A new legal row could erupt between Manchester City and the Premier League if amendments to top-flight sponsorship rules are voted through today.
City warned last week against rushing through changes to rules on associated party transactions (APTs) after they challenged them on competition law grounds.
It was announced last month that an arbitration panel found aspects of the rules to be unlawful, and City argue that to make amendments ahead of further guidance being given by the panel leaves the rules open to further challenges.
However, the Premier League’s bosses are understood to be confident the changes are lawful after more than a month of consultation, and crucially believe the amendments will be accepted by a majority of clubs.
Club statement
— Manchester City (@ManCity) October 7, 2024
The PA news agency understands Wolves are set to support the league at Friday’s shareholders meeting in central London.
That is contrary to reports earlier this week that they were one of six clubs who could back City and therefore prevent the league reaching a 14-club majority in Friday’s key vote.
Sources close to the Black Country club were surprised to be listed as a potential backer of City, given they supported the Premier League when the four-in-a-row champions first launched its legal challenge against the APT rules earlier this year.
Everton are also reported to be preparing to vote with the Premier League. Sources close to the Merseyside club did not give PA a clear indication of which way they would vote but did say the club were supportive of anything which protects the integrity of the league.
City definitely have the public support of Aston Villa to vote for a postponement and PA understands Nottingham Forest will also join them.
Villa cited the risk of further legal costs to the league as one of their reasons for supporting a delay, with the league having told clubs in September that over £45m was spent on upholding its rules last season.
Both the Premier League and City are understood to have been contacting clubs this week to find out which way they intend to vote.
Chelsea, Leicester and Newcastle could also support City but that would still leave the champions falling just short of a big enough bloc to halt the Premier League’s plans.
The Times reported earlier this year that City’s original legal submission against the APT rules referenced the league’s voting structure, calling it a “tyranny of the majority”.
The Premier League has consulted its clubs for more than a month on APT rule changes since an arbitration tribunal found aspects of them unlawful following City’s challenge.
The league vowed to move “quickly and effectively” to remedy the unlawful elements but City accused the Premier League of “misleading” clubs in its interpretation of the tribunal findings and said all the rules should be considered “void”.
The APT rules assess whether commercial deals done between clubs and entities linked to their ownership represent fair market value (FMV).
The tribunal found it was unlawful to exclude shareholder loans from the rules, so these will now be added in if the amendments are passed.
The effective rate of interest charged on existing and future shareholder loans will be assessed for FMV, which would vary from club to club depending on factors such as a club’s credit score.
Clubs are set to be given a grace period of 50 days to convert such loans to equity if they wish.
Other amendments will be made to roll back changes to the APTs introduced in February. One involves replacing “would” with “could” in the wording of what constitutes FMV within the rules, which should have the effect of providing more wriggle room to clubs.
Clubs are also set to be given access to the databank used by the Premier League to determine FMV before a decision is made, rather than afterwards, if the amendments are approved.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here