UK's HMRC declines to say if it is investigating Man City

HMRC has not confirmed or denied whether it is investigating Manchester City's finances. The authority said taxpayer confidentiality prevents its Permanent Secretary, JP Marks, from commenting on any possible ongoing investigation. That rule protects information about individual taxpayers and businesses from being disclosed publicly.

The question arose after Parliament's Treasury Committee examined the club's alleged financial misconduct. Committee chair Meg Hillier asked what action HMRC was taking after an independent commission found more than 100 alleged breaches of Premier League rules. The commission also said City used contracts that distorted reported revenue and costs.

HMRC did not announce an investigation or clear City of wrongdoing. It said it works constructively with football bodies and considers action when information indicates a possible tax risk. City denies wrongdoing and has appealed the Premier League verdict, so any HMRC response remains undisclosed.

HMRC is Britain's tax authority. Its role includes checking whether companies have reported and paid the tax they owe. For a football club, that means HMRC can examine the club's company tax returns and related financial information when tax compliance is in question.

The key power described here is the ability to unpick a company's tax returns. HMRC can review the figures and statements behind those returns. If it finds that false statements led to taxes being underpaid, it can apply financial penalties. The article does not state that HMRC has made such a finding against Manchester City.

HMRC also said it works constructively with bodies within football and considers action where information indicates a potential tax risk. It reported 68 inquiries involving players, agents and clubs, generating £110 million in additional revenue during 2025-26. Its response to City remains confidential.

Parliament's Treasury Committee sought HMRC's response after an independent commission found that Manchester City had committed more than 100 individual breaches of Premier League rules. The most relevant allegation for tax officials was that City used “sham” commercial contracts. The League said these contracts distorted the club's financial reporting.

According to the article, the contracts allegedly inflated revenue and understated costs by more than £900 million over nearly a decade. Those figures matter because tax calculations rely on financial information reported by a business. If reported revenue, costs or other statements were false, HMRC could consider whether there was a potential tax risk.

City has denied any wrongdoing. It filed an appeal seeking to overturn the verdict. Hillier said her letter was intended to ensure HMRC understood the seriousness of the situation, and HMRC said it considers action when relevant information indicates a possible tax risk.

The alleged financial irregularities were extremely large: the Premier League said Manchester City's contracts inflated revenue and understated costs by more than £900 million. The conduct was said to have continued over nearly a decade. The article does not provide a more precise total or a year-by-year breakdown.

Separately, an independent commission found that City had committed over 100 individual breaches of Premier League rules. These breaches were part of the sporting case, while the financial figures describe the alleged effect of the contracts on revenue and costs. The two figures measure different things: rule violations and the scale of the alleged reporting distortion.

City rejects wrongdoing and has appealed the verdict. HMRC has not said whether it is investigating the finances. Its confidentiality rules prevent public comment on any potential ongoing investigation, leaving the tax position unresolved in the article.

If HMRC established that false statements caused Manchester City to underpay tax, it could apply financial penalties. The article specifically describes this power in relation to a company's tax returns. It does not say HMRC has reached that conclusion about City, nor does it announce a penalty.

The mechanism would begin with HMRC examining and unpicking the club's tax returns. Officials would assess whether the reported figures and statements were accurate and whether any inaccuracy reduced the tax paid. A penalty could follow if false statements were responsible for the underpayment. The article gives no possible penalty amount.

For now, HMRC has declined to discuss any potential investigation because of taxpayer confidentiality. It says it considers action when information indicates a potential tax risk. City denies wrongdoing and has appealed the Premier League verdict concerning the alleged contracts.

Premier League disciplinary rules and UK tax law are different systems. League rules govern whether a club has complied with football's competition requirements. Tax law governs whether a company has accurately reported its finances and paid the correct tax. A breach under one system does not automatically prove a breach under the other.

The same commercial contracts could attract both types of attention because the League said City's contracts were “sham” arrangements that inflated revenue and understated costs. That alleged conduct could breach Premier League financial rules. Separately, if false statements in company tax returns caused tax to be underpaid, HMRC could examine the returns and impose financial penalties.

The article does not say that HMRC has found a tax breach. It says HMRC works with bodies within football and considers action when information indicates a potential tax risk. City denies wrongdoing and is appealing the League's verdict.

A company tax return is a business's formal report of its financial information and the tax it owes. It gives the tax authority the figures needed to assess whether the company has paid the correct amount. For a football club, the return would cover the company’s reported finances, although the article does not list every item it contains.

HMRC can decide that tax was underpaid by examining and unpicking the return. It may compare the reported figures with supporting information and look for false statements. If those statements caused the business to pay too little tax, HMRC can apply financial penalties. The article does not describe a specific audit process or penalty calculation.

HMRC said it considers action when information indicates a potential tax risk. It has conducted 68 inquiries involving football players, agents and clubs, generating £110 million in additional revenue in 2025-26. It has not disclosed City's tax position.