Mystery surrounds Man City payment as they are accused of taking £30m disguised as sponsorship funding from an Abu Dhabi based individual in 2012 and 2013 amid 115 Premier League charges

Man City have been accused of taking £30m – disguised as sponsorship funding – from a mystery figure.

According to a 2020 UEFA report obtained by the makers of a YouTube film, the Treble winners took two £15m payments from an Abu Dhabi-based individual in 2012 and 2013, sums that should have come from a club sponsor.

UEFA’s financial control body concluded that the payments, meant to have arrived from UAE-owned telecoms firm Etisalat, were actually ‘disguised equity funding’. It alleged the money actually came from City’s Abu Dhabi-based owners, which was a breach of their rules.

City were found guilty of ‘serious breaches’ of financial fair play regulation by UEFA between 2012 and 2016 and handed a two-year Champions League ban. However, they appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), who overturned the ban and reduced the accompanying fine from 30m euros to 10m euros.

CAS said most of the alleged breaches ‘were either not established or time-barred’.

However, last year the Premier League announced it had charged the champions with 115 offences, alleging that they had inaccurately reported their finances over a nine-year period up to 2018. 

According to The Times, who have seen the leaked report, the alleged payments are thought to be included in the 115 charges, which City have said they will fight. 

Unlike UEFA, and in a potentially significant difference, the Premier League’s rulebook means none of the alleged offences will be time-barred.

City declined to comment.

The report adds that in a UEFA disciplinary hearing City’s lawyer named the person who paid the money as Jaber Mohamed, saying he was ‘in the business of providing financial and brokering services to commercial entities in the UAE’.

UEFA add in the report that the ‘obvious question’ which was ‘not answered at any point’ is why either the company or the club’s owners ‘should have needed any financial assistance from a broker in paying the Etisalat sponsorship liabilities’. 

City said Etisalat repaid the money to their owners in 2015, an argument rejected by UEFA.

CAS said the payments could not be punishable because they were time-barred.. The panel also cleared City of obtaining similar payments via Etihad, the airline which is a longstanding sponsor of their stadium.

Both the Premier League and UEFA stipulate that owners are limited over the amount of funds they can inject. There are no such limits on sponsorship payments.

According to the Times, the film’s makers deny they are funded by any Middle East state or other agency. They have kept their identities secret.

City are thought to believe geopolitical motives are behind their work, amid a backdrop of tensions in the Gulf.