The Premier League is planning to introduce a spending cap for the 2025/26 season. A majority has already been found – but there is not complete unity on this issue. There is said to be headwind from Manchester in particular
The Premier League is continuing to work on the league structure. At a shareholders’ meeting in London on Monday, a spending cap was once again discussed. This is now to be put to the vote at the league’s annual general meeting in June.
This limit is intended to link the clubs’ expenditure to a certain percentage of their income. If the law had been in force last season, for example, the cap would have been £518 million – five times the £103.6 million that bottom club Southampton earned from centralized TV revenue.
According to English media reports, a majority has already been found in the Premier League. However, it is mainly clubs in the bottom half of the table that are in favor of this, as they are challenging the already fragile competitive balance of the league.
What is special about the proposed model is that it would be the first to link a club’s expenditure to the income of another club, whereas Financial Fair Play, for example, is based on a club’s own income. However, the spending cap would replace the current profitability and sustainability rules, which were responsible for the recent point deductions at Everton FC and Nottingham Forest.
Competitiveness of the Premier League “at risk”?
According to the BBC, only Manchester United, Manchester City and Aston Villa are said to have voted against the possible introduction of the spending cap on Monday. Chelsea FC also abstained. Man United, according to The Athletic, is primarily opposed to the proposal because it could potentially have a negative impact on the competitiveness of the Premier League.
The players’ union PFA is also critical of the proposal. A PFA spokesperson has already stated: “We will of course await further details on these specific proposals, but we have always made it clear that we would oppose any measure that would impose a hard cap on player salaries. “
