Premier League clubs vote to introduce spending cap

  • Premier League clubs have voted to introduce a cap on how much a team can spend on wages, transfers & agent fees
  • Man Utd, Man City & Aston Villa voted against the measures
  • Chelsea abstained from the vote
There will be a cap on spending in the Premier League
There will be a cap on spending in the Premier League / Richard Pelham/GettyImages

Premier League clubs have voted in favour of introducing a spending cap which will limit costs of transfers, wages and agent fees.

The cap will be linked to the lowest amount of money earned in television rights by one club in the division.

16 clubs voted in favour of introducing the measures, Sky News state. Manchester City, Manchester United and Aston Villa voted against the cap, while Chelsea abstained from the vote.

The idea of a spending cap was raised amid fears that the bigger clubs in the division have developed an unfair advantage and will be designed to ensure those earning huge sums from competing in the Champions League remain on a level playing field to the rest of the teams in the league.

The specific details of the cap have not yet been finalised but will be discussed at a meeting in June.

Importantly, it is understood that the cap will not impact any current levels of spending and teams will not be required to reduce their current wages.

Last season, City boasted a league-high wage budget of £423m, while their agent fees of £51.5m was also the highest in the division.

Pep Guardiola
City voted against the cap / Copa/GettyImages

Southampton made the least money from television rights last season, bringing in £104m. Just how that figure will correlate to the spending cap will be addressed at the June meeting.

According to The Times, United co-owners INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe have opposed the plans because they believed they would hand English sides a disadvantage compared to other top teams across Europe.

However, the Glazer family, who still own shares in United, are believed to be in favour of a spending cap.