The Premier League defeated Manchester City and Aston Villa in the bitter sponsorship vote battle after only Newcastle United and Nottingham Forest joined their rebellion.
Clubs voted 16 in favour and four against to pass three amendments to associated-party transactions, proposed in response to City’s landmark arbitration over the summer.
It is a bruising defeat for City and Villa, who had both written to rivals in recent days urging them to vote against changes, with the champions saying APTs remain “void”.
City, also locked in an ongoing hearing over the so-called “115 case” brought by the league, had warned ahead of the meeting that legal options would be considered if the vote passed.
However, rival clubs approved changes – most notably that shareholder loans will no longer be excluded from the rules – within minutes of arriving at a shareholder meeting in central London.
Chelsea and Everton, key targets in City and Villa’s attempts to win allies, backed the league despite previously voting against APT changes in February.
Discussions previously appeared to be on a knife-edge but Telegraph Sport reported on Thursday how those backing the league were confident they had the numbers.
The league will now hope to draw a line under a costly legal row that has divided the competition. City, however, have previously warned of more potential action, having declared the rules “void” following the conclusions of a tribunal they brought over the summer.
Three elements of the existing APTs will now be amended, subject to FA approval:
-
Shareholder loans will be subject to fair market value tests
-
Phrasing in Premier League rules will be softened from “would” or “could” relating to the tests
-
A database of “benchmarked” commercial deals will now be made available to clubs at an earlier stage in the scrutiny process
The Premier League confirmed in a statement clubs had “approved changes” after consultation in recent weeks. “The Premier League has conducted a detailed consultation with clubs – informed by multiple opinions from expert, independent Leading Counsel – to draft rule changes that address amendments required to the system,” the league added.
“This relates to integrating the assessment of Shareholder loans, the removal of some of the amendments made to APT rules earlier this year and changes to the process by which relevant information from the League’s ‘databank’ is shared with a club’s advisers.
“The purpose of the APT rules is to ensure clubs are not able to benefit from commercial deals or reductions in costs that are not at Fair Market Value (FMV) by virtue of relationships with Associated Parties. These rules were introduced to provide a robust mechanism to safeguard the financial stability, integrity and competitive balance of the League.”
Following intense club-to-club lobbying in recent days, senior Premier League figures expressed concerns about the precedent of allowing a club too much influence in shaping the way forward.
A source said the logic of approving the changes was clear following the tribunal’s ruling into City’s legal challenge and that any delay – or eventual non-approval – risked handing control away from a majority of clubs.
There is also a feeling that financial controls, as implemented by the PSR and APT rules, have never been more crucial in ensuring that the league retains a competitive balance.
Some even believe that the entire future of the Premier League is at stake and that there will be major ramifications for the entire pyramid if there are no controls on spending at the top.
An independent panel’s judgment, published last month, found two aspects of APT rules were unlawful. The league maintained “discrete elements” of its rules could “quickly and effectively be remedied”, but City claimed APT laws introduced in 2021 are “discriminatory and distortive”.
Clubs siding with the league on Friday maintained minor amendments were a proportionate response to the 175-page ruling last month. All Premier League amendments require the consent of the FA Board, but clubs have approved plans to ensure “appropriate parity between the treatment of shareholder loans and other APTs going forward, with transitional rules clarifying the treatment of existing shareholder loans within that framework”.
The rules will only apply from now on, ensuring 13 clubs who have used shareholder loans in recent years do not immediately face the threat of spending breach charges.
City, who wanted the entire vote postponed, are understood to believe any amendment on shareholder loans should be applied retrospectively in line with other APT rules introduced in 2021.
The Premier League, City and Villa had all written to the clubs in advance of the meeting. Nassef Sawiris, the Villa co-owner, also warned in a statement to Telegraph Sport that Friday’s vote should be postponed until February to allow the league to present a “united front”.
The league has been consulting for more than a month with clubs on changes to its rules on APTs. Those regulations, in place since 2021, effectively involve fair-market-value tests being applied to any sponsorship or transfer deals struck where a club owner may have financial interest on both sides of the deal. City have voted against APTs throughout, including when proposals to integrate shareholder loans into the rules were first raised.
Later at the Premier League meeting, the clubs were told that overall income for the competition is set to increase 17 per cent. Total broadcast and commercial income of £10.5bn in the current cycle of three years will rise to £12.25bn between 2025 and 2028. It follows the agreement of an undisclosed new overseas TV deal to be announced by the league within weeks.
