Premier League commission finds Manchester City inflated its books by more than £900 million

An independent commission has found Manchester City guilty of serious breaches of Premier League financial rules across nine seasons, from 2009/10 to 2017/18. The league said the club arranged sham contracts with commercial partners, and relied on sham agreements with others, to inflate revenue and cut reported costs by more than £900 million. Sanctions have not been set. A further hearing will decide them. City has until Friday 2 October to appeal the findings.

The Premier League published the result on 29 September, after The Athletic reported the outcome on the preceding Friday. The commission upheld every charge tied to the financial breaches and three of the four charges tied to a failure to cooperate. The league's statement said the purpose of the schemes was to make the club look as if it met spending limits. The commission's line, quoted by the league, was that by its conduct the club clearly intended to circumvent the rules.

Where the £900 million sits

The Athletic, citing the commission, split the figure. Revenue was overstated by £855.2 million. Expenses were understated by £66.2 million. Together that is £921.4 million, which is the “more than £900 million” in the league statement. The same accounts were filed with auditors and with football regulators. The commission found the club was significantly in breach of both the Premier League's spending limits and UEFA's financial fair play rules over the period.

The seasons in question run from the year after Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan bought the club in 2008 through to 2017/18. City has won eight Premier League titles since that takeover. The charges do not, by themselves, strip any of those titles. Title consequences, points deductions, fines or other sporting penalties are what the later hearing is for. The commission has separated liability from sanction, which is why the club can appeal the verdict before anyone knows the cost.

What “sham” means in the finding

The league defined the contracts as documents that misrepresented the true agreement between the parties. In plain terms, the paperwork shown to the league and to auditors was not the deal that moved the money. The commission found the club concealed the true state of its finances. That is a different finding from a calculation error or an aggressive reading of a sponsorship. It is a finding that the filed numbers were built to clear a rule. The cooperation charges sit on top of that. During the investigation the club breached duties of cooperation and utmost good faith on three of the four counts the league brought. One cooperation count did not stand.

The process took almost two years. More than 100 charges were in the original case. The public statement does not list each one. It groups them: sham commercial deals, misstated accounts, breach of spending limits, and the cooperation failures. City has said, through the coverage of the verdict, that it will consider an appeal. The chairman has publicly kept his confidence in the club's position. The appeal window is short. Friday 2 October is the date the league gave.

What is still open

Two things are not decided. The first is whether an appeal panel will reopen the findings or only the procedure. The second is the sanction if the findings stand. A points deduction applied to a current season would change the title race now. A retrospective title strip would rewrite the table from 2009/10 onward and would land on clubs that finished behind City in those years. A fine would not. The commission has not signalled which way it leans. UEFA's own earlier cases against the club, which ended without a Champions League ban after a Court of Arbitration for Sport ruling, are a separate track. This commission was a Premier League body, and its finding of a UEFA breach is a description of the accounts, not a UEFA judgment.

Until Friday, the operative fact is the verdict and the clock. The books for nine seasons were found to have been inflated by more than £900 million, £855.2 million of it on the revenue side. The sporting price has not been named.