The Independent Football Regulator and the ODSE Regime: A more assertive approach emerging

The IFR was created to improve financial sustainability, strengthen governance and protect club heritage through a formal licensing and oversight regime. Its purpose is not to regulate sporting results, but to reduce the risk of club failure and poor ownership practices, with honesty, integrity and financial soundness central to its assessment of those who own or control clubs.

The IFR emerged from concerns about the financial fragility and governance of English football, sharpened by the failed European Super League in 2021, the Fan-Led Review later that year and the Government’s 2023 White Paper, before being established by the Football Governance Act 2025 (“the Act”).

The Act received Royal Assent on 21 July 2025. Its provisions were brought into force in phases: core investigatory and enforcement powers affecting incumbent owners and senior managers came into effect in December 2025, followed by further provisions relating to the Independent Football Regulator’s Owners, Directors and Senior Executives (“ODSE”) regime on 5 May 2026

Central to the IFR’s role is the strengthened ODSE regime, effectively a more robust and consistently applied ‘fit and proper person’ test,         aimed at ensuring that those who own or control clubs meet appropriate standards of honesty, integrity and financial soundness

Recent regulatory signalling suggests a more robust and interventionist approach to that requirement.

Licensing will be one of the IFR’s main tools. Clubs in the top five tiers of English men’s football will need either a provisional or full licence to compete from the 2027/28 season. The regime will focus on financial resilience, governance, fan engagement and club heritage, with the IFR able to impose additional conditions on higher-risk clubs and require evidence such as business plans, governance statements and information about ultimate ownership.

Although the principles behind the test are familiar, the IFR’s statutory footing gives it a markedly different level of authority and accountability.

Statutory Powers of the Independent Football Regulator

Unlike existing league-based rules, the IFR will derive its authority from legislation. 

That matters because a statutory regulator can do more than rely on league rules or contractual remedies.

A statutory regulator is equipped with enforceable powers that extend beyond contractual arrangements between clubs and leagues.

The IFR’s six core powers will be:

• Operating a licensing regime for clubs in scope.
• Determining whether owners, directors and senior executives are suitable.
• Monitoring and enforcing compliance with requirements on financial regulation, fan engagement and club heritage.
• Setting and overseeing corporate governance standards.
• Restricting participation in competitions that are not fair and meritocratic and that threaten the heritage or sustainability of English football.
• Using backstop powers, as a last resort, to intervene in relation to financial redistribution between the football leagues.

This framework represents a move away from self-regulation towards a model more aligned with other regulated industries.

The ODSE Regime: Renewed Focus on Integrity

At the heart of the IFR’s approach is the requirement that individuals involved in club ownership and management demonstrate honesty and integrity. These concepts, while familiar, are inherently fact-sensitive and context-driven.

Traditionally, the “fit and proper person” test in football ownership, has focused on matters such as insolvency history, criminal convictions, and regulatory breaches. Under the IFR, the ODSE scope is expected to broaden to include:

• Patterns of conduct impacting trustworthiness
• Transparency in business dealings
• Responsiveness to regulatory scrutiny
• Reputational considerations linked to governance standards

The shift is therefore not just about excluding obviously unsuitable individuals at the outset, but about creating a continuing benchmark for conduct, transparency and regulatory engagement.

A Cautious Parallel: The West Ham Situation

In considering how the enhanced framework may operate in practice the current situation at West Ham provides a timely insight into the IFR’s powers

Under the statutory regime, the IFR may re-examine an incumbent owner where it has grounds for concern about suitability, with honesty and integrity sitting at the centre of that assessment.

That scrutiny would be concerned not with punishing reputational controversy in itself, but with determining whether the relevant individual remained fit to own or influence a regulated club.

In practical terms, the IFR’s potential actions could include requiring information and explanations from the club and the relevant owner, assessing whether any material change of circumstances had been properly disclosed, imposing licence conditions, and, in a more serious case, making an adverse suitability determination in respect of an incumbent owner. If the regulator concluded that an owner no longer met the statutory test, the consequences could extend well beyond monitoring and conditions, potentially requiring a reduction of influence, divestment or disqualification. 

For West Ham, therefore, an IFR investigation would be significant not merely because of the scrutiny itself, but because it could engage directly with the question whether the club’s ownership structure remains compatible with the statutory standards of suitability, honesty and integrity. As a new regulator, the IFR will face its own level of scrutiny. This will be a test.  The IFR will have to ensure that due process is followed during and after any investigation. Ultimately, any determination of suitability regarding the club’s ownership will have to be evidence-based.

Practical Implications for Clubs and Owners

A more assertive regime is likely to change how clubs approach ownership, governance and risk management in practice.

Clubs and their leadership teams should be considering:

• Governance structures: Ensuring that decision-making processes are documented, transparent and defensible.
• Due diligence procedures: Implementing more rigorous checks on prospective owners, directors and investors.
• Regulatory engagement: Maintaining open and proactive communication with the IFR.
• Reputational risk management: Understanding that public perception may increasingly intersect with regulatory assessment.

The key point is that clubs will need to show ongoing readiness for regulatory scrutiny, not simply meet a threshold once and move on.

What This Means

For those operating within football, the direction of travel is clear: the owners’ and directors’ regime is moving towards continuous scrutiny rather than episodic checks.

In practical terms, this means:

• A shift from reactive to proactive compliance: Clubs can no longer rely on meeting minimum thresholds at a single point in time. Ongoing scrutiny will require continuous alignment with regulatory expectations.
• Greater accountability at ownership level: Individuals with control or influence will need to evidence not just financial capability, but personal and professional integrity.
• Reduced tolerance for ambiguity: Decisions and behaviours that might previously have sat in a grey area may now attract closer examination.
• Alignment with broader regulatory norms: Football governance is moving towards standards seen in sectors such as financial services, where fitness and propriety are actively monitored.

For legal and compliance professionals, the practical focus will be on helping clubs evidence sound governance, clear decision-making and prompt engagement with regulatory concerns.

Ultimately, the introduction of a statutory regulator with meaningful powers signals a cultural as well as structural shift. The ODSE regime is not simply a gatekeeping mechanism; it is viewed as a continuous measure of credibility and trust within the game.