VBAR and Self-employment Act: which law provides real clarity on the employment relationship?

Since 2025, the debate about false self-employment and the qualification of employment relationships has entered a new phase. Two bills attempt to make possible the decades-old issue of legally enshrining the labor relations test: the Verduidelijking Beoordeling Arbeidsrelaties en Rechtsvermonden (VBAR), submitted on July 7 by outgoing Minister Van Hijum (SZW), and the Self-employment Act of VVD, D66, CDA and SGP, whose internet consultation ended on June 23. Both aim for more legal certainty for clients and self-employed workers, but differ in approach: the VBAR opts for a weighting based on steering and self-employment, the Self-employment Act, among other things, for a self-employment definition with test. Whiche of the two is really going to provide clarity on the test of the employment relationship?

The new VBAR

The VBAR introduces a statutory assessment framework for establishing an employment contract. In the revised version, the test focuses on two elements: work-related or organizational direction (W) and self-employment within the assignment (Z). The third original criterion, OP (entrepreneurship of the person), was after criticism deleted. This makes the model clearer and more consistent with case law, particularly the Deliveroo and Uber judgments of the Supreme Court.

The modified VBAR works with a system of five W criteria and five Z criteria. When there is predominant direction (W), according to the bill, there is an employment contract. If the Z criteria are predominant, then the worker is self-employed. If there is no clear predominance, it is up to the court to come to a judgment.

Another important element in the VBAR is the civil legal presumption of employment. For workers who earn less than €36 per hour (price level 2025), in case of doubt they can more easily invoke an employment contract. The burden of proof then lies with the client.

Counterpart VBAR

The Self-Employment Act, on the other hand, takes a fundamentally different approach: instead of a test for employee status, it starts in principle from the self-employed person himself. This means that it is defined when someone is independent, rather than when someone is not employed.

The Self-Employment Act works with a self-employment test consisting of five main criteria, including entrepreneurial risk, soliciting clients independently, and having your own business assets. There are also additional conditions, such as having provision for retirement and disability. The law also includes provisions to keep additional earners and occasional workers out of enforcement.

Differences in focus and operation

The fundamental difference between the VBAR and the Self-Employment Act lies in their legal premise. The VBAR builds on existing case law, such as the Deliveroo ruling, and codifies it into law. The Self-Employment Act creates an entirely separate qualifying framework from labor law.

The VBAR will continue to work within the existing system of Section 7:610 of the Civil Code, which defines the employment contract, and strive for better enforceability. To this end, there will also be an Order in Council (AMvB) with further interpretation of the review criteria. In contrast, the Self-Employment Act aims to expand Section 7:610 of the Civil Code with a separate legal recognition of self-employment.

SER-MLT Opinion

The VBAR contains no requirements for social benefits for the self-employed, while the Self-Employed Act explicitly addresses minimum standards for pension accrual and disability insurance. This is consistent with the SER-MLT advice on improving the livelihood security of the self-employed, among other things.

Both proposals share the goal of provide more clarity provide more clarity in a complex labor market where the boundaries between employment and self-employment are becoming increasingly diffuse. Both also recognize that the enforcement moratorium on the DBA Act was untenable, and that new legal frameworks are needed for principals to act compliantly, in parallel with enforcement on false self-employment by the Inland Revenue.

Comments Off on the Self-Employment Act

The Self-Employment Act counted on mostly positive responses. Research by Knab earlier in 2025 showed that over 70% of self-employed people are positive about the Self-Employment Act. Also in the Internet consultation, the reactions were positive, but with plenty of critical notes. The coalition of industry associations, consisting of ABU, Bovib, NBBU, RIM, VvDN, calls the bill a "good step forward", but calls for much clearer frameworks around provisions and for independent assurance of the intended review committee.

Association ZZP Netherlands supports the proposal and calls it a necessary step toward legal certainty and recognition. At the same time, the organization warns that the law must continue to provide room for additional earners and creative self-employed people, such as artists, who fall outside the scope of traditional employment.

In conclusion, the Labor Foundation is moderately critical. The social partners want enforcement of existing rules over new legislation and advocate linkage with the intended Basic Disability Insurance for the Self-Employed (BAZ). It also warns of the risk that the law will ignore the SER-MLT advice on some points.

(Uncertain) outlook

It is still unclear whether both bills survive politically. The VBAR is before the House of Representatives, but its consideration date is still uncertain. This is because of the upcoming Lower House elections. The pressure for rapid substantive consideration in the House of Representatives is being increased by the outgoing administration, however, since the VBAR is part of the social reforms in the Recovery and Resilience Plan (HVP). In it, the Netherlands promised various reforms to the European Commission during the coronapanda, in exchange for 5.4 billion euros in aid. If the VBAR does not survive parliamentary scrutiny or is introduced late (after Q2 2026), it could affect the payout of some 600 million euros. HeadFirst Group has previously been 2025 critical about the role of the VBAR in the HVP.

The Self-Employed Act, on the other hand, has yet to enter the legislative agenda. It is expected that now that the Internet consultation is over, the proposal will be modified and sent to the Council of State for technical reflection.

However, both proposals are unmistakable signals that politicians, civil society and the market want an end to the ambiguity surrounding the employment relationship test. What will hopefully follow is a period of review, redefining the balance between clarity, choice and protection.

Vision HeadFirst Group

HeadFirst Group sees a lot of potential in the Self-employed Act; especially in the legal anchoring of the position of freelancers. Regarding the VBAR, we are critical of the starting point from employee status in testing the employment relationship; something that is still present in the amended version of the bill. We argued back in 2024 for cutting up the VBAR, leaving out the VBA part and introducing the legal presumption of employee status, which counts on our support.

HeadFirst Group continues to monitor developments closely and advocates a balanced approach: legal clarity for clients, recognition for self-employment and a targeted approach against false self-employment. For more information on developments around politics and laws and regulations, read our white paper.

Want to know more about the creation of the VBAR? Then watch the video above, in which Sem Overduin of the Public Affairs team briefly explains it.

Request a free consultation

Questions about this? Please contact us.

Sem Overduin
Public Policy & Affairs Manager
Sem.Overduin@headfirst.nl

Oifik Youssefi
Public Affairs Officer
Oifik.Youssefi@headfirst.nl

Maaike van Driel
Head of Legal
Maaike.vanDriel@headfirst.group

Thomas ten Veldhuijs
Senior Legal Counsel
Thomas.tenVeldhuijs@headfirst.nl

VBAR vs. Self-employment Act: which one offers real clarity about the employment relationship?