COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS A European agenda for the collaborative economy
Date: 2016-06-02
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: application of EU law, consumer, economic cooperation, economy, entrepreneur, job creation, market access, national law, provision of services, service

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 2.6.2016  COM(2016) 356 final   COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS A European agenda for the collaborative economy {SWD(2016) 184 final}  
 
 
1. Introduction 

The collaborative economy creates new opportunities for consumers  and entrepreneurs. The 
Commission considers that it can therefore make an important contribution to jobs and growth 
in  the  European  Union,  if  encouraged  and  developed  in  a  responsible  manner.  Driven  by 
innovation, new business models have a significant potential to contribute to competitiveness 
and  growth.  The  success  of  collaborative  platforms  are  at  times  challenging  for  existing 
market operators and practices, but by enabling individual citizens to offer services, they also 
promote  new  employment  opportunities,  flexible  working  arrangements  and  new  sources  of 
income.  For  consumers,  the  collaborative  economy  can  provide  benefits  through  new 
services, an extended supply, and lower prices. It can also encourage more asset-sharing and 
more efficient use of resources, which can contribute to the EU’s sustainability agenda and to 
the transition to the circular economy.  

At the same time, the collaborative economy often raises issues with regard to the application 
of  existing  legal  frameworks,  blurring  established  lines  between  consumer  and  provider, 
employee and self-employed, or the professional and non-professional provision of services. 
This can result in uncertainty over applicable rules, especially when combined with regulatory 
fragmentation stemming from divergent regulatory approaches at national or local level. This 
hampers the development of the collaborative economy in Europe and prevents its benefits to 
materialise fully. At the same time, there is a risk that regulatory grey zones are exploited to 
circumvent rules designed to preserve the public interest. 

The collaborative economy is small but growing rapidly, gaining important market shares in 
some  sectors.  Gross  revenue  in  the  EU  from  collaborative  platforms  and  providers  was 
estimated  to  be  EUR 28 billion  in  2015.  Revenues  in  the  EU  in  five  key  sectors  almost 
doubled compared with the previous year and are set to continue expanding robustly.1 Growth 
has been strong since 2013 and accelerated in 2015 as large platforms invested significantly in 
expanding  their  European  operations.  Going  forward,  some  experts  estimate  that  the 
collaborative economy could add EUR 160-572 billion to the EU economy. Therefore there is 
a high potential for new businesses to capture these fast growing markets.2 Consumer interest 
is indeed strong, as confirmed by a public consultation and a Eurobarometer poll.3 

This Communication aims at helping to reap these benefits and to address concerns over the 
uncertainty about rights and obligations of those taking part in the collaborative economy. It 
provides  legal  guidance  and  policy  orientation4    to  public  authorities,  market  operators  and 
interested  citizens  for  the  balanced  and  sustainable  development  of  the  collaborative 
economy,  as  announced  in  the  single  market  strategy.5  This  non-binding  guidance  on  how 
existing EU law should be applied to the collaborative economy covers key issues faced by 
market  operators  and  public  authorities  alike.6  It  is  without  prejudice  to  initiatives  that  the 

1  

It is estimated that collaborative platforms operating in five key sectors of the collaborative economy generated revenues 
of  EUR 3.6 bn  in  2015  in  the  EU:  accommodation  (short-term  letting);  passenger  transport;  household  services; 
professional and technical services, and collaborative finance. All figures are based on estimates of PwC Consulting as 
part of a study contracted by the European Commission. 

2   EPRS: The cost of non-Europe in the Sharing Economy. January 2016. 
3   A  Eurobarometer  opinion  poll  found  that  52 %  of  EU  citizens  are  aware  of  the  services  offered  by  the  collaborative 
economy and 17 % have used such services at least once. A presentation of the results of the Eurobarometer poll and the 
public consultation carried out from September 2015 to January 2016 can be found in the accompanying Staff Working 
Document. 
Issues  related  to  crowdfunding  activities  (addressed  by  the  Commission’s  Communication  COM/2014/0172)  and 
services provided by learning platforms are not covered by this Communication. 

5   COM(2015) 550. 
6   The guidance provided in this Communication focuses on economic activities. Collaborative economy services can be 
offered for free, on a cost-sharing basis or against remuneration. For many Member States, pure cost-sharing activities 

4  

2 

 
 
                                                           
 
Commission may take in this area in the future and to the prerogatives of the Court of Justice 
as regards the interpretation of EU law. 

What is the collaborative economy? 
For  the  purposes  of  this  Communication,  the  term  "collaborative  economy"7  refers  to 
business models where activities are facilitated by collaborative platforms that create an open 
marketplace  for  the  temporary  usage  of  goods  or  services  often  provided  by  private 
individuals.  The  collaborative  economy  involves  three  categories  of  actors:  (i)  service 
providers who share assets, resources, time and/or skills — these can be private individuals 
offering  services  on  an  occasional  basis  (‘peers’)  or  service  providers  acting  in  their 
professional  capacity  ("professional  services  providers");  (ii)  users  of  these;  and  (iii) 
intermediaries  that  connect  —  via  an  online  platform  —  providers  with  users  and  that 
facilitate  transactions  between  them  (‘collaborative  platforms’).  Collaborative  economy 
transactions generally do not involve a change of ownership and can be carried out for profit 
or not-for-profit. 8 

2. Key issues 

2.1. Market access requirements 

As  well  as  creating  new  markets  and  expanding  existing  ones,  collaborative  economy 
businesses  enter  markets  so  far  served  by  traditional  service  providers.  A  key  question  for 
authorities and market operators alike is whether and if so to what extent, under existing EU 
law,  collaborative  platforms  and  service  providers  can  be  subject  to  market  access 
requirements.  These  can  include  business  authorisations,  licensing  obligations,  or  minimum 
quality standard requirements (e.g. the size of rooms or the type of cars, insurance or deposit 
obligations  etc.).  Under  EU  law,  such  requirements  need  to  be  justified  and  proportionate, 
taking account  of the specificities of the business model and innovative services concerned, 
while not favouring one business model over the other. 

Professional provision of services 

National  regulatory  approaches  differ  in  various  sectors,  some  being  more  restrictive  than 
others.  Depending  on  the  type  of  service,  regulatory  intervention  is  usually  motivated  by 
reference to varying public interest objectives: protection of tourists; ensuring public safety; 
combating tax evasion; maintaining a level playing field; safeguarding public health and food 
safety; remedying scarcity of affordable housing for citizens, etc. In some Member States, in 
addition 
targeted  regulatory 
interventions, spurred by the entry into the market of collaborative economy operators. 

to  existing  sector-specific  regulation, 

there  have  been 

Under  EU  law,  in  particular  the  fundamental  freedoms  of  the  Treaty  and  the  Services 
Directive,9 service providers are not to be subject to market access or other requirements, such 

or  transactions  making  services  available  as  part  of  an  exchange,  do  not  involve  remuneration.  Only  remunerated 
activities  constitute  an  economic  activity  under  EU  law.  See  Case  C-281/06  Jundt  [2007]  ECR  I-  I-12231  §32,  33. 
Importantly, even if the transaction between a service provider and a user does not constitute an economic activity, this 
may  still  be  the  case  for  their  respective  relationship  with  the  collaborative  economy  platform.  Each  relationship 
(platform-user; platform-service provider; service provider-user) must be assessed separately. 

7   The term collaborative economy is often interchangeably used with the term ‘sharing economy’. Collaborative economy 

is a rapid evolving phenomenon and its definition may evolve accordingly. 

8   Collaborative economy services may involve some transfer of ownership of intellectual property. 
9  

See Article 9 and 16 of Directive 2006/123/EC (‘the Services Directive’) and Articles 49 and 56 of the Treaty on the 
Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). 

3 

 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                     
as  authorisation  schemes  and  licensing  requirements,  unless  they  are  non-discriminatory, 
necessary  to  attain  a  clearly  identified  public  interest  objective10  and  proportionate  to 
achieving this interest (i.e. imposing no more requirements than strictly needed).11 This also 
applies to the regulation of professions.12 

The Services Directive requires national authorities to review existing national legislation to 
ensure that market access requirements continue to be justified by a legitimate objective. They 
must  also  be  necessary  and  proportionate.  As  the  Commission  emphasised  in  its  Annual 
Growth  Survey  201613,  a  more  flexible  regulation  of  services  markets  would  lead  to  higher 
productivity and could ease the market entry of new players, reduce the price for services, and 
ensure wider choices for consumers. 

The emergence of the collaborative economy and the entry into the market of new business 
models  provide  an  opportunity  to  policymakers  and  legislators  in  Member  States.  They  can 
consider whether the objectives pursued in existing legislation remain valid, both in relation 
to the collaborative economy and to traditionally operating service providers. 

When  reassessing  the  justification  and  proportionality  of  legislation  applicable  to  the 
collaborative  economy,  national  authorities  should  generally  take  into  consideration  the 
specific  features  of  collaborative  economy  business  models  and  the  tools  they  may  put  in 
place  to  address  public  policy  concerns,  for  instance  in  relation  to  access,  quality  or  safety. 
For  example,  rating  and  reputational  systems  or  other  mechanisms  to  discourage  harmful 
behaviour  by  market  participants  may  in  some  cases  reduce  risks  for  consumers  stemming 
from information asymmetries. This can contribute to higher quality services and potentially 
reduce the need for certain  elements  of regulation, provided adequate trust  can be placed in 
the quality of the reviews and ratings.  

Absolute bans and quantitative restrictions of an activity normally constitute a measure of last 
resort. They should in general only be applied if and where no less restrictive requirements to 
attain  a  legitimate  public  interest  objective  can  be  used.  For  example,  banning  short-term 
letting  of  apartments  appears  generally  difficult  to  justify  when  the  short-term  rental  use  of 
properties  can  for  example  be  limited  to  a  maximum  number  of  days  per  year.  This  would 
allow  citizens  to  share  their  properties  on  an  occasional  basis  without  withdrawing  the 
property from the long-term rental market. 

In addition, where service providers are legitimately required to obtain authorisations on the 
basis  of  national  law,  Member  States  are  to  ensure  that  the  conditions  to  obtain  them  are, 
among  other  things,  clear,  proportionate  and  objective  and  that  the  authorisations  are  in 
principle  granted  for  an  unlimited  period  of  time.14  Moreover,  the  relevant  administrative 
procedures  and  formalities  must  also  be  clear,  transparent  and  not  unduly  complicated, 
whereas their costs for the providers must be reasonable and proportionate to the cost of the 
procedure in  question and the procedures must be as speedy  as possible and subject  to  tacit 

10   For a list of overriding reasons relating to the public interest under the Services Directive see its Article 4 (8). 
11   See Recital 39 and Article 4 (6) of the Services Directive on the concept of ‘authorisation’. 
12   See Article 59 of the Professional Qualifications Directive 2005/36/EC. The proportionality and the necessity of national 
regulations on regulated professions will be further discussed in two forthcoming Commission initiatives (guidance on 
reforms needs on regulated professions and the proportionality test for regulated professions). 

13   COM(2015) 690 final, of 26.11.2015, Communication on the Annual Growth Survey 2016: Strengthening the recovery 

and fostering convergence 

14   See Articles 10 and 11 of the Services Directive. 

4 

 
 
                                                           
approval.15 Employing e-government best practices and principles can significantly lower the 
cost and burden of compliance for service providers.16 

Peer-to-peer provision of services 

In the collaborative economy context, an important element to assess whether a market access 
requirement is necessary, justified and proportionate, can be whether the services are offered 
by  professional  providers  or  rather  by  private  individuals  on  an  occasional  basis.  In  fact,  a 
specific  feature  of  the  collaborative  economy  is  that  service  providers  are  often  private 
individuals offering assets or services on an occasional peer-to-peer basis. At the same time, 
increasingly micro entrepreneurs and small businesses are using collaborative platforms. 

EU  legislation  does  not  establish  expressly  at  what  point  a  peer  becomes  a  professional 
services  provider  in  the  collaborative  economy.17  Member  States  use  different  criteria  to 
differentiate  between  professional  services  and  peer-to-peer  services.  Some  Member  States 
define professional  services as services provided against remuneration compared to  peer-to-
peer services that aim at compensating costs incurred by the services provider. Other Member 
States  have  introduced  a  differentiation  using  thresholds.  These  thresholds  are  often 
developed on a sector-specific basis taking into account the level of income generated or the 
regularity  with  which  the  service  is  provided.  Below  these  thresholds,  service  providers  are 
usually subject to less restrictive requirements. Thresholds, established in a reasonable way, 
can be a useful proxy and can help create a clear regulatory framework to the benefit of non-
professional providers. 

For example, in the transport sector, some Member States are preparing to exempt small-scale 
passenger transport services — falling below a specific threshold of annual turnover — from 
licensing  requirements.  In  the  short-term  accommodation  sector,  some  cities  permit  short-
term  rentals  and  home-sharing  services  without  prior  authorisation  or  registration 
requirements. This would be the case when the services are provided on an occasional basis, 
i.e. up to  specific thresholds  such as less than 90 days per  year. Other cities apply different 
rules  depending  on  whether  the  property  is  a  primary  or  secondary  residence,  on  the 
assumption that a citizen’s primary residence can only be rented out on an occasional basis. 

Collaborative platforms 

Whether or not – and the extent to which – collaborative platforms can be subject to market 
access  requirements  depends  on  the  nature  of  their  activities.  As  long  as  collaborative 
platforms provide a service normally provided for remuneration, at a distance, by electronic 
means and at the individual request of a recipient of services,18 they provide an information 
society service. Therefore, they cannot be subjected to prior authorisations or any equivalent 
requirements  that  are  specifically  and  exclusively  targeting  those  services.19  Also,  Member 
States  can  only  impose  regulatory  requirements  on  collaborative  platforms  providing  such 

15   See Article 13 of the Services Directive. 
16   COM(2016)  179  final  of  19.4.2016,  Communication  on  EU  eGovernment  Action  plan  2016-2020  –  Accelerating  the 

digital transformation of government 

17   The  Services  Directive  for  example  defines  service  providers  as  any  natural  or  legal  person  who  offers  any  self-
employed  economic  activity,  normally  provided  for  remuneration  (see  Article  4  (2)).  This  means  that  any  economic 
activity could be captured by the rules of this Directive regardless of the frequency it is offered and without requiring 
that the provider necessarily acts as ‘professional’. In addition, EU consumer acquis defines 'trader' as any person acting 
for the purposes relating to his trade, business, craft or profession (see section 2.3). 

18   See Article 2(a) of Directive 2000/31/EC ('e-Commerce Directive') and Article 1(1)(b) of Directive 2015/1535. See also 

Annex I to that latter Directive for an indicate list of services not covered by this definition. 

19   See Article 4 of the e-Commerce Directive. 

5 

 
 
                                                           
services across borders from another Member State under limited circumstances and subject 
to a specific procedure.20 

However, there may be cases in which collaborative platforms can be considered as offering 
other  services  in  addition  to  the  information  society  services  that  they  offer  to  intermediate 
between  the  providers  of  underlying  services  and  their  users.  In  particular,  in  certain 
circumstances, a platform may also be a provider of the underlying service (e.g. transport or 
short-term  rental  service).  In  such  a  case,  collaborative  platforms  could  be  subject  to  the 
licensing 
relevant  sector-specific 
requirements  generally  applied  to  service  providers,  under  the  conditions  as  set  out  in  the 
preceding sections21. 

including  business  authorisation  and 

regulation, 

Whether a collaborative platform also provides the underlying service will normally  have to 
be established on a case-by-case basis. Several factual and legal criteria can play a role in this 
regard.  The  level  of  control  or  influence  that  the  collaborative  platform  exerts  over  the 
provider of such services will generally  be of significant  importance.  It  can in  particular be 
established in light of the following key criteria: 

  Price: does the collaborative platform set the final price to be paid by the user, as 
the  recipient  of  the  underlying  service.  Where  the  collaborative  platform  is  only 
recommending a price or where the underlying services provider is otherwise free 
to adapt the price set by a collaborative platform, this indicates that this criterion 
may not be met. 

  Other  key  contractual  terms:  does  the  collaborative  platform  set  terms  and 
conditions, other than price, which determine the contractual relationship between 
the  underlying  services  provider  and  the  user  (such  as  for  example  setting 
mandatory instructions for the provision of the underlying service, including  any 
obligation to provide the service). 

  Ownership of key assets: does the collaborative platform own the key assets used 

to provide the underlying service. 

When  these  three  criteria  are  all  met,  there  are  strong  indications  that  the  collaborative 
platform exercises significant influence or control over the provider of the underlying service, 
which  may  in  turn  indicate  that  it  should  be  considered  as  also  providing  the  underlying 
service (in addition to an information society service). 

Depending  on  the  case  at  hand,  other  criteria  may  also  play  a  role.  For  instance,  if  the 
collaborative platform incurs the costs and assumes all the risks related to the provision of the 
underlying  service.  Or  if  an  employment  relationship  exists  between  the  collaborative 
platform and the person providing the underlying service in question (see section 2.4). These 
elements  could  indicate  that  the  collaborative  platform  exerts  a  high  level  of  control  and 
influence over the provision of the underlying service. 

Conversely, collaborative platforms may merely assist the provider of the underlying services 
by  offering  the  possibility  to  carry  out  certain  activities  that  are  ancillary  to  the  core 
information society services offered by the platform to intermediate between the provider of 

20   See  Articles  2  and  3  of  the  e-Commerce  Directive.  The  country  of  origin  principle  for  the  freedom  to  provide 
information society services cross-border can only be derogated from when there is a threat or a serious and grave risk to 
undermine  the  following  four  objectives:  public  policy,  protection  of  public  health,  public  security,  including  the 
safeguarding  of  national  security  and  defence  and  protection  of  consumers.  In  that  case  the  national  measures  in 
question must still be proportionate and certain procedural conditions (including notification to the Commission) must 
also be respected. 
i.e. that they are non-discriminatory, necessary to attain a clearly identified public interest objective and proportionate to 
achieving this interest (i.e. imposing no more requirements than strictly needed) 

21  

6 

 
 
                                                           
the  underlying  services  and  their  users  (e.g.  by  providing  payment  facilities,  insurance 
coverage,  aftersales  services  etc.)  This,  in  itself,  does  not  constitute  proof  of  influence  and 
control  as  regards  the  underlying  service.  Similarly,  offering  user  rating  or  review 
mechanisms is not in itself proof of significant influence or control.22 Yet, generally speaking, 
the  more  collaborative  platforms  manage  and  organise  the  selection  of  the  providers  of  the 
underlying services and the manner in which those underlying services are carried out — for 
example,  by  directly  verifying  and  managing  the  quality  of  such  services  —  the  more 
apparent  it  becomes  that  the  collaborative  platform  may  have  to  be  considered  as  also 
providing the underlying services itself. 

Therefore, a collaborative platform providing services in the short-term rental sector may only 
provide  information  society  services  and  not  also  the  accommodation  service  itself  if,  for 
example, the provider of the accommodation service sets its own prices and the platform does 
not  own  any  of  the  assets  used  for  that  service  provision.  The  fact  that  the  collaborative 
platform  may  also  offer  insurance  and  rating  services  to  their  users  need  not  alter  that 
conclusion. 

When  assessing  whether  market  access  requirements  applied  to  the  collaborative  economy 
are  necessary,  justified  and  proportionate  to  meet  identified  and  legitimate  public  interest 
objectives,  Member  States  should  take  into  account  the  specific  features  of  collaborative 
economy business models. 

For the purposes of regulating the activities in question, private individuals offering services 
via  collaborative  platforms  on  a  peer-to-peer  and  occasional  basis  should  not  be 
automatically  treated  as  professional  service  providers.  Establishing  (possibly  sector-
specific)  thresholds  under  which  an  economic  activity  would  be  considered  a  non-
professional peer-to-peer activity may be a suitable way forward. 

Member States are advised to take the opportunity to review, simplify and modernise market 
access  requirements  that  are  generally  applicable  to  market  operators.  They  should  aim  to 
relieve  operators  from  unnecessary  regulatory  burden,  regardless  of  the  business  model 
adopted, and to avoid fragmentation of the Single Market. 

2.2 Liability regimes 

Most  relevant  rules  on  contractual  and  extra-contractual  liability  are  laid  down  in  national 
laws  of  Member  States.  However,  under  EU  law,  online  platforms,  as  providers  of 
information  society  intermediary  services,  are  under  certain  conditions  exempted  from 
liability for the information they store.23 

The  applicability  of  this  exemption  from  liability  will  depend  on  the  legal  and  factual 
elements  relating  to  the  activity  performed  by  the  collaborative  platform  and  applies  where 
the  activities  in  question  qualify  as  hosting  services  under  the  terms  of  the  e-Commerce 
Directive.24  To  do  so,  their  conduct  must  be  merely  technical,  automatic  and  passive.25  The 

22   The actual rating/review is undertaken by the user, not the collaborative platform. 
23   Article 14 of the e-Commerce Directive. 
24  

In the context of the collaborative economy hosting can broadly speaking be understood as the activity of dealing with 
the  storage  of  customer  data  and  providing  the  venue  where  users  meet  providers  of  the  underlying  services.  The 
exemptions  under  Articles  12  and  13  of  the  e-Commerce  Directive  would  usually  not  apply  in  this  regard,  as 
collaborative  platforms  normally  do  not  provide  ‘mere  conduit’  or  ‘caching’  services  within  the  meaning  of  those 
provisions. 

25   As per section 4 of the e-Commerce Directive. In joined cases C-236/08 to C-238/08 Google France/Louis Vuitton, the 
CJEU underlined the key criterion when an online platform is deemed an ‘intermediary service provider,’ referring to 
recital  42  to  Directive  2000/31/EC.  According  to  this  recital,  information  society  services  are  meant  to  provide  the 

7 

 
 
                                                           
 
exemption from liability applies on the condition that the collaborative platform does not play 
an  active  role  which  would  give  it  knowledge  of,  control  over,  or  awareness  of  the  illegal 
information  -  and,  where  it  nonetheless  obtains  such  knowledge  or  awareness,  acts 
expeditiously to remove it or to disable access thereto.26 

Whether or not collaborative platforms can benefit from such liability exemption will need to 
be established on a case-by-case basis, depending on the level  of knowledge and control of 
the online platform in respect of the information it hosts. 

Importantly, under EU law, Member States cannot impose on collaborative platforms, to the 
extent that they provide hosting services, a general obligation to monitor or to actively seek 
facts or circumstances indicating illegal activity.27 
The  Communication  on  Online  Platforms  and  the  Digital  Single  Market28  explains  that 
maintaining the existing intermediary liability regime is crucial for the further development of 
the digital economy in the EU. This includes the collaborative economy, as online platforms 
act as key drivers for its growth. The Commission, at the same time, encourages responsible 
behavior by all types of online platforms in the form of voluntary action, for example to help 
tackle  the  important  issue  of  fake  or  misleading  reviews.  Such  voluntary  action  taken  to 
increase  trust  and  to  offer  a  more  competitive  service  should  not  automatically  be  taken  to 
mean that the conduct of the collaborative platform is no longer merely technical, automatic 
and passive. 

In  addition  to  hosting  services,  a  collaborative  platform  may  also  offer  a  number  of  other 
connected  or  ancillary  activities.  These  can  include  review  or  ratings  facilities,  payment 
facilities, insurance, ID verification (often carried out by third-party providers) or the platform 
may even provide the underlying service that is being offered to the users. 

The aforementioned liability exemption set out in EU law remains limited to the provision of 
hosting  services  and  does  not  extend  to  other  services  or  activities  performed  by  a 
collaborative  economy  platform.  The  aforementioned  liability  exemption  also  does  not 
exclude  the  collaborative  economy  platform's  liability  arising  under  the  applicable  personal 
data  protection  legislation,  in  as  far  as  the  platform's  own  activities  are  concerned. 
Conversely,  the  mere  fact  that  a  platform  also  carries  out  certain  other  activities  -  besides 
providing hosting services - does not necessarily mean that that platform can no longer rely on 
the  liability  exemption  in  respect  of  its  hosting  services.29  In  any  case,  the  way  in  which 
collaborative  platforms  design  their  information  society  service  and  implement  voluntary 
measures  to  tackle  illegal  content  online  remains  in  principle  a  business  decision  and  the 
question  of  whether  they  benefit  from  the  exemption  from  intermediary  liability  should 
always be assessed on a case-by-case basis. 

technical process of operating and giving access to a communication network over which information made available by 
third parties  is  transmitted  or  temporarily  stored,  for  the  sole  purpose  of  making  the  transmission  more  efficient;  this 
activity is of a mere technical, automatic and passive nature. 

26   Case C-324/09 L’Oréal/eBay. This is without prejudice for courts and national administrative authorities to require the 
collaborative  platform  to  terminate  or  prevent  an  infringement.  See  Article  14(3)  e-Commerce  Directive.  A 
comprehensive  background  on  the  intermediary  liability  regime  is  contained  in  the  Commission's  Staff  Working 
Document "Online services, including e-commerce, in the Single Market", SEC(2011) 1641 final. 

27   As set out in Article 15 (1) of the e-Commerce Directive. 
28   COM(2016) 288/2 of 25 May 2015, Communication on online Platforms and the Digital Single Market Opportunities 

and Challenges for Europe  
In  that  respect,  some  courts  exclude  liability  protection  if  the  hosting-related  aspects  of  a  service  are  not  the  most 
important  aspects  of  the  service.  See  to  this  extent  the  decision  of  the  Court  of  Paris  in  Louis  Vuitton  Malletier  / 
Christian Dior Couture and Parfums Christian Dior, Kenzo, Givenchy et Guerlain v. eBay all issued by the Commercial 
Court of Paris, First Chamber, on 30 June 2008. An opposite view  was taken by a  Greek court in the Greek case No 
44/2008 of Rodopi Court of First Instance, published in (2009) Armenopoulos, 406. 

29  

8 

 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                     
Collaborative platforms are encouraged to continue taking voluntary action to fight illegal 
content  online  and  to  increase  trust  (for  example  by  helping  to  ensure  the  quality  of  the 
services  offered  by  providers  of  underlying  services  on  their  platform).  Such  voluntary 
measures should not automatically be taken to mean that collaborative platforms that benefit 
from the exemption from intermediary liability no longer do so. 

2.3 Protection of users 

Traditionally,  EU  consumer  and  marketing  legislation  has  been  designed  to  address 
transactions,  in  which  there  is  a  weaker  party  that  needs  to  be  protected  (typically  the 
consumer).  However,  the  collaborative  economy  blurs  the  lines  between  consumers  and 
business  since  there  is  a  multisided  relationship  that  may  involve  business-to-business, 
business-to-consumer,  consumer-to-business,  and  consumer-to-consumer  transactions.  In 
these relationships, it is not always clear who the weaker party requiring protection may be. 

Currently,  EU  consumer  and  marketing  legislation  is  based  on  the  distinction  between  a 
‘trader’  and  a  ‘consumer’.  A  trader  is  a  person  'acting  for  purposes  relating  to  his  trade, 
business,  craft or profession';30 a ‘consumer’ is  a  person acting  'outside his  trade, business, 
craft or profession'31. These criteria applied to the participant categories in the collaborative 
economy,  determine  the  respective  rights  and  obligations  of  the  parties  under  existing  EU 
consumer and marketing legislation.32 

In  particular,  EU  consumer  law  applies  to  any  collaborative  platform  that  qualifies  as  a 
‘trader’  and  engages  in  ‘commercial  practices’  vis-à-vis  consumers.  Providers  of  the 
underlying  services  also  qualify  as  traders  if  they  act  'for  purposes  relating  to  their  trade, 
business,  craft  or  profession'.  Conversely,  EU  consumer  and  marketing  legislation  does  not 
apply  to  consumer-to-consumer  transactions.  Therefore,  if  neither  the  collaborative  service 
provider nor the user qualifies as a trader, the transactions between them will fall outside the 
scope of this legislation. 

This raises the central question under which conditions in a peer-to-peer provision of services, 
the provider of the underlying service qualifies as trader. Member States currently approach 
this issue differently.33 Under current EU law, this question must be answered on a case-by-
case  basis.  To  this  end,  the  Commission  offers  some  general  orientations  in  the  revised 
Guidance on the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive34. Within the specific context of the 
collaborative  economy  the  following  factors  are  important.  While  none  of  them  in  itself 
would  be  sufficient  to  qualify  a  provider  as  trader,  depending  on  the  circumstances  of  the 
case, their combination may point into that direction: 

  Frequency of the services: providers who offer their services merely on an occasional 
basis  (i.e.  on  a  purely  marginal  and  accessory  basis  as  opposed  to  regularly)  will  be 
less likely to qualify as a trader. The greater the frequency of the service provision, the 
more  apparent  it  is  that  the  provider  may  qualify  as  a  trader,  because  this  could 
indicate that he is acting for purposes related to his business, craft or trade. 

30   Article 2(b) Directive 2005/29/EC ('Unfair Commercial Practices Directive'). 
31   Article 2(a) Unfair Commercial Practices Directive. 
32   For  business  to  consumer  transactions  in  the  collaborative  economy,  the  Unfair  Commercial  Practices  Directive, 
Directive 2011/83/EU ('Consumer Rights Directive') and Directive 93/13/EEC on Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts 
would apply. For business to business transactions, Directive 2006/114/EC on Misleading and Comparative Advertising 
would apply. 

33   An ongoing Commission study on consumer issues in the collaborative economy will map relevant national legislation 

in the 28 Member States. 

34   SWD(2016) 163 final, of 25 May 2016, Guidance on the implementation/application of Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair 

commercial practices 

9 

 
 
                                                           
  Profit-seeking motive: a profit-seeking motive may be an indication that the provider 
may qualify as a trader for a given transaction. Providers aiming at exchanging assets 
or skills (for example, in the case of home swapping or time banks) will in principle 
not  qualify  as  traders.  Providers  who  simply  obtain  cost  compensation  for  a  given 
transaction  may  not  be  seeking  a  profit.  Conversely,  those  providers  that  obtain 
remuneration beyond cost compensation likely have a profit-seeking motive. 

  Level of turnover: the higher the turnover generated by the service provider (be it from 
one or several collaborative platforms), the greater the indication that the provider may 
qualify as a trader. In this regard, it is important to assess whether the level of turnover 
generated  by  the  provider  stems  from  the  same  activity  (e.g.  ride  sharing)  or  from 
various  type  of  activities  (ride  sharing,  gardening,  etc.).  In  the  second  scenario,  a 
higher turnover may not necessarily imply that the provider qualifies as a trader, since 
it  may  not  have  necessarily  been  obtained  in  relation  to  the  provider’s  other  (main) 
business. 

A  person  regularly  offering  gardening  services  —  facilitated  by  collaborative  platforms  — 
and  seeking  to  obtain  substantial  remuneration  could  fall  within  the  definition  of  trader. 
However,  a  professional  babysitter  who  occasionally  provides  gardening  services  — 
facilitated by collaborative platforms — would in principle not qualify as a trader insofar as 
the occasional gardening services are concerned. In line with the Unfair Commercial Practices 
Directive,  all  traders  must  comply  with  professional  diligence  duties  and  not  mislead 
consumers.  This  also  applies  to  collaborative  platforms  qualifying  as  traders  as  far  as  their 
own  commercial  practices  are  concerned  (e.g.  intermediation  services,  payment  services, 
rating services etc.). Collaborative platforms should also enable underlying service providers 
that  qualify  as  traders  to  comply  with  EU  consumer  and  marketing  law,  for  example  by 
designing their web structures to make it possible for third party traders to identify themselves 
as such to platforms users. In addition, they could also clearly indicate to all users that they 
will  only  benefit  from  protection  under  EU  consumer  and  marketing  laws  in  their  relation 
with  traders.  If  the  collaborative  platform  applies  criteria  to  select  underlying  service 
providers operating through it and if it performs checks in relation to their reliability, it should 
inform users accordingly. 

In addition, collaborative platforms and providers of underlying services may be required to 
comply with other applicable information obligations under EU law,35 including with regard 
to transparency requirements of the relevant sector-specific legislation.36  

In any event, like any other controllers collecting and further processing personal data in the 
EU,  collaborative  platforms  must  comply  with  the  applicable  legal  framework  on  the 
protection of personal data.37 Ensuring adherence to the rules for processing personal data will 
help increase the trust of individuals, whether providers or consumers (including peer to peer) 
using the collaborative economy, so they know that when it comes to their personal data they 
will have the protection they are due. 

A  way  to  increase  consumer  confidence  is  to  increase  trust  in  peer-to-peer  services.  Trust-
building mechanisms  such as online rating and review systems  and quality labels  can be  an 
essential  tool  to  overcome  the  lack  of  information  about  individual  service  providers.  Such 
mechanisms  for  establishing  trust  in  the  collaborative  economy  have  been  created  either  by 

35   For example, pursuant to Article 6 of the Consumer Rights Directive, Article 22 of the Services Directive and Article 5 

of the e-Commerce Directive. 

36  For example, pursuant to Article 5 of the e-Commerce Directive. 
37   Data protection rules, currently contained in Directive 95/46/EC, have been reviewed recently. The new General Data 

Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679, OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1, shall apply from 25 May 2018. 

10 

 
 
                                                           
the collaborative platforms themselves or by specialised third parties and can be particularly 
important where existing consumer legislation does not apply, as explained below. 

In  line  with  EU  consumer  and  marketing  rules,  Member  States  are  encouraged  to  seek  a 
balanced approach to  ensure that consumers  enjoy a high  level  of  protection in  particular 
from  unfair  commercial  practices,  while  not  imposing  disproportionate  information 
obligations and other administrative burdens on private individuals who are not traders but 
who provide services on an occasional basis. 

The  effectiveness  and  use  of  online  trust  mechanisms  (e.g.  quality  labels)  to  increase  trust 
and  credibility  should  be  improved  to  encourage  a  more  confident  participation  in  the 
collaborative economy. 

2.4 Self-employed and workers in the collaborative economy 

The  collaborative  economy  generates  new  employment  opportunities,  generating  revenues 
beyond traditional linear employment relationships,  and it enables people to work according 
to  flexible  arrangements.  This  makes  it  possible  for  them  to  become  economically  active 
where  more  traditional  forms  of  employment  are  not  suitable  or  available  to  them.  At  the 
same time, the more flexible work arrangements may not be as regular or stable as traditional 
employment  relations.  This  may  create  uncertainty  as  to  applicable  rights  and  the  level  of 
social protection. Working arrangements in the context of the collaborative economy are often 
based on individual tasks performed on an ad hoc basis rather than tasks regularly performed 
in a pre-defined environment and timeframe. 

In  fact,  this  is  part  of  a  more  structural  shift.  There  are  increasingly  blurred  boundaries 
between the self-employed and workers, there is an increase in temporary and part-time work 
and multiple job-holding.38 Under the European pillar of social rights39, the Commission has 
launched a public consultation as to how best to address the need for increased participation in 
the  labour  market,  ensuring  fair  working  conditions  and  adequate  and  sustainable  social 
protection.  This  initiative  is  currently  subject  to  a  consultation  process,  by  which  the 
Commission seeks to gather stakeholders’ views on the current EU social acquis, the future of 
work and the coverage of social protection schemes. 

While most labour law falls under national competence, the European Union has nonetheless 
developed  certain  minimum  standards  in  the  field  of  social  policy.40  To  provide  some 
orientation on how the traditional distinction between the self-employed and workers applies 
in the context of the collaborative economy, this section examines the conditions under which 
an employment relationship exists in line with EU labour law41 and jurisprudence. 

38   Based on statistics from Eurostat. 
39   COM(2016) 127 final. The public consultation on the European pillar of social rights was launched on 8 March 2016 

and will run until 31 December 2016.  
In accordance with its competences as set in Article 153 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the Union  

40  
41   EU  labour  law  includes  Directives  regulating  workers’  rights  and  obligations.  They  refer  to  limits  to  working  time 
including  the  right  to  paid  annual  leave,  to  daily  and  weekly  rest  and  protection  in  case  of  night  work,  as  well  as 
information  on  individual  employment  conditions,  rights  for  posted  workers,  prohibition  of  discrimination  against 
workers  in  non-standard  forms  of  employment  (e.g.  part  time,  fixed  term  or  workers  employed  under  temporary 
agencies),  protection  in  case  of  insolvency  of  employers,  protection  against  discrimination  on  protected  grounds  as 
gender,  ethnicity,  sexual  orientation.  They  also  include  protection  in  case  of  collective  redundancies  or  in  case  of 
transfer of undertakings or in case of cross-border mergers. It provides for the involvement of workers — information 
and consultation, and board-level worker participation in some circumstances. In the area of health and safety at work, 
general principles concern the prevention of occupational risks and the protection of the safety and health of workers at 
the workplace. 

11 

 
 
                                                           
Since, in general, EU labour law only sets minimum standards and does not cover all aspects 
of social legislation applicable to work relationships, which implies that Member States may 
in  principle  set  higher  ones  in  their  national  legislation,  collaborative  economy  actors  are 
advised  to  refer  to  national  labour  legislation  applicable  in  the  country  where  the  service  is 
provided. 

The EU definition of ‘worker’ 

EU law guaranteeing rights to workers is only applicable to people who are in an employment 
relationship, i.e. who are considered ‘workers’. While EU Member States are responsible for 
deciding who is to be considered a worker in their national legal order, at EU level the Court 
of Justice (CJEU)  has defined the  concept  of worker  for the purpose of applying  EU law.42 
This definition has primarily been developed within the framework of the free movement of 
workers. The CJEU stated that ‘the essential feature of an employment relationship is that for 
a  certain  period  of  time  a  person  performs  services  for  and  under  the  direction  of  another 
person in return for which he receives remuneration’.43 The CJEU notably confirmed that this 
definition shall also be used to determine who is to be considered as a worker when applying 
certain EU Directives in the social field.44 

Whether an employment relationship exists or not has to be established on the basis of a case-
by-case assessment, considering the facts characterising the relationship between the platform 
and  the  underlying  service  provider,  and  the  performance  of  the  related  tasks,  looking 
cumulatively in particular at the following three essential criteria:45 

- 
- 
- 

the existence of a subordination link; 
the nature of work; and 
the presence of a remuneration. 

For the criterion of subordination to be met, the service provider must act under the direction 
of the  collaborative platform,  the latter determining the  choice of the activity, remuneration 
and working conditions.46 In other words, the provider of the underlying service is not free to 
choose  which  services  it  will  provide  and  how,  e.g.  as  per  the  contractual  relationship  it 
entered  with  the  collaborative  platform.47  Where  the  collaborative  platform  is  merely 
processing the payment deposited by a user and passes it on to the provider of the underlying 
service, this does not  imply that  the collaborative platform is  determining the remuneration. 
The  existence  of  subordination  is  not  necessarily  dependent  on  the  actual  exercise  of 
management or supervision on a continuous basis.48 

For the nature of the work criterion to be met, the provider of the underlying service must 
pursue an activity of economic value that is effective and genuine, excluding services on such 

42   For  the  purpose  of  applying  national  labour  law,  Member  States  remain  free  to  extend  the  EU  concept  of  worker  to 
situations that do not fall under the EU definition. If the assessment of the existence of an employment relationship is 
linked to the applicability of some specific instruments of EU law (Working Time Directive 2003/88/EC) and Collective 
Redundancies  Directive  98/59/EC),  then  national  definitions  of  workers  are  not  relevant.  In  addition,  the  definitions 
given by national laws are always subject to the assessment by national or European courts. 

43   COM(2010)  373  Reaffirming  the  free  movement  of  workers:  rights  and  major  developments.  Point  I.1.1  http://eur-

lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1453133735571&uri=CELEX%3A52010DC0373. 

44   Directives  on  working  time  (Isère  (C-428/09)),  on  collective  redundancies  (Balkaya  (C-229/14))  and  employment 
equality ('O' (C-432/14)). Other labour law Directives expressly refer to the Member States understanding of who is a 
worker, as long as these respect the effectiveness of EU law, with reference to O’Brien case (C-393/10). 

45    See also COM(2010) 373 final, pages 4-6. 
46  
47  

Jany and Others v Staatssecretaris van Justitie (C-268/99). 
'The  rise  of  the  'just-in-time  workforce':  on-demand  work,  crowdwork  and  labour  protection  in  the  'gig  economy', 
Valerio De Stefano, ILO Conditions of Work and Employment Series No. 71 , 2016, p. 17 

48   Danosa (C-232/09); see also De Stefano, ibid, page 16 

12 

 
 
                                                           
a  small  scale  as  to  be  regarded  as  purely  marginal  and  accessory.49  National  courts  have 
adopted divergent approaches in identifying what is marginal and accessory even within the 
context  of  more  traditional  employment  relationships.  There  is  a  mix  of  use  of  thresholds 
(hour  or  wage-based)  and  ad  hoc  assessments  of  the  features  of  a  given  relationship.  In  the 
context  of  the  collaborative  economy,  where  persons  actually  provide  purely  marginal  and 
accessory  services  through  collaborative  platforms,  this  is  an  indication  that  such  persons 
would  not  qualify  as  workers,  although  short  duration50,  limited  working  hours51, 
discontinuous  work52  or  low  productivity53  cannot  in  themselves  exclude  an  employment 
relation. At the same time, persons providing services on more than an occasional basis may 
be  either  workers  or  self-employed,  as  the  actual  qualification  of  their  status  results  from  a 
comprehensive test of all three criteria. 

The remuneration criterion is  primarily  used for distinguishing a volunteer  from  a worker. 
Thus,  where  the  provider  does  not  receive  any  remuneration  or  receives  merely  a 
compensation of costs incurred for his activities, the remuneration criterion would not be met.  

While the above criteria are referred to when applying the EU definition of workers, courts in 
the  Member  States  tend  to  use  a  similar  set  of  criteria  when  they  undertake  their  global 
assessment of a given employment relationship in the national remit. 

In order to help people make full use of their potential, increase participation in the labour 
market and boost competitiveness, while ensuring fair working conditions and adequate and 
sustainable social protection, Member States should: 

-  assess  the  adequacy  of  their  national  employment  rules  considering  the  different  needs  of 
workers  and  self-employed  people  in  the  digital  world  as  well  as  the  innovative  nature  of 
collaborative business models; 

- provide guidance on the applicability of their national employment rules in light of labour 
patterns in the collaborative economy. 

2.5 Taxation 

Adapting to new business models 

Like all economic operators, those in the collaborative economy are also  subject to taxation 
rules. These include personal income, corporate income and value added tax rules. However, 
issues have emerged in relation to tax compliance and enforcement: difficulties in identifying 
the  taxpayers  and  the  taxable  income,  lack  of  information  on  service  providers,  aggressive 
corporate tax planning exacerbated in the digital sector, differences in tax practices across the 
EU and insufficient exchange of information.  

In  this  regard,  Member  States  should  aim  at  proportionate  obligations  and  a  level  playing 
field.  They  should  apply  functionally  similar  tax  obligations  to  businesses  providing 
comparable services. Raising awareness on tax obligations, making tax administrators aware 
of  collaborative  business  models,  issuing  guidance,  and  increasing  transparency  through 
online information can all be tools for unlocking the potential of the collaborative economy. 

49   For more details on the actual assessment of 'genuineness of work' by CJEU, as well as in the Member States (e.g. using 
earning  or  hour-based  thresholds)  in  the  context  of  free  movement  of  workers,  see  'Comparative  Report  2015  -  The 
concept  of  worker  under  Article  45  TFEU  and  certain  non-standard  forms  of  employment',,  FreSsco  network  for  the 
European Commission 
50   Ninni-Orasche (C-413/01) 
51   Kempf (C- 139/85) 
52   Raulin (C-357/89) 
53   Bettray (C-344/87) 

13 

 
 
                                                           
Information  about  national  tax  obligations,  including  those  linked  to  employment  status, 
should be clearly communicated to stakeholders. 

To  increase  clarity  and  transparency,  some  Member  States  have  issued  guidance  on  the 
application  of  the  national  tax  regime  to  collaborative  business  models,  and  a  few  have 
considered  changes  to  their  legislation.54  Concerning  corporate  tax,  the  Commission  is 
working on a general approach to tax avoidance. 

At  the  same  time,  the  collaborative  economy  has  created  new  opportunities  to  help  tax 
authorities  and  taxpayers  with  their  tax  obligations.  This  is,  in  particular,  thanks  to  the 
increased  traceability  allowed  by  the  intermediation  of  online  platforms.  It  is  already  an 
ongoing practice in some Member States to have agreements with platforms for the collection 
of  taxes.  For  example,  in  the  accommodation  sector,  platforms  facilitate  the  payment  of 
tourist taxes on behalf of service providers. There are also cases where tax authorities use the 
traceability allowed by online platforms to collect taxes from the individual providers. 

An example of good cooperation between tax authorities and collaborative businesses comes 
from  Estonia.  In  cooperation  with  ride-sharing  platforms,  the  aim  is  to  simplify  the  tax 
declaration  process  for  drivers.  Transactions  between  the  driver  and  the  customer  are 
registered  by  the  collaborative  platform,  which  then  only  sends  the  data  that  is  relevant  for 
taxation purposes to the authorities, who will then pre-fill taxpayer tax forms. The main idea 
is to help taxpayers fulfil their tax obligations effectively and with minimum effort. 

Reducing administrative burden 

Economic growth is best supported by measures that aim to reduce the administrative burden  
on individuals and businesses without discriminating between business models. To this end, 
an  efficient  exchange  of  tax-related  information  amongst  platforms,  authorities  and  service 
providerscan  help  reducing  costs.  The  creation  of  one-stop  shops  and  the  development  of 
online feedback mechanisms can also create new possibilities for partnerships and compliance 
monitoring. 

However, different  approaches by national  tax authorities toward the treatment  of platforms 
can increase the administrative burden on collaborative activities. These may include different 
views on the business scope of platforms with respect to the services they provide; the criteria 
used to link their activities to a tax jurisdiction, the employment relationship between services 
providers and platforms, as well as general compliance requirements and auditing procedures.  

The development of commonly agreed standards to tackle these issues in a coherent manner, 
taking into account the elements clarified in the previous sections of this Communication, as 
well as moving more administration online, could help in this respect. 

Value added tax 

Supplies of goods and services provided by collaborative platforms and through the platforms 
by their users are in principle VAT taxable transactions. Problems may arise in respect of the 
qualification  of  participants  as  taxable  persons,  particularly  regarding  the  assessment  of 
economic activities carried on, or the existence of a direct link between the supplies and the 
remuneration  in  kind  (for  instance  in  case  of  ‘bank’  type  arrangements  where  participants 
contribute goods or services to a common pool in exchange for the right to benefit from that 
pool).  

54   An overview of initiatives can be found in the Staff Working Document accompanying this Communication. 

14 

 
 
                                                           
The Commission is preparing several initiatives to enhance the capacity of tax administrations 
within the framework of the Action Plan on VAT.55 This includes extending to the supply of 
goods  the  VAT  one-stop  shop  for  electronic  services,  starting  a  pilot  project  to  improve 
cooperation between tax administrations, and publishing a guide for cooperation between tax 
authorities and businesses in e-commerce. 

Member  States  are  encouraged  to  facilitate  and  improve  tax  collection  by  using  the 
possibilities provided by collaborative platforms, as these already record economic activity. 

Collaborative  platforms  should  take  a  proactive  stance  in  cooperating  with  national  tax 
authorities to establish the parameters for an exchange of information about tax obligations, 
while  ensuring  compliance  with  legislation  on  the  protection  of  personal  data  and  without 
prejudice to the intermediary liability regime of the e-Commerce Directive. 

Member  States  are  invited  to  assess  their  tax  rules  to  create  a  level  playing  field  for 
businesses  providing  the  same  services.  Member  States  should  also  continue  their 
simplification efforts, increasing transparency and issuing online guidance on the application 
of tax rules to collaborative business models. 

3. Monitoring 

The  collaborative  economy  spans  across  several  sectors  in  a  rapidly  changing  landscape. 
Given  this  dynamic  and  evolving  nature,  the  Commission  intends  to  establish  a  monitoring 
framework  covering  both  the  evolving  regulatory  environment  and  economic  and  business 
developments. The monitoring will aim to follow trends on prices and quality of services, and 
identify  possible  obstacles  and  problems  encountered,  in  particular  when  they  arise  from 
divergent national regulations or regulatory gaps. 

The monitoring tools will include: 

1. 

2. 
3. 

4. 

Periodic  surveys  of  consumers  and  businesses  on  the  use  of  the  collaborative 
economy.56 
Ongoing mapping of regulatory developments in Member States. 
Stakeholder  dialogue  in  the  framework  of  the  Single  Market  Forum,  with    twice 
yearly  forums    to  assess  sector  development  on  the  ground  and  to  identify  good 
practices. 
The results of the monitoring of the collaborative economy will be summarised in 
the Single Market Scoreboard. 

The  monitoring  activity57  will  also  contribute  to  the  Commission’s    ongoing  work58  on  the 
single  market  in  view  of  facilitating  innovation  and  entrepreneurship.  Given  the  dynamic 
character of collaborative economy business models and the rapid development of data-driven 
digital  technologies,  further  policy  issues  may  emerge  from  ongoing  or  new  data  collection 
and research, and may need to be addressed. Collaborative platforms should cooperate closely 
with  the  authorities,  including  the  Commission,  to  facilitate  access  to  data  and  statistical 
information in compliance with data protection law. 

55    COM(2016) 148 final, of 7.04.2016, Communication on an action plan on VAT; Towards a single EU VAT area - Time 
to decide 
56  
57     The core elements will be complemented with data and insights from third party reports, possible data analytics and web 

In addition, information will be drawn from official statistics and third party reports. 

scraping, and official statistics to the extent information is available.. 

58     Existing or future REFIT exercises may also identify areas where further intervention is needed. 

15 

 
 
                                                           
The  monitoring  activity  and  its  tools  are,  in  any  case,  without  prejudice  to  Commission's 
enforcement  of  existing  EU  legislation  which  will  continue  in  line  with  the  principles 
expressed in this Communication. 

4. Conclusion 

In view of the significant benefits that new collaborative economy business models can bring, 
Europe  should  be  open  to  embracing  these  new  opportunities.  The  EU  should  proactively 
support the innovation, competitiveness and growth opportunities offered by modernisation of 
the economy. At the same time, it is important to ensure fair working conditions and adequate 
and  sustainable  consumer  and  social  protection.  For  this  to  happen,  citizens  and  businesses 
should  be  aware  of  the  rules  and  obligations  applying  to  them,  as  clarified  in  this 
Communication. Member States are encouraged to clarify their national situation in a similar 
way. The Commission  stands ready to  work with  Member States and relevant  authorities to 
support them in this process. 

The guidance provided in this Communication aims at supporting consumers, businesses and 
public  authorities  to  engage  confidently  in  the  collaborative  economy.  It  will  also  support 
Member States to consistently apply EU law across the single market. The Commission will 
continuously review developments in the European collaborative economy, collect statistical 
data  and  evidence  and  work  with  Member  States  and  stakeholders  also  to  exchange  best 
practices.  The  Commission  looks  forward  to  engaging  in  a  dialogue  with  the  European 
Parliament,  the  Council  and  Member  States  to  ensure  the  best  possible  environment  for 
citizens and businesses in the collaborative economy. 

16