The Premier League planned to implement a new financial regulatory system to replace the current Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR).
Unfortunately, according to The Times, they face uncertainty due to ongoing legal challenges from Manchester City and the Professional Footballers’ Association (PFA).
Clubs were expected to decide on a successor to PSR at a shareholders’ meeting on Thursday.
However, Man City’s twin legal actions against Associated Party Transaction (APT) regulations can throw a spanner in the works. Any formal vote may be premature.
The Premier League’s PSR framework limits clubs to losses of £105 million over three years.
The system has been heavily criticised, especially after Everton and Nottingham Forest faced points deductions last season while other clubs spent recklessly.
With PSR set to expire at the end of the 2024/25 season, there are talks to replace it with a Squad Cost Rule (SCR), capping player wages, transfer fees and agent payments at 85 percent of a club’s revenue.
Another proposal is an anchoring scheme. This would tie spending on player costs to five times the revenue of the lowest-earning club in the league.
However, Man City and Manchester United oppose this.
Man City took legal action against the Premier League after they rejected a lucrative sponsorship deal with Etihad.
The club has several sponsorship deals with Abu Dhabi-linked companies. City are owned by the City Football Group (CFG), a holding company with the majority stake owned by the Abu Dhabi United Group.
Abu Dhabi companies funnel large amounts of money into City, and the APT rules were designed to curb them. However, City refuse to allow the Premier League to have its own way.
A three-judge panel declared aspects of these APT rules unlawful in October, but City launched another case challenging subsequent amendments made in November.
Meanwhile, the Professional Footballers’ Association has entered the fray, accusing the Premier League of sidelining them in discussions over the new financial framework.
They have threatened legal action, claiming the league has failed to consult them on player-related financial changes, violating existing agreements.
Premier League chief executive Richard Masters refuted their claims.
