Regulator urges tighter club spending as 94% of top 116 clubs lose money
The Independent Football Regulator (IFR) is publishing its long-awaited "State of the Game" report on Tuesday, which will recommend that English football clubs introduce greater cost controls to improve financial sustainability. The 250-page draft report paints a damning picture of the sport's finances, revealing that 94% of the top 116 clubs are currently loss-making, highlighting the urgent need for reform across the industry.
The final report will follow in spring after an eight-week public consultation, and represents the most detailed study ever conducted of English football's finances. The publication comes as the EFL and Premier League remain locked in negotiations over financial settlements, with the EFL seeking £207m annually compared to the Premier League's current offer of £180m per year, and the regulator now armed with powers to impose a settlement if agreement cannot be reached.
- 94% of top 116 English clubs are loss-making according to IFR report
- Regulator recommends greater cost controls to improve sustainability
- EFL and Premier League still negotiating funding amid report
New here? Start with this
English football clubs often spend more money than they generate in revenue. The sport is structured with the Premier League at the top and the English Football League running the professional divisions below it, and many clubs across these levels lose money each year. This widespread financial difficulty has prompted concerns about the long-term viability of professional football.
An independent regulator was created to oversee English football's finances and prevent clubs from collapsing due to debt. The regulator has powers to investigate club finances and enforce rules designed to protect the long-term health of the sport. This regulatory role reflects concern that the football industry cannot manage its finances without outside intervention.
The regulator has become important because the different levels of professional football have competing financial interests. The Premier League and English Football League sometimes dispute how money should flow between them, and the regulator now has power to force a settlement if they cannot agree. These disputes affect the stability of professional football across the country.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Financial sustainability is essential for the sport's long-term health and stability. With 94% of top clubs operating at a loss, the current system is clearly unsustainable and risks further insolvencies that harm players, creditors, and communities. Prudent cost controls aligned with actual revenue would protect the sport's integrity, encourage responsible ownership, and ensure clubs invest strategically rather than recklessly chasing short-term sporting success at the expense of their survival.
The case against
Clubs should retain autonomy to pursue their strategic ambitions within a competitive market rather than face prescriptive regulatory limits that favour established wealth and stifle innovation. Operating at a loss does not inherently signal irresponsibility—many successful businesses operate on investment cycles—and tight cost controls risk preventing ambitious owners from building new competitive forces, investing in infrastructure and youth development, or creating jobs and opportunities. The actual problem is unequal distribution of Premier League wealth, not overall spending levels, and market competition remains preferable to state-like regulation of private entities.
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by The Guardian as “Football regulator to recommend cost controls in landmark report with 94% of clubs making loss”.