The Independent Football Regulator, established by a 2025 law, is seeking £20 million, or $27 million, from clubs to fund its initial year. The IFR stated the overall levy is £20.3 million, with £1 million set aside for legal work and another £1 million designated as a clawback to offset the regulator's setup costs. The budget also funds a staff of about 100.
For scale, the IFR put its annual costs at about 0.2% of the £9 billion English football generated last season. The funding decision followed the regulator's recent warning that the sport's current economics are pushing too many teams into losses.
The IFR set a tiered structure so the highest-earning Premier League clubs shoulder more and could contribute up to £1.8 million per season. Lower-division clubs fall into a much smaller band, ranging from £45,000 to £600.
This lands while teams may already face additional exposure from the Premier League's legal fight with Manchester City FC, adding another expense to club budgets.
When you want clear context on markets and policy, sign up for the free Market Briefs to stay informed daily.
Last year, the government estimated the regulator's annual costs could run up to £10.2 million over its first decade, a figure IFR chief executive Richard Monks said no longer reflects the "current financial reality or the task ahead of us." Monks also said, "Boston Consulting Group went out to a large number of owners and potential investors for the State of the Game report," and noted the consulting spend was not ruinous, with details to come in the IFR's annual report.
The IFR's report last week said the sport needs to overhaul its financial structure because too many clubs are losing money. The use of Boston Consulting Group stirred concerns over costs, and at least one team declined to work with BCG because of concerns about the contract's price, said a person with knowledge of the matter. BCG declined to comment. "The levy we are proposing today represents a fair and balanced approach," Monks said. "We are confident football will see this as a relatively modest investment to help achieve a more sustainable ecosystem, which will provide peace of mind for fans, clubs and the communities they serve."
Football consultant Paul Quinn argued the industry is in no position to push back, saying the regulator benefits the game over time and costs a fraction of what clubs spend on player acquisition and agent fees. The bottom line: the levy is small relative to the sport's revenue base, tiered by earnings, and arriving alongside other legal and regulatory outlays that may touch your portfolio's exposure to clubs, broadcasters, or sponsors.
If you follow developments in sports finance and the wider economy, try the free Market Briefs newsletter for a quick daily recap.
