Football Referees Are Not Employees: What the Latest PGMOL IR35 Decision Means for Businesses and Contractors

The long-running dispute between HMRC and Professional Game Match Officials Limited over the employment status of part-time football referees has reached another significant milestone — and HMRC has lost again.

In Professional Game Match Officials Ltd v HMRC [2026] UKFTT 654 (TC), the First-tier Tribunal held that the referees engaged by PGMOL were not employees for tax purposes, dealing a significant blow to HMRC's attempt to recover £584,000 in unpaid employment taxes. This is despite the Supreme Court previously confirming that sufficient mutuality of obligation and control existed to satisfy the first two limbs of the well-known Ready Mixed Concrete ("RMC") test.

The case is highly relevant for businesses, contractors, consultants and advisers dealing with:

• IR35/off-payroll working issues.
• Employment status disputes.
• Freelance and contractor arrangements.
• Sports, media and entertainment engagements.
• Professional services and consultancy structures.

The decision is another reminder that employment status remains a multifactorial assessment, and that the existence of some employment-type factors does not automatically create a contract of employment.

Background to the PGMOL Case

HM Revenue & Customs argued that referees engaged by PGMOL should be treated as employees for tax purposes.

The dispute centred on whether the individual match appointments between PGMOL and referees constituted contracts of employment under the traditional Ready Mixed Concrete test.

The Supreme Court had previously ruled that:

• there was sufficient mutuality of obligation; and
• there was sufficient control,

to move the analysis to the third stage of the employment status test.

The case was therefore remitted to the First-tier Tribunal to undertake the wider multifactorial assessment and determine whether, viewed overall, the relationships were contracts of employment.

The Tribunal's Decision

The First-tier Tribunal ultimately concluded that the referees were not employees.

Although some factors pointed towards employment, the tribunal considered that the overall legal and factual picture did not demonstrate the hallmarks of employment.

Mutuality of Obligation – "Suffused with Choice"

One of the most interesting aspects of the judgment is the tribunal's analysis of the quality and nature of mutuality.

The tribunal accepted that a basic wage/work bargain existed during individual appointments. However, it found that obligations between PGMOL and its referees were "narrow, short-lived and suffused with choice" — a phrase that will become central to future employment status arguments.

Importantly, the tribunal noted:

• referees could decline appointments;
• that right was routinely exercised;
• referees could withdraw after accepting appointments without sanction;
• there was no ongoing retainer between matches; and
• the work was not economically significant to many referees.

The tribunal therefore distinguished between the minimum mutuality required to create a contract and the much stronger reciprocal obligations usually associated with employment relationships.

This distinction will be highly relevant in future IR35 and employment status disputes.

Control Was Regulatory Rather Than Managerial

The tribunal also analysed the degree and nature of PGMOL's control.

While PGMOL imposed extensive standards regarding:

• conduct;
• fitness;
• assessments;
• coaching; and
• performance review,

the tribunal held that this type of oversight was primarily regulatory, developmental and gatekeeping, rather than the type of day-to-day managerial supervision normally associated with employment.

The tribunal placed particular emphasis on the fact that referees retained complete autonomy while officiating matches and that PGMOL had limited ability to direct how duties were actually performed during engagements.

This again highlights an important employment status principle in that significant control alone does not automatically create employment, if the wider context points away from an employment relationship.

Other Factors Considered by the Tribunal

The tribunal also considered several other important employment status indicators, including:

Economic Dependency

The referees were not economically dependent on PGMOL in the same way as traditional employees. In almost all cases, refereeing was a secondary activity — referees were economically anchored elsewhere.

Regularity of Work

Although work was regular, there was no enforceable obligation for future engagements.

Length of Relationship

Long-standing relationships arose because of ability and performance rather than contractual commitment.

Integration

The tribunal drew an important distinction between "operational involvement" and "organisational integration". While referees were operationally embedded within PGMOL's systems, their professional identity, authority and accreditation derived from the FA. Working regularly within an engager's systems does not, of itself, equate to being integrated into the engager's undertaking as an employee.

Why This Case Matters for IR35 and Off-Payroll Working

This decision will be welcomed by many businesses and contractors dealing with IR35 and employment status issues.

The case reinforces several important principles:

• employment status remains highly fact specific;
• no single factor is determinative;
• mutuality and control must be considered qualitatively, not simply mechanically;
• regulatory oversight does not necessarily amount to employment-style control; and
• the overall contractual and practical reality remains critical.

The judgment may prove particularly useful in sectors where individuals operate with significant autonomy despite working within structured frameworks, including:

• consultancy;
• financial services;
• sport and media;
• IT contracting;
• legal consultancy; and
• professional services.

The CEST Tool: Is It Still Reliable?

Perhaps the most significant practical takeaway from this case concerns HMRC's own Check Employment Status for Tax (CEST) tool, which thousands of businesses use to determine how to tax workers under the off-payroll working rules.

The PGMOL ruling exposes a potential flaw in CEST: the tool effectively treats the presence of mutuality of obligation plus control as sufficient to indicate employment. But this case demonstrates that the nature and quality of those obligations is critical — a narrow, short-lived and choice-filled arrangement is fundamentally different from the reciprocal obligations of a true employment relationship.

CEST does not adequately grapple with this nuance. Businesses that have relied solely on CEST to determine worker status — particularly in sectors like sports, media, IT contracting and professional services — should consider whether their conclusions remain reliable in light of this ruling.

It remains to be seen whether HMRC will revise how CEST operates following this decision.

What Businesses Should Be Doing Now

Businesses engaging contractors or consultants should ensure that:

• contracts accurately reflect the practical reality of engagements;
• there is genuine autonomy and flexibility where appropriate;
• workers are free to decline and withdraw from appointments without penalty;
• control mechanisms are regulatory or quality-assuring rather than managerial;
• substitution and project-based features are properly documented;
• working practices remain consistent with contractual terms; and
• IR35 and employment status reviews are undertaken regularly, without relying solely on CEST.

Many disputes arise because contractual documentation and practical reality diverge over time.

How Newshams Tax Advisers Can Help

At Newshams Tax Advisers, we advise businesses, contractors, consultants and professional firms on complex:

• IR35 and off-payroll working issues;
• employment status disputes;
• HMRC enquiries and investigations;
• consultancy structuring;
• contractor engagements; and
• employment tax matters.

We provide commercially focused and practical advice designed to minimise risk while supporting operational flexibility.

Confused about how the PGMOL ruling affects your IR35 position?

Whether you are dealing with a complex employment matter or need a forensic review of your current contracts, our experts are here to help.

Contact Newshams Tax Advisers today for a specialist consultation on IR35 and employment tax matters.

---

Case Reference: Professional Game Match Officials Ltd v HMRC [2026] UKFTT 654 (TC) (1 May 2026).