Manchester City found guilty of all Premier League financial charges with sanctions still to be decided

On 29 September 2026, an independent commission found Manchester City guilty of all charges relating to serious financial breaches across nine seasons and upheld three of four groups of allegations concerning the club's failure to cooperate with the investigation and act in good faith. City reject the findings and will appeal.

  • Date: 29 September 2026
  • Competition: Premier League
  • Verdict: Guilty of all charges relating to serious financial breaches across nine seasons
  • Breaches: Sham arrangements with commercial partners inflated revenue and reduced costs by more than £900 million (2009/10 to 2017/18)
  • Cooperation: Three of four groups of allegations upheld — failure to cooperate and act in good faith
  • Next step: Separate sanctions process and appeal; no punishment confirmed

Manchester City have rejected the findings and indicated that they will appeal. No punishment had been confirmed when the decision was announced. A separate sanctions process must determine what consequences should follow, while the appeal could preserve, reduce or overturn the original findings. This means several outcomes remain possible, including combinations of different penalties.

What was Manchester City found guilty of?

The independent commission found that Manchester City used sham arrangements with commercial partners to inflate revenue and reduce reported costs between 2009/10 and 2017/18.

According to the Premier League's statement, owner-funded arrangements were presented as commercial sponsorship income, while other agreements helped the club record lower operating expenses than it had actually incurred. The commission concluded that these arrangements inflated revenue and reduced costs by more than £900 million.

The commission also found that City filed misstated accounts, concealed the true position from auditors and regulators, and would have breached Premier League and UEFA spending limits by a substantial amount if the relevant agreements had been reported accurately. Multiple failures to cooperate with the Premier League investigation were upheld as well.

Manchester City continue to dispute the findings and have said the decision contains material errors of law, principle and fact. The club's appeal therefore becomes the first major factor in determining the final outcome.

Outcome one: Manchester City win their appeal completely

The best possible result for Manchester City would be a complete victory on appeal.

Under this scenario, a new appeal commission would overturn the original findings and determine that the charges had not been proven to the required standard or that the original commission had made a sufficiently serious legal or procedural error.

If every significant finding were overturned, Manchester City could avoid a sporting sanction entirely. The club could also argue that its long-standing position had been vindicated.

However, a complete reversal would require the appeal panel to reject a substantial and detailed set of findings. The original commission found serious misconduct across multiple areas, including commercial arrangements, financial reporting, spending limits and cooperation. A total appeal victory is legally possible, but it represents only one end of the range of outcomes.

Outcome two: City win a partial appeal

A partial appeal may produce a more complicated result.

The appeal commission could overturn some findings while leaving others intact. It might decide that particular arrangements were not proven to be improper, that certain charges were duplicated or that aspects of the original reasoning were flawed. This could reduce the seriousness of the case without clearing Manchester City altogether.

A partial appeal may also affect the eventual punishment. If some of the most serious findings were overturned, City could argue that relegation, expulsion or an enormous points deduction would no longer be proportionate.

Alternatively, the appeal panel could leave the core financial findings intact but remove some cooperation breaches. That might reduce the penalty without fundamentally altering the conclusion that serious rule-breaking occurred.

Outcome three: the appeal fails and the findings stand

If Manchester City's appeal is dismissed, the original findings will remain in place.

The sanctions commission would then determine the appropriate punishment based on the seriousness, duration and effect of the breaches, as well as any mitigating arguments submitted by the club.

This outcome would leave Manchester City facing the widest range of penalties. The commission's findings cover systematic conduct over nearly a decade rather than one isolated accounting error, which could encourage the Premier League to seek an unprecedented sanction.

An unsuccessful appeal would not automatically determine what punishment City receive. It would, however, remove the club's main route for challenging the underlying findings within the Premier League process.

Outcome four: a formal reprimand or warning

At the least severe end of the scale, Manchester City could receive a reprimand.

A reprimand would place the club's wrongdoing formally on record but would not significantly affect its league position, finances or ability to compete.

This would be an extremely lenient response given the number and seriousness of the findings. Reprimands are more commonly associated with relatively limited breaches rather than systematic failures involving financial information and cooperation.

A warning could still form one part of a broader package, particularly in relation to individual charges. It is unlikely to represent the full punishment if the central findings survive the appeal.

Outcome five: a large fine

A financial penalty is one of the clearest options available to the independent commission.

Premier League rules allow a commission to impose a fine, and the amount does not have to follow a rigid published tariff in a case of this type.

Manchester City could therefore receive the largest financial penalty imposed on an English club. The commission may attempt to reflect the duration of the breaches, the financial advantage allegedly obtained and the club's failure to cooperate.

The main criticism of a fine-only outcome would be its practical impact. Manchester City are one of the wealthiest clubs in world football, meaning even a substantial payment might cause less competitive damage than a points deduction. A fine is consequently more likely to be combined with another penalty than used as the sole response.

Outcome six: a points deduction in 2026/27

A current-season points deduction is one of the most realistic sporting sanctions.

Premier League rules allow points already scored, or points still to be earned, to be deducted. The commission could therefore remove points from Manchester City's 2026/27 total once the sanctions process is completed.

The size of the deduction would determine its effect. A relatively modest penalty could remove City from the title race or prevent Champions League qualification. A much larger deduction could place the club in a relegation battle regardless of the results achieved on the pitch.

Because the findings concern numerous breaches over several years, the commission is not necessarily restricted to the types of deductions previously imposed for a single Profitability and Sustainability Rules breach.

Outcome seven: a points deduction that effectively relegates City

The commission could impose a deduction large enough to make relegation almost unavoidable.

This would differ technically from expulsion. Manchester City would remain a Premier League member for the season but could finish in the bottom three because of the points removed.

A deduction of this scale would represent an attempt to translate historic financial advantages into a major current sporting consequence.

The eventual division in which City would play could still produce further questions. Normal relegation would usually place the club in the Championship, but the precise relationship between the Premier League sanction and the football authorities beneath it could become legally and administratively complicated.

Reports following the verdict suggested that an unprecedented deduction capable of causing relegation was among the outcomes under consideration, although no official sanction has been confirmed.

Why the appeal is the hinge for every possible punishment

Manchester City have built their defence on material errors of law, principle and fact, and that argument now carries the entire case. If the appeal panel accepts even part of it, the sanctions commission's room for manoeuvre shrinks. The more findings that survive, the more severe the punishment can reasonably be argued to be.

The commission's findings describe conduct across nine seasons, from 2009/10 to 2017/18, involving sham commercial arrangements, misstated accounts and a failure to cooperate. That breadth is what separates this case from a single Profitability and Sustainability Rules breach and why the sanctions commission is not bound by previous points-deduction precedents.

A points deduction in 2026/27 would hit City where it hurts most: the current table. A modest deduction damages a title challenge or Champions League qualification. A larger one drags the club into a relegation fight. A fine alone would be absorbed by a club of City's wealth, which is why the commission is expected to combine penalties rather than rely on a single financial hit.

Talking points

  • A fine alone would be meaningless for a club of City's wealth. If the commission wants a real deterrent, it must attach a sporting penalty to any financial sanction.
  • The appeal is City's best route out. Overturning even a few cooperation findings would let them argue that relegation or expulsion is disproportionate to what remains.
  • A points deduction that relegates City would raise an administrative mess: would they drop into the Championship, and how would the Premier League's sanction interact with the EFL?
  • Three of four cooperation groups were upheld. That finding is harder to attack than the financial detail, and it strengthens the case for a severe sanction.

What happens next

Manchester City will pursue an appeal against the commission's findings. In parallel, the separate sanctions process must determine the punishment. The appeal commission's decision will directly shape whether the sanctions commission can impose a reprimand, a record fine, a 2026/27 points deduction, or a deduction large enough to relegate the club.

Frequently asked questions

What was Manchester City found guilty of?

Manchester City were found guilty of all charges relating to serious financial breaches across nine seasons, including using sham arrangements with commercial partners to inflate revenue and reduce reported costs by more than £900 million between 2009/10 and 2017/18.

When will Manchester City be punished?

No punishment had been confirmed when the verdict was announced on 29 September 2026. A separate sanctions process must determine the consequences, and the club's appeal could preserve, reduce or overturn the findings first.

Can Manchester City be relegated?

Yes. A points deduction large enough to leave City in the bottom three is one of the possible outcomes. Reports following the verdict suggested an unprecedented relegation-causing deduction was under consideration, though no official sanction has been confirmed.

Filed under: Latest News | LA Premier League Home