UEFA Cost Hat: The profits of sellers need to be shared for 3 years; Chelsea Villa registration difficulties

Hupu, August 22, TheAthleticUK football and financial team analyzed UEFA's cost cap and its impact on Aston Villa, Chelsea and other teams.

[Must Board] Chelsea must sell UEFA knockout roster players this summer to register new players in the Champions League

First of all, the cost hat means that UEFA requires clubs to calculate their "team cost ratio" and limit these clubs to keep the ratio below 70% or below (80% in 2024, both Chelsea and Villa have exceeded this upper limit).

A tricky part for external analysis is that the ratio is calculated in natural years—the season's assessment will focus on the entire 2025—rather than what we usually call the fiscal year range. The

cost ratio, roughly speaking, is the annual amortized cost of the hiring expenses associated with the player and coach plus any expenses incurred at the time of signing, including brokerage fees. These combined costs are then divided by the club's annual revenue (including other operating income, which is usually not included in the club's operating income) and the profit or loss of the club's players selling.

Therefore, all the above elements are calculated in calendar years, except for profits or losses sold by players. These profits or losses are figures for the past three calendar years and are then distributed proportionally; this means that clubs can benefit from evaluating profits outside the calendar year, but only one-third of the value.

What is particularly important is the impact of UEFA's cost cap on sellers. Domestic PSR and football revenue rules cover the profits generated by all players leaving the team, but the proportional allocation method used by the team's cost ratio means that only one-third of the sales profit is included in the calculation.

In other words, Villa recently sold academy Jacob Ramsey for £39 million, accounting for only £13 million in 2025 calculations.

But on the other hand, they can count the £13 million profits of selling Ramsey each for each of the next two seasons, although it would be meaningless if they did not participate in the European war by then. This undoubtedly doesn't help clubs like Villa, which are currently in a compliance dispute. The

cost hats are suitable for all clubs participating in European competitions this season, but for Chelsea and Villa, after violating the rules, the "reconciliation agreement" they reached with UEFA this summer has made them worse.

In addition to paying a total of €42 million fine and agreeing to future financial measures, the two teams also accepted a condition that their "A-list transfer balance" must be positive.

A roster refers to the roster of European players that clubs must register by September 2 (the day after most UEFA transfer windows are closed).

For Chelsea and Villa, they must ensure that any changes between the A-list submitted now and the roster submitted last February (i.e. before the knockout stage) will generate a positive transfer balance.

transfer balance is calculated by offsetting the cost savings of players removed from the roster with the costs incurred by adding new signing players (or other players).

In other words, Chelsea and Villa need to ensure that the annual cost of the player list submitted next month is less than or equal to the annual cost of the player list submitted in February.

There is something to be paid attention to. TheAthletic has confirmed with UEFA that UEFA allows the club to include one-third of its transfer profits in the calculation of the transfer balance.

Even if Jackson and Nkunku are not sold, Chelsea can remove them from the A-list, saving transfer costs (although the cost will still affect the overall space), a profitable sale will enhance Chelsea’s registration ability.

The departure of other players has made some room for Chelsea: Lucas Bergstrom (defused this summer), Mark Giu (loan to Sunderland) and Jaden Sancho (loan from Manchester United) are also on the previous A-list.