardless norwegian law requires that the operator of the vehicle has a license, which is the drivers.
- sleepybrett 10y ago
  How terrible for them, all they did was break the law and get caught.
ryanmcdonough 10y ago
Feel like the title needs to start with "12"
trendia 10y ago
This is like forcing bank tellers to pay back their salary to the government because the bank management didn't follow the rules.
- vkou 10y ago
  Or like making street drug dealers pay any gains from the proceeds of their sales, as opposed to the kingpins. Which is, in fact, exactly how we deal with organized crime. (The kingpins, if caught, will pay too.) Just because Michael Corleone ordered a hit, generally doesn't mean that you get to keep whatever he paid you. At least the drivers have legal recourse, in the form of suing Uber.
- frgtpsswrdlame 10y ago
  In your simile, are the bank tellers also breaking the law?
- elastic_church 10y ago
  you make it sound like that is an unfathomable reality to be used an analogy for how ridiculous the Uber scenario is, except that would be reality. all banks operate under licensing regimes these days. if a legislature also decided to hold bank tellers personally liable because they were operating without a license personally or their organization wasn't, it would be the same. Does the Norwegian government do that? Well I wouldn't have been able to tell you they did that for taxi drivers there 5 minutes ago. The point is that its not actually far fetched.
- this_user 10y ago
  Except in this analogy the bank would be a rogue operation that deliberately and openly defies local law. And the teller would be someone who knowingly participates in breaking the law. So it's really more akin being a member of the mob.
- lazyasciiart 10y ago
  No, it's not. It's more like the US practice of charging people with a misdemeanor crime for selling insurance without a license, which can be levied even against someone selling insurance for a company . Zenefits employees, for instance, risked felony charges in some states and if the company had continued to do business that way I think it's plausible some would have been convicted. However Zenefits changed their leadership, publicly said it was wrong of them and that they wouldn't do it again. Uber has doubled down and said "nah mate we're cool what are you going to do about it". Surprise, the Norwegians are calling their bluff.
robert_foss 10y ago
To me this seems like a reasonable response. Rules have been violated, and in a society with a rule of law there has to be consequences.
- nickff 10y ago
  'Rule of law' generally refers more to how laws are written and interpreted in general, rather than whether they are enforced in one specific instance.[1] I would argue that the way Uber, AirBNB, and other similar companies are being treated is in violation of the 'rule of law'. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law
  - oh_sigh 10y ago
    It's hard to tell from the auto-translation of Norwegian, but weren't these drivers not paying taxes and not licensed to be a taxi?
    - nickff 10y ago
      It seems that they are not paying 'licensing' fees/taxes, though I (much like you) am not sure because of the translation. I generally believe that most licenses that raise revenue for the government violate the rule of law, especially when they are issued on a political or non-safety related bases.
      - duskwuff 10y ago
        I'm not sure what you believe the phrase "rule of law" means, but it seems to be something other than its common definition.
        nickff 10y ago
        My definition of rule of law is a common one where: 1) Laws must be known by all who are governed by them (i.e. there cannot be secret laws) 2) The enforcement of laws must be foreseeable and predictable (i.e. laws should not be interpreted or enforced differently over time) 3) Laws should be enforced equally against all those subject to the law (i.e. there should be no exemptions) I would argue that 'sharing economy' companies have been subjected to abrogations of 2 and 3 in many jurisdictions, and I fail to see how this specific enforcement action proves that any of these principles are being upheld. I appear to be in the minority, and a great number of people seem to believe that I am factually incorrect.
Flammy 10y ago
If your goal is to deter companies and individuals for taking advantage of gray markets, this is probably a very logical decision.
- Scarblac 10y ago
  What's gray about it?
  - flubert 10y ago
    https://www.google.com/#q=uber+greyball&* https://www.google.com/#q=uber+greyball&*
  - Flammy 10y ago
    The gray part is the fact that Uber happily entered markets by ignoring regulation or unilaterally deciding some rules didn't apply to them. Right or wrong, they were deciding without getting approval. I use the term 'gray market' which is commonly used to differentiate from 'black market' or clearly illegal, and 'white market' or fully above board and legal.
    - Scarblac 10y ago
      I mean, in the country the article about it seems just black to me. Clearly against the existing rules and thus getting punished. Don't see the vagueness that could make it gray.
dustinmr 10y ago
Norway considers them independent contractors? You would never require this of regular employees would you? You would hold the corporation responsible.
- mmarx 10y ago
  Regardless of contractor/employee status, there are additional requirements for commercial passenger transport besides having a Driver's License. Certainly drivers are responsible for compliance.
- masklinn 10y ago
  > You would never require this of regular employees would you? You would hold the corporation responsible. Both would be responsible. Consider a truck driver without a driving license (at all), the company would probably be investigated for having a driver without a license, the driver would definitely be charged.
SadWebDeveloper 10y ago
It baffles me the amount of support in this threads for this totalitarian bullshit... i know we suppose to hate Uber but ultimately charging with criminal charges to the "users" aka "drivers" is huge mistake, it will be the equivalent of the US government asking you to paid all your earnings because ebay wasn't playing by the rules. PS: On a side note, i will add Norway to the list of countries you shouldn't do business.
- manarth 10y ago
  Given the mention of eBay, should governments ignore eBay traders who ignore tax regulations? [1] Do the US government ignore people who don't comply with online sales regulations, or do they charge them a penalty? [2] The words 'eBay', or 'Uber', or 'Airbnb', or any other gig-economy organisation, do not provide a broad licence for legal non-compliance. [1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11077630/eBay-users-warned-to-declare-income-as-trader-is-jailed-for-tax-evasion.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11077... [2] https://www.forbes.com/2010/04/22/irs-tax-audit-ebay-seller-personal-finance-irs-worker-loses.html https://www.forbes.com/2010/04/22/irs-tax-audit-ebay-seller-...
- rleigh 10y ago
  When Uber and its employees and/or contractors are intentionally and knowingly breaking criminal laws, then they are absolutely liable to criminal charges. They don't get to ignore laws they disagree with any more than any other citizen would. It would be unreasonable and unfair to assume otherwise.
  - pitaj 10y ago
    You're correct, but you're not arguing against what he said. OP made a moral argument, you're making a legal one.
  - SadWebDeveloper 10y ago
    Almost any service we as developer built "are intentionally and knowingly breaking criminal law", either you are breaking local, state or federal laws or not complying with some standards that could face "criminal charges" therefore you are asking and giving the government the power to pretty much do anything they want. M sure in most of the countries, applying this will end in people rioting and vandalism.
afinlayson 10y ago
Why do employees, or contractors face more severe penalties (in proportion) than the company? Uber hired these people, they should face big fines and losing business license. Hell even if they both are fine equally 100% off income for Uber drivers, and fined 100% income for the company as well. Illegal immigration wouldn't happen if there were huge penalties against companies and or people hiring them.
- chillacy 10y ago
  Did Uber actually hire these people? My understanding is that Uber drivers do not enter an employee-employer relationship with Uber, at least in the US.
  - afinlayson 10y ago
    Even if it's a company-contractor relationship it has the same implications. You can't do business illegally, or else every company wanting to do something illegal would hire contractors.
    - chillacy 10y ago
      I see, as of october last year it looks like Uber got sued in the UK over this, and lost. It may end up having to employ the drivers.
andrenth 10y ago
Person A wants to go from point P1 to point P2. Person B offers to take person A via car ride in exchange for a commonly agreed amount of money. Both see the exchange as advantageous to themselves and the exchange is made. Bureaucrats see this and become furious that they didn't get their share for doing nothing. Bureaucrats punish Person B.
itstrueok 10y ago
Taxation is theft.

101 points by sprite 10y ago

Google transalte has bacame really good. I didn't notice it was a translation until looking at the domain. [Edit] Now, I have re-read looking for mistakes, it's obvious it's a translation. Still, it can rank as a weird english dialect written in a hurry.

Y_Y 10y ago
One could say the same about your post. I think if Google can pass for a non-native speaker that's pretty good.
kqia040 10y ago
I was also genuinely impressed with the translation work done by google, I didn't realise it was translated until the second sentence. Edit: ironically a typo

d33 10y ago

Could someone from Norway provide a comment on this? How credible is e24.no?

thomasnno 10y ago
Norwegian here. I belive that e24.no is highly credible, I have been reading it for a number of years. The news of the harsh penalties for these uber drivers have also been mentioned in the radio news.
- thatwasunusual 10y ago
  Harsh?
  - mschuster91 10y ago
    I'd certainly classify a driver license revocation as "harsh". Even more so if it's complex/impossible to get it back...
abrkn 10y ago
Norwegian here. dn.no is more credible and appears to be running a similar story[1] [1] https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dn.no%2Fnyheter%2F2017%2F03%2F07%2F1738%2FUber%2Foslo-politiet-aksjonerte-mot-uber-sjaforer&edit-text= https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&pr...
- mreftel 10y ago
  ...with e24 as the sole source. Not saying it's not true, just that dn.no repeating it is not /that/ much of confirmation.
  - abrkn 10y ago
    I stand corrected
thatwasunusual 10y ago
I'm from Norway, and e24 is credible enough in this particular case. I'd like to shed some background on why the story, though: In Norway, transporting passengers is extremely regulated. As in most other countries, taxi drivers need to have a license, go through certain tests etc., to be allowed to transport passengers. The problem is that Uber (in Norway) won't cooperate with the government in regards to a number of standards we have; it goes all from how the drivers are paid (taxation) to (more importantly) if the insurance covers any damages other than the car and/or its owner, not the passenger(s). Also, how well do Uber do background checks on their drivers? I guess it's easy to give a negative rating on a driver after you've been raped, or hit in the head with a hammer, but - hey - that could happen to anyone? I've lived in San Francisco, and used Uber, and I must say that I feel a lot safer in a taxi. I know that their insurance will cover me in case something happens, even though my Norwegian travel insurance is worth more than gold in US hospitals (tried that, different discussion). I know that my taxi driver represents a company more than an Uber driver represents him-/herself. Said that, I've met some fantastic Uber drivers over the years, and I hope that - over time - Uber (and the likes) and the licensed taxi/cab business can meet in the middle somewhere. The priority shouldn't be price, IMO, but the safety of the passengers AND the drivers.
- gtirloni 10y ago
  I've been in a few Lyft and Uber rides and at some point I just stopped counting how many traffic laws were being broken (red light, no turn signal, improperly overtaking another car, driving on the bike lane to cut traffic, turning left wher eits was prohibited, etc). Never mind the loud music too. I don't have the same careless experience when I take a taxi. Of course, this is anecdata only, but the fact that there are virtually no requirements make me worried. I only take Uber/Lyft if someone else is ordering it (when we're in a group), otherwise I'll find other options with actual professional drivers or public transportation.
  - blakes 10y ago
    That's interesting, because anecdotally I have had essentially the opposite experience. Taxis in my area (Seattle) drive fast and loose, at least they did 4 to 5 years ago. No signals, always about 10MPH over the limit. Music always on, not loud, but usually always on. Lyft/Uber drivers in the area were/are a little more gentle (the ones that weren't taxi drivers before). Interestingly, sometimes I'll get a Lyft driver that asks if I care about how fast I need to get to my destination and how I'd like them to drive. Also, I took taxis in Prague during vacation, and that system is amazing and I'd choose those taxi services over Uber/Lyft any day. Clean, quick, stupid simple, and the drivers were pros.

tyingq 10y ago

Wow...One of the drivers has to pay back close to 1M kroner. Close to $118k USD.

holydude 10y ago

EFTA socialism. I really really hate European govs.

zeveb 10y ago

How terrible for them — all they did was drive people to their destinations in return for money: the passengers and the drivers benefitted alike. And how cruel of the Norwegian Crown.

myowncrapulence 10y ago
Yeah, I understand not wanting Uber in your country and going after the company, but to hit bottom-tier employees is just wrong. Reminds me of the US justice system in the finance sector.
- astrange 10y ago
  They aren't employees.
  - gtirloni 10y ago
    That's the weak argument Uber is trying to make everywhere.
  - simonh 10y ago
    Even if they were employees, it should not matter. They knowingly personally broke the law. Being paid by someone to do it is no excuse.
- masklinn 10y ago
  > I understand not wanting Uber in your country Norway wants Uber and its drivers to follow Norwegian laws, namely fulfil the requirement of a license for paid passenger transportation. > to hit bottom-tier employees is just wrong. Uber sells them as independent contractors, and regardless norwegian law requires that the operator of the vehicle has a license, which is the drivers.
sleepybrett 10y ago
How terrible for them, all they did was break the law and get caught.

ryanmcdonough 10y ago

Feel like the title needs to start with "12"

trendia 10y ago

This is like forcing bank tellers to pay back their salary to the government because the bank management didn't follow the rules.

vkou 10y ago
Or like making street drug dealers pay any gains from the proceeds of their sales, as opposed to the kingpins. Which is, in fact, exactly how we deal with organized crime. (The kingpins, if caught, will pay too.) Just because Michael Corleone ordered a hit, generally doesn't mean that you get to keep whatever he paid you. At least the drivers have legal recourse, in the form of suing Uber.
frgtpsswrdlame 10y ago
In your simile, are the bank tellers also breaking the law?
elastic_church 10y ago
you make it sound like that is an unfathomable reality to be used an analogy for how ridiculous the Uber scenario is, except that would be reality. all banks operate under licensing regimes these days. if a legislature also decided to hold bank tellers personally liable because they were operating without a license personally or their organization wasn't, it would be the same. Does the Norwegian government do that? Well I wouldn't have been able to tell you they did that for taxi drivers there 5 minutes ago. The point is that its not actually far fetched.
this_user 10y ago
Except in this analogy the bank would be a rogue operation that deliberately and openly defies local law. And the teller would be someone who knowingly participates in breaking the law. So it's really more akin being a member of the mob.
lazyasciiart 10y ago
No, it's not. It's more like the US practice of charging people with a misdemeanor crime for selling insurance without a license, which can be levied even against someone selling insurance for a company . Zenefits employees, for instance, risked felony charges in some states and if the company had continued to do business that way I think it's plausible some would have been convicted. However Zenefits changed their leadership, publicly said it was wrong of them and that they wouldn't do it again. Uber has doubled down and said "nah mate we're cool what are you going to do about it". Surprise, the Norwegians are calling their bluff.

robert_foss 10y ago

To me this seems like a reasonable response. Rules have been violated, and in a society with a rule of law there has to be consequences.

nickff 10y ago
'Rule of law' generally refers more to how laws are written and interpreted in general, rather than whether they are enforced in one specific instance.[1] I would argue that the way Uber, AirBNB, and other similar companies are being treated is in violation of the 'rule of law'. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_law
- oh_sigh 10y ago
  It's hard to tell from the auto-translation of Norwegian, but weren't these drivers not paying taxes and not licensed to be a taxi?
  - nickff 10y ago
    It seems that they are not paying 'licensing' fees/taxes, though I (much like you) am not sure because of the translation. I generally believe that most licenses that raise revenue for the government violate the rule of law, especially when they are issued on a political or non-safety related bases.
    - duskwuff 10y ago
      I'm not sure what you believe the phrase "rule of law" means, but it seems to be something other than its common definition.
      - nickff 10y ago
        My definition of rule of law is a common one where: 1) Laws must be known by all who are governed by them (i.e. there cannot be secret laws) 2) The enforcement of laws must be foreseeable and predictable (i.e. laws should not be interpreted or enforced differently over time) 3) Laws should be enforced equally against all those subject to the law (i.e. there should be no exemptions) I would argue that 'sharing economy' companies have been subjected to abrogations of 2 and 3 in many jurisdictions, and I fail to see how this specific enforcement action proves that any of these principles are being upheld. I appear to be in the minority, and a great number of people seem to believe that I am factually incorrect.

Flammy 10y ago

If your goal is to deter companies and individuals for taking advantage of gray markets, this is probably a very logical decision.

Scarblac 10y ago
What's gray about it?
- flubert 10y ago
  https://www.google.com/#q=uber+greyball&* https://www.google.com/#q=uber+greyball&*
- Flammy 10y ago
  The gray part is the fact that Uber happily entered markets by ignoring regulation or unilaterally deciding some rules didn't apply to them. Right or wrong, they were deciding without getting approval. I use the term 'gray market' which is commonly used to differentiate from 'black market' or clearly illegal, and 'white market' or fully above board and legal.
  - Scarblac 10y ago
    I mean, in the country the article about it seems just black to me. Clearly against the existing rules and thus getting punished. Don't see the vagueness that could make it gray.

dustinmr 10y ago

Norway considers them independent contractors? You would never require this of regular employees would you? You would hold the corporation responsible.

mmarx 10y ago
Regardless of contractor/employee status, there are additional requirements for commercial passenger transport besides having a Driver's License. Certainly drivers are responsible for compliance.
masklinn 10y ago
> You would never require this of regular employees would you? You would hold the corporation responsible. Both would be responsible. Consider a truck driver without a driving license (at all), the company would probably be investigated for having a driver without a license, the driver would definitely be charged.

SadWebDeveloper 10y ago

It baffles me the amount of support in this threads for this totalitarian bullshit... i know we suppose to hate Uber but ultimately charging with criminal charges to the "users" aka "drivers" is huge mistake, it will be the equivalent of the US government asking you to paid all your earnings because ebay wasn't playing by the rules. PS: On a side note, i will add Norway to the list of countries you shouldn't do business.

manarth 10y ago
Given the mention of eBay, should governments ignore eBay traders who ignore tax regulations? [1] Do the US government ignore people who don't comply with online sales regulations, or do they charge them a penalty? [2] The words 'eBay', or 'Uber', or 'Airbnb', or any other gig-economy organisation, do not provide a broad licence for legal non-compliance. [1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11077630/eBay-users-warned-to-declare-income-as-trader-is-jailed-for-tax-evasion.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11077... [2] https://www.forbes.com/2010/04/22/irs-tax-audit-ebay-seller-personal-finance-irs-worker-loses.html https://www.forbes.com/2010/04/22/irs-tax-audit-ebay-seller-...
rleigh 10y ago
When Uber and its employees and/or contractors are intentionally and knowingly breaking criminal laws, then they are absolutely liable to criminal charges. They don't get to ignore laws they disagree with any more than any other citizen would. It would be unreasonable and unfair to assume otherwise.
- pitaj 10y ago
  You're correct, but you're not arguing against what he said. OP made a moral argument, you're making a legal one.
- SadWebDeveloper 10y ago
  Almost any service we as developer built "are intentionally and knowingly breaking criminal law", either you are breaking local, state or federal laws or not complying with some standards that could face "criminal charges" therefore you are asking and giving the government the power to pretty much do anything they want. M sure in most of the countries, applying this will end in people rioting and vandalism.

afinlayson 10y ago

Why do employees, or contractors face more severe penalties (in proportion) than the company? Uber hired these people, they should face big fines and losing business license. Hell even if they both are fine equally 100% off income for Uber drivers, and fined 100% income for the company as well. Illegal immigration wouldn't happen if there were huge penalties against companies and or people hiring them.

chillacy 10y ago
Did Uber actually hire these people? My understanding is that Uber drivers do not enter an employee-employer relationship with Uber, at least in the US.
- afinlayson 10y ago
  Even if it's a company-contractor relationship it has the same implications. You can't do business illegally, or else every company wanting to do something illegal would hire contractors.
  - chillacy 10y ago
    I see, as of october last year it looks like Uber got sued in the UK over this, and lost. It may end up having to employ the drivers.

andrenth 10y ago

Person A wants to go from point P1 to point P2. Person B offers to take person A via car ride in exchange for a commonly agreed amount of money. Both see the exchange as advantageous to themselves and the exchange is made. Bureaucrats see this and become furious that they didn't get their share for doing nothing. Bureaucrats punish Person B.

itstrueok 10y ago

Taxation is theft.