West Brom get TWO points deducted (page 8)
Comments
-
yes, I meant without GD. But West Brom's recent form has been goodfenaddick said:
They still can, a 6 goal swing between 2 wins and losses is pretty likelyPrincessFiona said:
Oxford could overtake West Brom if they'd had 3 points deductedfenaddick said:
3 points doesn't really change anything. The maths for a 5 point and 6 point gap are the same, just GD becomes irrelevantPrincessFiona said:it's almost like 3 points could be an issue0 -
On 24 April 2026 the independent Club Financial Review Panel (CFRP) ordered that West Bromwich Albion was subject to an immediate two-point deduction for breach of the Profitability and Sustainability (P&S) Rules.
The order noted that written reasons would follow but directed that the points deduction be published that day. The CFRP has now issued its written reasons (available here), which enables the League to provide a summary for interested parties.
The Club lodged its annual accounts on 31 December 2025 and the CFRU completed its subsequent review, as is the case with all Championship Clubs, and in accordance with the Regulations.
Following discussions between the Club Financial Report Unit and the Club in early-2026, in March the CFRU submitted a Compliance Report to the CFRP in relation to an alleged breach of P&S Rules covering the three-year period ending in the 2024/25 season.
The approach reflects a rule change, agreed with Clubs, to align with the Premier League position that regulatory action should only be taken once final accounts for the year have been received, while maintaining the intent that proceedings are concluded, wherever possible, within the same season as the accounts are lodged.
Where a Club wishes to challenge the terms of a Compliance Report, it has the opportunity to file evidence and submissions, with regulations providing that the hearing must take place within 28 days. The hearing took place on 22 and 23 April. The hearing date was scheduled in accordance with the Regulations, and the length of the hearing was agreed between the parties. The Club was afforded a full opportunity to present its case, including detailed written submissions and evidence from multiple Club witnesses.
The CFRP determined that the Club had exceeded the Upper Loss Threshold of £39 million by £1.97m (i.e. total losses of £40.97m), after permitted add-backs. The Panel imposed a two-point deduction in accordance with the EFL’s sanctioning guidelines. For clarity, the guidelines’ starting point is three points for breaches between £1 and £2m, but the Panel reduced this by one point in light of the Club’s positive trend in financial results, in line with the guidelines.
The Panel’s decision focused on three specific issues which were central to the Club’s P&S calculation and directly contributed to the decision to issue the sporting sanction. These are set out below.
1. £5.2m interest expense incurred by the Club
The Club had a loan from MSD taken out under the previous ownership. The interest on that loan was recorded as a cost in the Club’s accounts. However, the Club argued that the holding company was ultimately responsible for the interest payments and that it was appropriate to ‘recharge’ the expense to the holding company, recognising the amounts paid by the holding company as ‘income’ in the accounts of the Club.
The Panel did not accept that approach and determined that liability for the interest remained with the Club. This led the Panel to conclude the interest expense recharge was intended to assist the Club in its presentation of its P&S Calculation. As it considered that the ‘recharge’ was not of fair market value (what an independent party would agree to), the Panel removed it, effectively increasing the Club’s losses by £5.2m.
2. Community add-backs
The CFRU originally made an adjustment to the Club’s final P&S Calculation by disallowing an amount of just over £2.1m which had been claimed as Community Development Expenditure.
Addbacks or permitted adjustments of expenses are allowed in P&S Calculations to ensure Clubs are not penalised for spending on areas considered to be good causes, but only where the expense is actually incurred and recorded by the Club in its own accounts.
Following further discussions, the proposed adjustment was reduced to just over £2m. After hearing arguments from both sides, the CFRP agreed with the CFRU’s assessment.
The CFRP was explicit in its view that its role is to decide whether the adjustment is allowed under the financial rules and not to judge how valuable the benefits are to the Foundation or the local community.
3. £256k relating to Effective Interest Rates
The Club argued that its accounting treatment for some transfer fees owed to other Clubs was incompatible with the P&S Rules, and asked for a manual change to reduce its losses by £256k. However, this treatment is in line with UK accounting standards and was applied as part of the Club’s audited accounts. The Panel concluded it is permitted under the P&S Rules, so there was no basis to amend the calculation.
In summary, these three claims reduced the Club’s losses for P&S purposes. When they were removed, the Club’s losses exceeded the permitted limit of £39m over the three-year period, resulting in the two-point deduction.
The decision of the independent Panel underlines that all 72 Clubs must follow the Rules as agreed by the Clubs, with the expectation that the EFL will apply those rules, and when applying the P&S rules the accounting treatments and add-back claims must be properly evidenced and reflect the true financial position.
The Club may appeal the decision within 14 days. If an appeal is lodged, it will be heard within 28 days of submission.
https://www.efl.com/news/2026/may/13/west-bromwich-albion-football-club---cfrp-decision-explainer/
0 -
Is there an executive summary, by any chance?2
-
On 24 April 2026, the independent Club Financial Review Panel (CFRP) imposed a two-point deduction on West Bromwich Albion for breaching the EFL’s Profitability and Sustainability (P&S) Rules for the three-year period ending 2024/25.
The Panel found the Club exceeded the permitted £39m loss threshold by £1.97m, reporting adjusted losses of £40.97m. While the EFL guidelines suggested a three-point deduction, this was reduced to two points due to the Club’s improving financial position.
The decision focused on three key accounting issues:
- A rejected £5.2m interest expense recharge to the Club’s holding company, which the Panel determined remained a liability of the Club.
- Disallowed community development add-backs of just over £2m that did not meet P&S criteria.
- Rejection of a proposed £256k accounting adjustment relating to transfer fee liabilities.
Removal of these adjustments pushed the Club beyond the allowable loss limit and resulted in the sporting sanction.
The ruling reinforces the EFL’s position that Clubs must ensure accounting treatments and add-back claims are fully evidenced and accurately reflect their financial position. The Club has 14 days to appeal the decision.
1
