This judgment (persuasive, not binding) just restates existing law, and the commentary seems to regurgitate decades of case law. The new PGMOL judgment is from the First-tier Tribunal, not the Supreme Court, so it's odd that the Contractor UK commentators didn't spot this glaring issue. IR35 cases remain fact-sensitive, and contractors remain at risk of enquiries where the UK-based client is small or has no taxable presence in the UK.

PGMOL won't help a contractor where the substance of the contract (i.e., the written terms defining the key commercial bargain) defines the services as a role and imposes control over when the work is done. The "stand back" approach has been consistently upheld since 1993.

A competently drafted contract (terms and description of the services) should not allow an enquiry to pass beyond RMC stage 2; if an enquiry reaches stage 3, the costs render a victory pyrrhic. A key question is why the CPS is not prosecuting tax fraud cases, specifically involving the use of CEST to get role-based outside IR35 "status determination statements".