The Rise of Influencer Marketing has introduced new dynamics into the commercial landscape, while at the same time raising questions about the legal nature of these collaborations. The ability of influencers to guide consumers' purchasing choices makes them valuable tools for promoting products, but raises the question of whether their activity can be assimilated to that of commercial agents.
A recent one ruling of the Court of Rome he raised the question, analyzing a case that saw a company involved accused of not having paid the social security contributions required for commercial agents in relation to the compensation paid to some influencers. The category social security institution in fact maintained that the influencers in question had carried out a continuous and stable promotional activity for the company, attributable to the agency contract governed by articles 1742 and following of the Civil Code.
The company defended itself by stating that the contracts stipulated with the influencers did not include obligations of promotion or of reaching sales targets, characteristic elements of the agency relationship. The company stressed that the influencers' activity was limited to the publication of content on social media, without any direct involvement in the conclusion of sales contracts.
With ruling no. 2615/2024 of 4 March 2024, the Court of Rome established that the affiliate marketing relationship between influencers and companies can effectively be considered an agency relationship pursuant to Article 1742 of the Civil Code.
This happens when the influencer promotes products through social media and websites., using a personalized discount code which allows you to track orders and calculate the commission on purchases And It presents characteristics of stability and continuity, thanks to a permanent contract and the regular issuing of invoices. Furthermore, the “zone” of operation has been interpreted as the community of followers, comparable to the typical territorial area of agency contracts.
Following this interpretation, the company was ordered to pay social security contributions and sums due to the Termination Compensation Fund (FIRR), in addition to penalties for failure to pay such amounts in a timely manner.
The ruling of the Rome Tribunal is for the moment isolated, but it is not possible to exclude that the orientation illustrated will be followed in jurisprudence.
