Australia's high court rules Uber owes payroll tax on driver fares

Overview

Updated 1 hour ago

Uber must pay New South Wales about $81 million in payroll tax after Australia's highest court ruled that the money it hands drivers is wages, not a fare it merely passes along. Six of the seven judges dismissed Uber's appeal on 4 November 2026, ending a fight that started with a state tax assessment in 2021.

The ruling rests on a 2007 state law that treats contractors as employees for payroll tax when their work is supplied to a business. Uber argued it was only a payment collection agent. The court found the driving is what lets Uber charge riders and keep its service fee, so the fares count as wages.

Why it matters

Every platform that sets prices and takes a cut, from delivery to care work, now faces the same payroll tax logic in Australia.

Questions about this story

Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.

No questions yet — be the first to ask.

Key Indicators

$81M

Payroll tax assessed

The bill for the 2015 to 2020 financial years, in Australian dollars, plus costs.

6–1

High Court majority

Six judges dismissed Uber's appeal; Justice Simon Steward dissented.

Financial years assessed

The assessments covered the years ending 30 June 2015 through 30 June 2020.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

People Involved

Stephen Gageler

Chief Justice of Australia

Wrote the leading judgment dismissing Uber's appeal

Simon Steward

Justice of the High Court of Australia

Sole dissenter in the Uber appeal

Organizations Involved

Uber Australia Pty Ltd

Rideshare and delivery platform

Ordered to pay about $81 million in payroll tax plus costs

The Australian arm of the global rideshare company, which argued it was a payment agent for drivers rather than their employer.

High Court of Australia

National supreme court

Ruled 6-1 against Uber

Australia's final court of appeal, which hears appeals from state supreme courts including on the interpretation of state tax statutes.

NSW Chief Commissioner of State Revenue

State tax authority

Won the case and was awarded costs

The New South Wales tax office that issued the original assessments and defended them through three courts.

Transport Workers Union

Trade union

Backed the tax case and welcomed the ruling

The union representing truck drivers, delivery riders and other transport workers, which campaigned for gig drivers to be treated as employees.

New South Wales Government

State government

Welcomed the ruling and is reviewing the full judgment

The state whose payroll tax base grows with the ruling.

Timeline

2021 November 2026

4 events Latest: Yesterday

Tap a bar to jump to that date

November 2026
High Court dismisses Uber's appeal 6-1
Latest Legal

The court holds that fares remitted to drivers are wages under the contractor provisions of the Payroll Tax Act 2007 (NSW), and orders Uber to pay costs.
Yesterday
Uber warns ruling reaches beyond rideshare
Statement

Uber says the decision could affect mortgage brokers, service marketplaces and medical practices, and asks states to modernise payroll tax law.
Yesterday
August 2025
Court of Appeal overturns Uber's Supreme Court win
Legal

The NSW Court of Appeal finds drivers supply driving services to Uber and the fares remitted to them are deemed wages.
August 1st, 2025
2021
NSW assesses Uber for payroll tax on driver fares
Tax assessment

The Chief Commissioner of State Revenue issues assessments covering the 2015 to 2020 financial years, later reported at about $81 million.
2021

Scenarios

Other states bill gig platforms for payroll tax

Possible Resolves by End of 2027

Discussed by: Tax lawyers and the NSW government's ministerial release, which noted the ruling's wider application

The High Court interpreted NSW's contractor provisions, but Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia have similar payroll tax statutes. If their revenue offices read the decision the same way, they can issue assessments against Uber and delivery platforms for past years. The trigger is a single state revenue office announcing an assessment or audit.

States rewrite payroll tax law to exempt digital marketplaces

Unlikely Resolves by Q2 2027

Discussed by: Uber, which called on state governments to modernise payroll tax laws

Uber's preferred outcome is legislative, not judicial. A state parliament could amend its payroll tax act to exclude payments made through digital platforms, or to define platform operators as intermediaries rather than employers. That would need a government willing to give up revenue and a parliament willing to vote for it.

Drivers file wage claims built on the ruling

Possible Resolves by End of 2027

Discussed by: Employment lawyers and the Transport Workers' Union

The High Court decided a tax question, not an employment law question. But its finding that drivers supply services to Uber under contracts gives lawyers material for underpayment and entitlement claims. A representative proceeding in the Federal Court would test whether the tax reasoning carries into workplace law.

Historical Context

2 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

February 2021

Uber's UK Supreme Court loss (2021)

The UK Supreme Court unanimously upheld a tribunal ruling that Uber drivers are 'workers' under British employment law, entitled to minimum wage, holiday pay and pension contributions. Uber had argued drivers were independent contractors using its app.

Then

Uber granted its UK drivers worker status and began paying minimum wage from the moment they logged on.

Now

The ruling became a reference point for gig economy cases across Europe and showed that contract labels do not decide employment status.

Why this matters now

The Australian case asks a narrower tax question, but the underlying dispute is the same: whether the platform or the driver is the one supplying the service.

November 2020

California Proposition 22 (2020)

After California's legislature passed AB5, which made it harder to classify workers as contractors, app-based companies funded a ballot campaign to exempt their drivers. Voters approved Proposition 22, keeping drivers as contractors while offering limited benefits.

Then

Rideshare and delivery drivers stayed independent contractors in California.

Now

The measure was upheld by the California Supreme Court in 2024, and it showed platforms could win at the ballot box what they lost in court.

Why this matters now

It marks the alternative path. Uber lost in Australian courts, so its next move is to ask state governments to change the statute.