Premier League spending cap trialled in 24/25
A Premier League spending cap opposed by Villa and two other top-flight clubs will be trialled next season.
Watch more of our videos on ShotsTV.com
and on Freeview 262 or Freely 565
Clubs agreed at yesterday’s Premier League annual general meeting to test out top-to-bottom anchoring (TBA) on a non-binding basis, as well as squad cost rules (SCR) similar to those already introduced by Uefa at European level.
Villa, who voted against proceeding with a legal and economic analysis of anchoring back in April, were understood to be one of three clubs, along with Manchester City and Manchester United.
The system would cap a club’s spending on football costs such as player wages – regardless of how much revenue a club earns – as a multiple of the smallest central Premier League television and prize money allocation to be received by any club.
It is understood the multiple initially being trialled is five times that smallest allocation. So if Southampton earned £100million from central funds next season, the most any club could spend on football costs would be £500m.
The Premier League said the shadow trial would enable the league to fully evaluate the system and “complete its consultation with all relevant stakeholders”.
This will include the Professional Footballers’ Association, which has said it will oppose any measure which amounts to a hard salary cap. The union has enlisted leading sports barrister Nick De Marco to represent it in this matter, the man who helped the PFA force the withdrawal of an EFL salary cap introduced in 2020.
The Premier League said anchoring was “a pre-emptive measure to protect the competitive balance of the Premier League”.
“This protection is intended not to have an impact unless significant revenue divergence of clubs occurs,” its statement added.
Two votes to change PSR for next season were also rejected at yesterday’s meeting. The first motion – brought by Villa – sought to raise the maximum allowable losses over three years from £105m to £135m.
The second sought to allow clubs playing in Europe to claim as an allowable loss any difference between what they earned in Uefa coefficient payments and the amount received by the highest-earning English club.