Taylor bows to calls for independent review as PFA scrutiny increases

QC will examine union after demand by Purkiss Charity Commission to question source of salary

The Charity Commission is to question the Professional Footballers’ Association after concerns were raised about how chief executive Gordon Taylor’s annual pay of more than £2million was funded.

The investigation is understood to focus on how the PFA General Fund charges the PFA Charity for expenses, and the suggestion that this provides sufficient income to cover salaries, including Taylor’s hugely controversial pay packet.

The PFA has been embroiled in a civil war since Ben Purkiss, its chairman, publicly called for modernisation, and Taylor did yesterday finally agree to an independent review of an organisation he has led for the past 37 years. That is expected to include funding arrangements which the Charity Commission are set to look into.

“We are aware of concerns regarding the expenditure of the Professional Footballers’ Association Charity and we will be engaging with the trustees to establish the facts,” a spokesman told The Daily Telegraph. “Trustees should be able to demonstrate that all decisions around expenditure have been carefully considered in line with the best interests of their charity and those it is set up to help.”

New accounts, which were also revealed on Tuesday by The Telegraph, detailed staff costs of just over £4million for a company listed as “PFA Charity”. And yet, on page 18 and section 15 of the same accounts, it is stated that “the Charity does not have any employees and therefore no salaries or wages have been paid during the year”.

The television income from the Premier League, which has totalled just under £52million over the past two seasons, is listed as a “donation” in the PFA Charity accounts. Member subscriptions from around 5,000 players go into the PFA General Fund, but these total only between £500,000 and £600,000 per year and so could not cover staff salaries. It is understood that the commission is looking into whether the PFA Charity is effectively funding the salary of Taylor and whether this would be normal and appropriate. It could also now consider whether this is a reasonable salary. It does not represent a formal Charity Commission inquiry.

“The public rightly expect charitable funds to go to causes they are set up to support,” added the commission spokesman. “As regulator, we expect all charities to carefully steward funds in the best interests of their charity in order to maximise their benefit to society.”

A study of charity pay in 2017, by Third Sector, found an average top pay at general charities of £186,000 per year. Taylor earned £2.29million including his salary, bonus and benefits in 2016-17.

His remuneration for 2017-18 has not yet been published but is expected to remain above £2million. The Premier League insists that “a significant majority of the funds provided are spent on charitable and good causes, as well as football development” although “a proportion of what the Premier League provides is available to be used at the PFA’S discretion”.

The Telegraph has contacted the PFA for a response to the Charity Commission’s statement.

Taylor did yesterday issue an open letter to members in which he accepted calls for an open review of the organisation, led by an independent QC.

“It is important that we are transparent, committed to constantly improving and restless in our mission to support you,” he said. “I am happy to defend our record – including on issues such as mental health, diversity and player welfare – but I am the first to admit there are always areas we can improve.

“I am adamant that criticism must not be swept under the carpet and instead addressed head on. We owe it to you, our members, to hold ourselves to the highest possible standards. We believe we do.”

The latest accounts show that the PFA Charity received £24.75million from the Premier League in television income and details how it then spent £17.41million on grants to institutions and individuals.

Taylor has always defended how his organisation spends money and Ipswich striker Jonathan Walters, who is on the PFA’S management committee, also launched a staunch justification last night.

“Being in there, I know there’s a lot of good work done and know how much work we do,” he said. “We have 3,500 current members and more than 50,000 ex-members so it is less than 0.5 per cent [who have reportedly signed a letter calling for Taylor to stand down] but it’s not good enough.

“We should be filtering every problem but we do a lot of good work. To have this small amount that have a grievance shows there’s a lot of good work that we actually do. There’s been a bit of mob rule over the weekend on social media and I don’t like that. There’s a reported 200 or 300 names that have signed the letter and I would like to see those names. How many of those players have a grievance with the PFA to do with certain things like tax-avoidance schemes and felt the PFA did not back them?”

The PFA has come under a barrage of criticism since Purkiss had his eligibility for the chairman’s role questioned over his status as a non-contract player at Walsall. Purkiss has wanted a review for several years and, while Taylor’s concession might be viewed as a victory for the chairman, there was no word on if the PFA would press ahead with removing him from the role.