The conclusion foregrounds the wider implications of the book’s empirical findings for scholars of international neoliberalism, political projects, and policy change, as well as those seeking to understand the long shadow cast by reforms to social security during the 1980s. It begins by making the case for ‘neoliberalism’ as a valid object of study, recognising that the term has its critics and limitations. It argues for several analytical strategies that, we believe, can yield a deeper, more complex understanding of neoliberalism and that begin to address the persistent separateness of economic, intellectual history, and governmentality literatures and the relative lack of detailed consideration of specific case studies of neoliberal governance and policymaking compared with intellectual histories. The conclusion then surveys the book’s key findings across the full life cycle of (attempted) policy change and highlights the implications of these for current understandings of the role neoliberal ideas played in late twentieth-century government and the different pathways along which they found political traction. The conclusion’s closing sections explore the ways in which our overarching empirical findings recast what we know about the Thatcher project and political change in the 1980s before considering how our case study of neoliberal policy change in pensions might lead scholars to think differently about international neoliberalism, its interactions with interest groups, its shifting policy forms, its differing roles in the policymaking process, and, ultimately, its policy legacy.