Manchester City’s financial scandal has inevitably drawn attention across town, where Manchester United face a very different financial challenge involving more than £1bn of debt and hundreds of millions spent on interest payments.
The Premier League panel investigating City delivered a stark conclusion: the club’s income had been overstated by more than £830m.
The judgement found that City’s owners circumvented financial regulations over a number of years by injecting funds that should not have been recorded as sponsorship income.
The ruling arrived less than five days after Manchester United submitted their extended filing to the New York Stock Exchange, detailing their accounts for the year ending 30 June 2026.
United recorded £37m in interest payments, up from £34m the previous year.
Football finance analyst Swiss Ramble estimates United’s net interest payments since the Glazer family’s leveraged takeover in 2005 have now reached £852m.
The situations at City and United are fundamentally different, but the timing has highlighted a striking contrast. While one Manchester ownership group injected huge sums into its club, another has overseen a period in which a similarly substantial amount has left through interest payments.
Manchester United chief executive Omar Berrada stressed the importance of financial sustainability in the club’s latest accounts.
“While these results confirm that we are on the right trajectory, we will continue to take a disciplined approach to ensure our finances remain sustainable,” Berrada said.
The accounts followed a third-place Premier League finish, securing United’s return to the Champions League after a two-year absence.
There were also record revenues of £677.6m, with that figure projected to reach as much as £760m in 2026-27.
However, the wider financial picture explains Berrada’s cautious approach.
United confirmed they had committed £191.7m to new players and associated costs since 30 June. That includes deals involving Carlos Baleba, Andrey Santos and Youri Tielemans, as well as academy players such as England youth international Tynan Thompson.
Those payments are due over the next five years.
United have also borrowed another £90m, taking their overall debt to £1.15bn. For comparison, the equivalent figure in the club’s accounts to June 2021 was £667m.
Before 30 June, United also owed £375m in transfer payments, with £218m due before 30 June 2027.
In addition to their recent signings, United could be liable for another £122.8m in contract-related payments if existing players reach previously agreed targets.
United restructured their debt in June, adding $125m (£94.36m) to their main debt.
On 23 September, the club confirmed £63.5m had been spent on land connected to their proposed new stadium, although the final funding model for the project has yet to be determined.
Some supporters, particularly those opposed to leaving Old Trafford, believe that money would have been better spent strengthening Michael Carrick’s squad.
However, United continue to emphasise financial discipline.
Their wage bill stood at £313m in 2025, the fifth highest in the Premier League. With no European football in 2025-26, that dropped to £302m.
United’s wages-to-turnover ratio is 45%, an impressive figure compared with their Premier League rivals.
There is generally a strong relationship between wage spending and league performance, although United themselves have frequently demonstrated that high salaries do not guarantee success.
The club have previously topped the Premier League wage table without winning the title and finished 15th in 2024-25 despite possessing the division’s fifth-highest wage bill.
Against that backdrop, Carrick’s third-place finish represented a significant overachievement relative to United’s salary ranking.
United were relatively restrained in the latest summer transfer window, spending £148m. That was less than newly promoted Ipswich and Hull, among others.
Their longer-term net spending, however, remains substantial, largely because of their struggles to generate significant transfer income.
By the time the transfer window closed on 1 September, United had raised £47m through player sales, placing them 11th among Premier League clubs.
Of their traditional ‘big six’ rivals, only Liverpool generated less.
Since selling Romelu Lukaku to Inter Milan for £74m in 2019, United have received more than £25m for a player on only four occasions: Mason Greenwood, Scott McTominay, Rasmus Hojlund and Alejandro Garnacho.
The club have attempted to address the issue by changing how they structure outgoing transfers.
Several young players departed during the summer, including Radek Vitek and Toby Collyer, who joined Middlesbrough and West Brom respectively for lower fees than might previously have been expected.
Defenders Tyler Fredricson and James Overy left without transfer fees.
However, United included significant sell-on and buy-back clauses in those deals as part of a strategy designed to generate greater long-term value from academy departures.
In June 2023, Premier League clubs voted to limit future leveraged buyouts to around 65% of a club’s value.
The decision appeared to have been influenced by ALK Capital’s takeover of Burnley in December 2020.
For many Manchester United supporters, however, such restrictions arrived far too late.
The Glazer family completed their leveraged takeover of United in 2005, and the debt associated with that ownership model has remained a source of frustration ever since.
Manchester City’s financial scandal has now indirectly brought United’s situation back into focus.
There appears to be little realistic prospect of United eliminating their substantive debt in the immediate future, leaving Berrada and the club’s leadership with a complicated financial balancing act.
They must control operating costs, reduce outstanding transfer liabilities, avoid placing further pressure on their revolving credit facility and determine how to finance a new stadium.
At the same time, they must invest enough in Carrick’s squad to remain competitive.
Success on the pitch remains one of the clearest ways of easing that pressure.
United earned £80m in prize money from their run to the Champions League quarter-finals in 2017-18. By comparison, reaching the Europa League final in 2024-25 generated £31m.
Their recently negotiated Adidas shirt agreement also includes a £10m annual reduction if United fail to qualify for the Champions League.
That makes a return to Europe’s premier club competition particularly important.
Carrick’s side will host bottom club Tottenham at Old Trafford on 10 October looking to climb from 12th place in the Premier League.
United may not have publicly defined their ultimate target for the season, but the financial picture makes one objective increasingly obvious.
Champions League qualification is about far more than sporting prestige. For a club balancing £1.15bn of debt, major transfer commitments and plans for a new stadium, it has become an important part of Manchester United’s financial equation.
