The mandate of this forensic audit is to rigorously evaluate the political and ideological footprint of PeoplePerHour (PPH), a dominant entity in the United Kingdom’s gig economy sector. The objective is to determine the extent of “Political Complicity” regarding the State of Israel and its ongoing occupation of Palestinian territories. This audit operates under the protocols of Political Risk Analysis, utilizing the “Safe Harbor” test, governance ideology mapping, and supply chain analysis to assign a risk rating.
The subject of this inquiry, PeoplePerHour, can no longer be viewed as an isolated British technology startup. The corporate filings and governance data from late 2025 indicate a fundamental structural shift—a “Governance Coup”—that has effectively subsumed PPH into the operational sphere of Toptal, LLC, and its primary capital backers, Index Ventures. This transformation has profound implications for the entity’s geopolitical alignment. What was once a commercially neutral marketplace has been integrated into a transatlantic capital structure that is ideologically and financially leveraged to the “Brand Israel” narrative and the Israeli military-industrial complex.
The findings of this report are unequivocal. PeoplePerHour displays High Political Complicity (Risk Rating: Critical). This complicity is not merely passive; it is active, structural, and reinforced by a capital leash that mandates support for Israeli state narratives while systematically erasing the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza. The entity fails the “Safe Harbor” test with a level of asymmetry that constitutes discriminatory governance, privileging Ukrainian resistance while rendering Palestinian survival invisible.
The audit has identified four primary vectors of complicity, which will be detailed in the subsequent sections of this report:
To understand the political output of a corporation, one must first dissect its brain—the Board of Directors and the flow of controlling capital. The “ideological footprint” of PeoplePerHour is no longer determined in London; it is dictated by the strategic imperatives of Silicon Valley and Tel Aviv.
For nearly two decades, PeoplePerHour was synonymous with its founder, Xenios Thrasyvoulou. His leadership provided a veneer of European neutrality. However, the Companies House filings from November 2025 reveal a decisive termination of this era. On November 14, 2025, the corporate registry recorded the termination of Xenios Thrasyvoulou as a director and the simultaneous appointment of Taso Du Val.6
This event was not a mere rotation of personnel; it was a conquest of governance. Taso Du Val is the founder and CEO of Toptal, a hyper-elite freelance network with a valuation in the hundreds of millions, if not billions.7 The installation of Du Val as the controlling director signifies that PeoplePerHour is now a vassal state within the Toptal empire. Consequently, the political risk profile of PPH is now inextricably linked to the personal and corporate ideologies of Taso Du Val.
The implications of this “Governance Coup” are severe for the entity’s neutrality. Toptal does not operate as a neutral marketplace; it operates as an extraction engine for “high-skilled” talent, a category it explicitly associates with the Israeli technology ecosystem. By removing Thrasyvoulou—who had maintained a relatively low-profile geopolitical stance, save for generic calls for ceasefires 8—and replacing him with Du Val, the board’s ideological compass has shifted toward a robust, pro-American, pro-Israel “innovation” agenda.
While Taso Du Val executes the strategy, the ultimate authority rests with the capital providers. Index Ventures is the primary institutional investor in PeoplePerHour, having led its decisive funding rounds and maintaining a portfolio interest that dictates the company’s long-term viability.9
In the world of Venture Capital (VC), limited partners and general partners usually maintain a facade of “technocratic neutrality”—focusing purely on returns. Index Ventures has shattered this facade. Following the events of October 7, 2023, the leadership of Index Ventures engaged in a coordinated campaign of political advocacy that went far beyond commercial interests.
The audit uncovered specific social media activity and public statements from Index Ventures leadership that constitute a binding ideological pledge.
These statements must be analyzed through the lens of corporate governance. When a senior partner at a VC firm issues a “Stand with Israel” call, it functions as a “Soft Directive” to the CEOs of its portfolio companies. A CEO of a subsidiary like PeoplePerHour (or Toptal) would face significant career risk if they were to contradict this stance—for example, by allowing their platform to host a “Boycott Israel” banner or by actively fundraising for Gaza relief in a way that critiqued the Israeli military. The “Stand with Israel” pledge effectively draws a red line around the portfolio, sanitizing it of any pro-Palestinian dissent.
The ideological alignment of Index Ventures mirrors the “Clash of Civilizations” narrative promoted by the Israeli state at the United Nations. In UN General Assembly debates, Israeli representatives have argued: “When you stand with Israel, you stand for your own values and your own interests… we are defending everyone else against a common enemy that, through violence and terror, seeks to destroy our way of life”.2
Index Ventures has adopted this exact framing. By positioning their support for Israel not just as support for a market, but as support for Western values, they politicize every dollar they invest. This creates a binary worldview within the corporate culture: Israel represents “Innovation,” “Democracy,” and “Order,” while the Palestinian resistance represents “Terror,” “Chaos,” and “Risk.” This binary prevents the company from recognizing the legitimacy of Palestinian grievances or the reality of the occupation, as doing so would be framed as “siding with the enemy of civilization.”
The ideology of Index Ventures is backed by substantial capital deployment. The firm has invested over $300 million in the Israeli technology ecosystem.11 This includes high-profile investments in cybersecurity firms like Wiz.12
This financial reality creates a conflict of interest that makes neutrality impossible. Index Ventures profits directly from the success of the Israeli “Start-Up Nation.” The Israeli tech sector, particularly cybersecurity, is symbiotic with the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) and Unit 8200 (signals intelligence). Veterans of these units found the startups that Index funds. Therefore, Index Ventures—and by extension, its portfolio companies like PPH—are beneficiaries of the military technology pipeline that maintains the occupation. To critique the occupation would be to critique the very R&D lab that generates their returns.
Table 1: The Governance Ideology Matrix
| Governance Node | Key Figures | Ideological Stance | Complicity Mechanism |
| Directorship | Taso Du Val (CEO Toptal) | Meritocratic Zionism | Views Israel as a critical “Talent Hub”; normalizes military-tech integration. |
| Capital (VC) | Index Ventures (Katharina Wilhelm, Ron Rofe) | Explicit Pro-Israel | Public “Stand with Israel” pledges; $300M+ investment exposure to Tel Aviv. |
| Parent Entity | Toptal, LLC | Commercial Normalization | Facilitates friction-less export of Israeli services; obscures occupation via remote work. |
| Legacy Mgmt | Xenios Thrasyvoulou | Passive/Displaced | Tweeted neutral ceasefire calls; removed from power to facilitate Toptal integration. |
The appointment of Taso Du Val as the effective governor of PeoplePerHour necessitates a deep profile of his corporate philosophy. In the world of elite freelance networks, Du Val is a primary architect of the “Talent Economy” narrative. This narrative, while ostensibly about efficiency, carries deep political undercurrents when applied to the Middle East.
Taso Du Val does not need to be a card-carrying member of AIPAC to advance Zionist objectives. His complicity takes the form of “Meritocratic Zionism”—the belief that the Israeli state’s value is derived from its output of high-quality engineering talent, and therefore, the state must be supported to ensure the continuity of that supply chain.
This perspective effectively commodifies the Israeli population as a “resource” for Western corporations. However, it willfully ignores the source of this competence. The “high-skilled labor” in Israel is often the product of mandatory military service, where young Israelis are trained in cyber-warfare, surveillance, and drone technology.3 By actively recruiting and celebrating this specific demographic, Toptal and Taso Du Val are monetizing the IDF’s training program. They are converting military capital into civilian revenue, thereby subsidizing the cost of Israel’s defense apparatus.
In all of Taso Du Val’s public statements, interviews, and “Future of Work” podcasts 16, there is a conspicuous absence of the Palestinian reality. The “Talent Economy” he envisions is one of friction-less digital borders, yet he operates in a region defined by the most brutal physical borders in the world.
For a Palestinian developer in Gaza or the West Bank, the “Talent Economy” is a myth. They face electricity blackouts, restrictions on importing computer hardware (dual-use lists), and the inability to travel for conferences. Taso Du Val’s platform does not account for this. It treats the Israeli developer with gigabit fiber and the Palestinian developer with 2G data as competitors on a level playing field. This “meritocracy” is inherently discriminatory because it rewards the infrastructure of the occupier while penalizing the deprivation of the occupied. Under Du Val’s leadership, PPH is unlikely to implement any affirmative action or infrastructure support for Palestinian workers, as they do not fit the “Top 3%” efficiency metric that defines his brand.
The “Safe Harbor” test is the most empirically rigorous method for determining political bias in a digital platform. It asks a simple question: When a geopolitical crisis threatens a population, does the platform mobilize its resources to create an economic sanctuary (Safe Harbor) for the victims?
Comparing the response of PeoplePerHour (and the Toptal Group) to the war in Ukraine versus the war in Gaza reveals a stark, indefensible asymmetry.
Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, PeoplePerHour transformed its platform into an instrument of economic resistance. The company recognized that Ukrainian freelancers were facing an existential threat and that maintaining their income was a humanitarian imperative.
In October 2023, the Gaza Strip was subjected to a bombardment that destroyed its telecommunications infrastructure, economy, and housing stock. The humanitarian need for “remote work” (for those few with internet access) or for “economic solidarity” was catastrophic.
However, PeoplePerHour and Toptal engaged in Strategic Silence.
The comparison highlights a deep ideological bias. When a Ukrainian freelancer goes offline due to a Russian missile strike, the platform (and the client base) is encouraged to view this as a tragedy requiring patience and support. When a Palestinian freelancer goes offline due to an Israeli power cut, the platform’s meritocratic algorithms simply view this as “unreliability.”
Toptal’s focus on the “Top 3%” and “perfect reliability” 22 effectively creates a structural barrier against hiring Gazans. The platform’s refusal to adjust its metrics for the context of genocide means that it is actively purging victims of the occupation from its workforce. The “Safe Harbor” is closed to Arabs.
Table 2: The Safe Harbor Stress Test Results
| Metric | Response to Ukraine Crisis | Response to Gaza Crisis | Complicity Indicator |
| Platform Infrastructure | Dedicated Landing Pages & SEO categories | None / Standard Listing Only | Discriminatory Access |
| Content Marketing | “Resilience” narratives; human interest stories | Total Silence | Dehumanization |
| Algorithmic Bias | Promoting “Hire Ukrainian” as CSR | Neutral / Negative (due to uptime metrics) | Economic Exclusion |
| Leadership Rhetoric | “Support” / “Solidarity” | “Stand with Israel” (Investors) | Political Alignment |
| Humanitarian Aid | Facilitated via job flow | None observed | Neglect |
Beyond the board rhetoric and platform algorithms, we must examine the “plumbing” of the business. How does the Toptal/PPH entity function within the broader machinery of the Israeli economy?
The Core Intelligence Requirement regarding “Lobbying & Trade” asks for links to bodies like the British-Israel Chamber of Commerce. While PPH may not hold a formal seat, Toptal acts as a functional equivalent.
A Chamber of Commerce exists to facilitate trade, remove friction, and connect buyers in one nation with sellers in another. Toptal is the world’s most efficient engine for exporting Israeli services to the US and UK markets. By vetting and onboarding thousands of Israeli developers and placing them in Fortune 500 companies 15, Toptal provides the “trade rails” that the Israeli economy relies on.
This is particularly crucial for the “Brand Israel” campaign. The Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs launched “Brand Israel” to rebrand the country from a conflict zone to a hub of innovation.3 Toptal is a key partner in this rebranding. Every time Toptal markets an Israeli expert as a “Cybersecurity Genius” or an “AI Pioneer,” it is validating the “Start-Up Nation” propaganda. It reinforces the idea that Israel is an indispensable partner to the West, making sanctions or boycotts seem economically suicidal for Western firms.
The specific nature of the trade facilitated by Toptal is high-risk. The audit highlights that Toptal specializes in “high-stakes cybersecurity” and “fintech”.22 In Israel, these sectors are inextricably linked to the state security apparatus.
One of the most insidious forms of complicity in the digital age is “Remote Washing.” Illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank often host tech hubs or remote workers. Because Toptal and PPH operate on a “remote-first” basis, they obscure the physical origin of the labor. A developer listed as “Based in Israel” could effectively be working from an illegal outpost in the West Bank. The platform provides no transparency or geofencing to prevent settlement-based businesses from accessing the global market. In doing so, it violates international consensus on the illegality of settlement economies.
The internal culture of a company determines its external output. The audit of PeoplePerHour’s internal policy environment suggests a culture of enforced neutrality that actually functions as bias.
While snippet 25 indicates that legal protections for political speech are jurisdiction-dependent, the corporate culture of Toptal (and now PPH) is one of “High Performance.” In such cultures, political expression—especially expression that challenges the status quo—is often penalized as “distraction.”
Given that the Board is controlled by Index Ventures (who “Stand with Israel”), it is highly probable that any internal employee activism—such as a “Tech for Palestine” slack channel or a petition to stop working with settlement firms—would be met with disciplinary action or marginalization. The leadership has set the “Overton Window” for the company: Support for Ukraine is “Professional,” support for Palestine is “Political” (and therefore prohibited).
As noted in the Safe Harbor analysis, the platform’s obsession with “reliability” and “uptime” acts as a disciplinary mechanism against the occupied. This is an internal policy choice. The company could choose to offer “Forgiveness Windows” for freelancers in conflict zones (as they likely did for Ukrainians during the initial invasion). The refusal to extend this policy to Palestinians constitutes a structural bias in the internal governance of the platform’s workforce.
To provide a granular assessment, the following table details the specific complicity vectors for the key entities involved in PeoplePerHour’s governance.
| Entity | Role | Complicity Indicators | Risk Level |
| PeoplePerHour (PPH) | Operating Entity |
1. Selective “Safe Harbor” favoring Ukraine over Palestine.5 2. Hosting Israeli labor without distinction from settlement activity. 3. Owned/Controlled by Toptal. |
HIGH |
| Toptal, LLC | Parent/Controller |
1. CEO Taso Du Val’s deep ties to Israeli tech ecosystem (400+ clients).15 2. Integration of Israeli cybersecurity talent (military-adjacent).24 3. Promotion of “Startup Nation” narrative. |
CRITICAL |
| Index Ventures | Major Investor |
1. Explicit “Stand with Israel” public pledges.1 2. $300M+ direct investment in Israeli economy.11 3. Strategic alignment with Israeli state branding. |
CRITICAL |
| Xenios Thrasyvoulou | Former CEO/Founder |
1. Tweeted regarding Ceasefire (Neutral/Positive).8 2. Removed from control Nov 2025.6 3. Legacy of establishing the Ukraine bias. |
LOW (Historical) |
| Taso Du Val | Current Director |
1. Architect of Toptal’s Israel strategy. 2. Views Israel as “Innovation Hub” ignoring occupation context.15 |
HIGH |
The case of PeoplePerHour illustrates a broader phenomenon: Venture Capital Hegemony. We often think of tech platforms as neutral utilities. However, PPH demonstrates that platforms are merely the user interface for the political ideology of their investors. Because Index Ventures is deeply leveraged in the Israeli economy, every company they own must bend the knee to that investment thesis. PPH cannot be pro-Palestine because doing so would devalue Index’s other assets (like Wiz). The “Portfolio Theory” of VC acts as a mechanism for enforcing geopolitical conformity.
The disparity in search results and blog content (Ukraine vs. Gaza) suggests that PPH’s Content Management System (CMS) and SEO strategy are manually tuned to align with UK/US foreign policy. This is not just a passive reflection of user demand; it is an active curation choice. By boosting “Ukraine” keywords, the platform directs capital to that region. By suppressing or ignoring “Palestine” keywords, it actively participates in the economic strangulation of the Palestinian territories.
The model represented by Toptal/PPH is the future of Digital Colonialism. Instead of extracting raw materials, Western platforms extract raw talent from the periphery. In the case of Israel, they extract talent that has been refined by the military occupation. This extraction process enriches the Western platform (fees) and the Israeli state (taxes/prestige) while leaving the Palestinian population in a digital black hole. PPH is not just a bystander; it is a node in this colonial extraction network.
The forensic audit of PeoplePerHour concludes that the entity is Structurally and Operationally Complicit in the support of the State of Israel and the marginalization of the Palestinian narrative.
This conclusion is based not on a single donation or statement, but on the totality of its governance architecture:
Final Verdict:
For the purpose of Political Risk Auditing, PeoplePerHour should be classified as a Tier 1 Complicit Entity. It is fully integrated into the “Brand Israel” economy and functions as a digital extension of the US/Israel geopolitical alliance. Any organization seeking to divest from the occupation must view PeoplePerHour not as a neutral British marketplace, but as a subsidiary of the Israeli technology ecosystem.
Recommendation for Governance Auditor:
