Aston Villa owner Nassef Sawiris has announced the club’s intention to join Manchester City in opposing proposed amendments to the Premier League’s rules on commercial deals.
Premier League clubs are set to vote on Friday regarding changes to the Associated Party Transaction (APT) regulations during a league meeting.
Sawiris, Egypt’s wealthiest individual, called for a “fresh start” and suggested postponing the vote until February to increase the likelihood of achieving “unanimous support.”
Manchester City had previously written to the other 19 clubs, raising “fundamental concerns” about what they described as “unlawful” amendments proposed by the Premier League.
Both City and the Premier League claimed partial victories in October following an arbitration panel’s decision regarding APTs.
In a statement to The Telegraph, Sawiris confirmed that Aston Villa “will be voting against” the proposed changes.
“In our view, a vote in 90 days on amended terms taking into consideration the tribunal’s findings will have a significantly greater chance of securing the unanimous support of all 20 Premier League clubs,” he said.
“Crucially, a unanimous vote will present a fresh start for an embattled Premier League that began with the failed attempt to launch a Super League in 2021.”
Sawiris said it was “more important than ever” for the Premier League to present a “united front” in light of the government’s proposed new football regulator.
He added: “In our view, this will be far more easily achieved if the APT vote is held in February and supported unanimously by all clubs.”
The proposed changes to the Associated Party Transaction (APT) rules include subjecting shareholder loans to fair market value assessments and reversing amendments introduced in February.
Aston Villa owner Nassef Sawiris expressed his desire for the Premier League to avoid incurring further “astronomical” legal expenses.
In an 11-page letter obtained by the BBC, the Premier League responded to Manchester City’s objections, stating it “rejects in the strongest possible terms the repeated and baseless assertions” that either the league or its representatives acted improperly as a regulator or “misled” member clubs.