UEFA licence and outstanding player salaries: cutoff and evidence

Outstanding player salaries can become a licensing documentation issue for a club. The relevant question is not only whether money is missing on the assessment date. The club must identify which contractual or legal employee payables were due by 28 February and show their position as at 31 March.

Article 72 of the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Sustainability Regulations, Edition 2025, requires a structured employee table. Overdue, deferred and disputed amounts must be traceable. This licensing evidence is separate from the question whether a player may terminate a contract under FIFA rules or bring a salary claim.

Article 72.01 links the evidence to 31 March preceding the relevant licence season. At that date, the licence applicant must show that it has no overdue employee payables arising from contractual or legal obligations that were due by 28 February preceding the licence season.

The two dates have different functions. 28 February is the due-date and recording cutoff for the obligations within the table. 31 March is the later control date at which the club must show the position and any overdue balance that remains. A payment after 28 February is therefore not invisible. It must be placed correctly in the timeline.

The club should first confirm the licence season, the relevant submission process and any forms or technical requirements imposed by the competent licensor. Article 72 provides the substantive framework. The national licensing procedure may require additional documents or a particular file format.

Under Article 72.02, employee payables include every form of consideration due under contractual or legal obligations. The provision refers to wages, salaries, image rights payments, bonuses and other benefits described in Annex K.1.2(c). The review must therefore go beyond the monthly base salary.

For a player, relevant items may include appearance bonuses, points bonuses, agreed image rights payments, accommodation, a vehicle or other benefits in kind. Each item needs a clear legal or contractual basis. A sum mentioned in an email or account statement does not become a licensing payable without establishing entitlement and due date.

A useful table separates the claim, due date and status. It should show which amount is undisputed and overdue, which amount is payable later under an agreement and which amount is disputed as to its existence or calculation. The remuneration check helps organise base pay, bonuses and benefits in kind before a review.

Article 72.03 includes all professional players under the FIFA Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players. It also refers to administrative, technical, medical and security staff performing functions described in Articles 36 to 52. Certain service providers performing those functions may also fall within the scope.

The label used for an agreement does not decide the issue by itself. The licensing review should identify each person’s function, period of employment or engagement and the basis on which payment was due. This also matters for people who were no longer working for the club at the cutoff date.

Article 72.04 extends the review to the legal group structure and reporting perimeter. Where a player or staff member is employed, contracted or advised by another group entity, the related payable can still fall within the scope. The club and player contract focus page helps with the allocation of roles and responsibilities.

Article 72.05 keeps within scope amounts owed to people who are no longer employed or engaged by the licence applicant. What matters is the contractual or legal due date. Ending the relationship therefore does not remove an unpaid obligation from the employee table.

This is relevant for a final instalment, a bonus payable after the season, a settlement amount or an outstanding image rights payment. The documents should show the start and end of the engagement as well as the due date of each item. A later account statement must not be confused with the end of the contract.

A player who has already moved to another club can therefore remain in the former club’s table if a due obligation is unpaid. The licensing review focuses on the documented obligation and its status. Whether the same facts create a sporting or employment dispute is a separate question.

Article 72.06 requires an employee table with the total balance payable, the total overdue amount and any remaining overdue amount at 31 March rolled forward from 28 February. The table must also show deferred and disputed amounts.

For each item, Article 72.07 requires at least the person’s name and function, start and end date, overdue amounts with each due date and any amounts settled between 28 February and 31 March. For a deferral, the original and new due dates as well as the date of the written agreement must be recorded.

For a dispute, the file should include the case reference and a short description of the positions of all involved parties. A single line such as “player salaries outstanding” is not enough for this review. A main table combined with an evidence file for each person and a short chronology for each exception is more reliable.

Article 72.08 requires the employee table to be reconciled with the underlying accounting records. The table is therefore not only a legal or personnel document. Each balance should be traceable to an accounting entry, payroll record, agreement or payment confirmation.

Differences between the contract, payroll, creditor records and bank account should be resolved before submission. Particular care is needed with partial payments, set-off, foreign currency, repayment claims and amounts processed through a group entity. The reason for each difference belongs in the file.

Under Article 72.09, the licence applicant must confirm that the employee table is complete, accurate and compliant. A short statement and signature by the executive body or authorised signatories provide the required evidence. The signatories should be able to understand the supporting records and the internal approval path.

For licensing purposes, an amount must be classified differently depending on whether it was due and unpaid, deferred under a written agreement or disputed as to its existence or amount. These categories should not be mixed for presentation purposes. Each classification needs a short factual explanation.

For a deferral, the original due date, the new due date and the date of the written agreement must be visible. For a dispute, the claim, objection, case reference and current procedural status should be brought together. An internal note without a link to the contract or communication is too weak.

The licensing process does not automatically decide the player’s civil claim. At the same time, a pending dispute does not remove the club’s duty to record the item completely and transparently. The regulations focus page offers additional orientation on the sporting-law layer.

Article 72 addresses which employee payables a licence applicant must disclose and how the club proves its position at the relevant cutoff dates. It does not automatically decide whether a player may terminate the employment contract. These are separate reviews with different consequences.

FIFA rules on termination for overdue payables require a separate assessment of the conditions, written notice and cure period. A salary claim or a proceeding before the FIFA Football Tribunal also does not by itself prove that the employee table under Article 72 is complete and accurate.

The file should therefore contain two timelines: a licensing timeline with 28 February, 31 March, the table and submission as well as a contract timeline with due dates, notices, agreements and any termination statement. The article on training exclusion and pay evidence adds a practical perspective on payment records.

Start with a complete list of people. Record players, staff and relevant service providers with their function, engagement period and contractual basis. Then classify each remuneration item by due date, payment, balance, deferral or dispute status.

Next, establish the position at 28 February and every change through 31 March. Reconcile the table with the accounts, collect evidence for each item and record written agreements or case references for deferred and disputed amounts.

For the actual submission, the player contract and amendments, account statements, payment records, settlement agreements, accounting reconciliation and signable confirmation should be reviewed together. Mag. Bernhard Brandauer, Rechtsanwalt, will discuss the next sensible steps with you.

Which date matters for outstanding player salaries?
Article 72 uses two dates. Employee payables due by 28 February are recorded. At 31 March, the club must show that no overdue amount remains or identify the balance that is still outstanding.

Does a bonus count like base salary?
It can, if it is due under a contractual or legal obligation. Article 72.02 refers to wages, salaries, image rights payments, bonuses and other benefits. Entitlement, due date and calculation must be supported.

Must former players be included in the table?
Yes. Amounts owed to people who are no longer employed or engaged remain within scope under Article 72.05. The relevant points are the due date and payment status of the obligation.

How should a deferred payment be documented?
The original and new due dates and the date of the written agreement should be clear. The table should identify the item as deferred rather than describing it as paid without qualification.

Does the UEFA table automatically prove the player’s claim?
No. The table serves the licensing evidence. Whether a claim exists, how much is due or whether termination is possible must be assessed separately under the contract, applicable law and relevant sporting regulations.