England’s independent football regulator has the authority to compel club owners to relinquish control if they fail to meet its standards of conduct, financial responsibility and propriety, its
chair David Kogan has said.
Speaking on The Rest Is Football podcast, Kogan confirmed that the Independent Football Regulator (IFR) could intervene against owners and senior executives, stressing that its powers extend beyond simply issuing recommendations.
Asked by presenter Alastair Campbell whether an owner could refuse to leave a club if ordered to do so, Kogan responded unequivocally: “No, no, no. We’ve got absolute power to do so.”
Established in July 2025, the regulator was created to strengthen financial oversight across English football, protect clubs from financial instability and ensure that those in control of clubs meet appropriate standards. Its remit covers ownership, governance and the financial health of teams across the English football pyramid.
Manchester City case under scrutiny
The regulator’s potential role has attracted particular attention as Manchester City continues its appeal against a verdict involving 114 alleged breaches of Premier League financial regulations.
Kogan said the IFR would not rush into a separate investigation while the existing proceedings remained unresolved. Once the appeal process has concluded, the regulator will assess whether an independent inquiry is warranted and determine what action, if any, should follow.
“I am not going to get pushed into making any judgement on this until we’ve seen all of those questions being answered,” he said, adding that reaching conclusions prematurely would be a “colossal mistake”.
Kogan emphasised that the IFR operates under a different mandate from the Premier League. Rather than imposing sporting penalties directly on clubs, such as points deductions or fines, the regulator would examine the behaviour and suitability of the individuals responsible for running them.
Its decisions would be based on established tests for club owners, directors and senior executives, allowing it to scrutinise the conduct of those in positions of authority.
State-backed investors not automatically excluded
Kogan also acknowledged that the legislation underpinning the regulator does not give it an automatic veto over takeovers simply because a prospective buyer is backed by a foreign state or sovereign investment fund.
Using a Norwegian sovereign wealth fund as an example, he explained that the IFR could not block an acquisition solely on that basis.
The regulator must operate within the powers Parliament has granted it, meaning that state-backed investment is not automatically prohibited. Any intervention would have to be justified within the framework of the legislation.
Premier League considers increasing payments to lower divisions
The interview also addressed the longstanding dispute over how football revenues are distributed between the Premier League and the English Football League (EFL).
Kogan revealed that the Premier League was discussing proposals to more than double its annual solidarity payments to lower-league clubs. The money is intended to support teams outside the top flight and help address the substantial financial inequalities across English football.
Under the proposals, parachute payments to clubs relegated from the Premier League would be reduced, while funding available to the Championship would rise significantly.
Parachute payments are designed to help relegated clubs manage the sharp loss of television and commercial revenue following their departure from the top division. However, critics argue that these payments can give former Premier League sides a considerable financial advantage over Championship rivals.
Kogan said the proposed changes could reduce that disparity and make competition in the second tier more balanced. The negotiations form part of wider efforts to settle the disagreement over financial support between the Premier League and the lower divisions.
Concerns over agents’ fees and mounting transfer debts
Kogan also criticised the sums spent on football agents, saying annual fees had exceeded £500 million.
He described the expenditure as excessive and argued that the money could be better directed towards players and the development of clubs.
“Agents’ fees are ridiculous. Over £500 million. It’s half a billion pounds,” he said.
The regulator’s chair also raised concerns about the scale of outstanding debts between clubs, which he said amounted to billions of pounds. He warned that transfer-related liabilities were increasing sharply, creating further risks for the financial stability of the game.
His comments underline the breadth of the IFR’s emerging agenda: strengthening accountability among club owners, improving financial sustainability and addressing structural inequalities that continue to shape English football.
The regulator’s ability to act against owners will depend on the statutory framework governing its decisions, but Kogan’s remarks signal an assertive approach to oversight at a time when the financial conduct of clubs, the distribution of revenues and the influence of wealthy investors remain central issues for the sport. Photo by Ank kumar, Wikimedia commons.
