FA weighs response after Manchester City financial verdict appeal

The Football Association is considering the implications of the verdict against Manchester City in the Premier League’s financial case, saying the decision has significant consequences for football’s integrity. The FA said it was studying the independent commission’s findings and would act where appropriate. It added that the proceedings between the Premier League and City remained ongoing and declined to comment further on the case itself.

City confirmed that it had lodged an appeal against findings that the club breached Premier League financial regulations between the 2009-10 and 2017-18 seasons. The club said the ruling contained material errors of law, principle and fact and maintained that it had submitted extensive evidence supporting its position. The independent panel found City guilty of all the charges relating to the alleged breaches.

The Premier League says the club systematically broke its rules for almost a decade. The commission also found that City used arrangements described as “sham contracts” to disguise more than £830m in secret funding and to conceal the true scale of certain liabilities. City’s expected appeal arguments may include claims that important sponsorships were funded by the Abu Dhabi government rather than the club’s owners.

However, the supplied material notes that Etihad Airways told US authorities in 2015 that it funded its sponsorship from its own liquidity and denied receiving government subsidies. The case has also drawn attention from UK parliamentary committees. One committee asked whether HM Revenue and Customs had requested redacted documents from the commission’s report.

A separate committee called for stronger corporate-accounting enforcement, saying compliant clubs needed confidence that rules were fairly applied. The appeal will be heard privately by a new three-member independent commission. Regulations provide for a hearing to conclude within 12 weeks and a decision within 30 days, although that timetable can be extended.

Previous practice suggests sanctions may be delayed until the appeal is decided, though that is not guaranteed. A further appeal could follow if penalties are imposed.