Manchester City found guilty of financial rule breaches; sanctions still to be decided

Manchester City was found guilty by an independent Premier League commission of serious financial rule breaches covering nine seasons, the league announced on 29 September. The finding could bring sporting or financial sanctions, but none has been decided. City maintains its innocence and says it will pursue an appeal.

The Premier League said the commission upheld all charges concerning the club’s financial rules and most charges concerning its failure to cooperate with the league’s investigation. The findings cover the 2009/10 to 2017/18 seasons. They are a regulatory decision that City can challenge, rather than a final answer on what penalty, if any, the club will face after the remaining proceedings.

What the commission found about City’s finances

According to the Premier League’s account of the findings, City arranged what the commission called ‘sham’ contracts with commercial partners and relied on other such agreements. The league said the arrangements misrepresented who was paying sponsorship fees: the partners paid only part, while the club’s owner at the time, Abu Dhabi United Group Investment & Development Ltd, funded the rest.

The league said other arrangements funded by the owner allowed City to record lower operating expenses than it actually incurred. These included an arrangement involving Fordham, which bought players’ image rights. Taken together, the commission found, the schemes inflated revenue and reduced costs by more than £900 million across the affected period. That figure describes the commission’s finding about the accounts; it is not an announced fine or sanction.

What the commission found about cooperation

The Premier League said three of four alleged breaches of City’s duties to cooperate and act in utmost good faith were upheld. It quoted the commission as finding that the club had made ‘concerted efforts to stop and frustrate’ the league’s investigation. The rejected allegation matters: the league’s account does not say every cooperation charge was proved.

The investigation began in December 2018, the league said, and a formal complaint followed in February 2023. A 42-day commission hearing ended in December 2024. Explaining the time taken to issue its decision, the commission said it had faced about 7,000 pages of witness and expert transcripts alongside detailed submissions from the parties. It called the delay regrettable.

Manchester City’s response and appeal deadline

City said it was ‘disappointed and surprised’ by the commission’s opinion, according to The Independent’s report of the club’s statement. The club said it was innocent of the accusations and argued that the decision contained material errors of law, principle and fact. It said it would pursue the appeal avenues available to it.

The Premier League says City has until Friday 2 October to appeal the findings. An appeal has not yet been resolved, and the league’s description of the decision as a ‘final award’ means that its redacted core findings can be published under league rules. It does not remove City’s right to challenge them. The league says the remaining process, including any appeal, should be concluded as soon as possible.

How a sanction would be decided

A further hearing before the independent commission will address sanction separately, the Premier League said. Its rules give commissions discretion and list fines, points deductions and other sporting sanctions among the possibilities. The list does not establish which, if any, will apply to City. The hearing will be private, and its outcome will remain confidential until publication is permitted under the rules.

Premier League chief executive Richard Masters called the case and decision the most significant in the league’s history, while acknowledging that sanction and other elements remain undecided. The uncertainty affects how City and other clubs assess the competition, but the available decision does not establish a points deduction, relegation or expulsion. Nor does the league’s statement announce any criminal investigation.

The league has published a redacted account of the commission’s core findings and says further material remains confidential. That limits what readers can assess about the full reasoning from the published statement alone. For now, the established position is a finding of financial rule breaches, a club that disputes it, an appeal deadline and a separate sanctions process still to come.