CHELSEA will NOT suffer any immediate problems even if owner Roman Abramovich is placed on a potential UK Russia sanctions list.
Blues owner Abramovich and Everton training ground sponsor Alisher Usmanov were both named by Lib Dem MP Layla Moran among 35 prominent Russians she believes should have their assets frozen and confiscated.
PM Boris Johnson was forced to correct the Parliamentary record after wrongly telling the Commons that sanctions had already been sanctioned.
In 2018, Abramovich was informed his “golden visa” would not be renewed when it lapsed.
He has rarely been in the UK since and has taken an Israeli passport.
If sanctions are applied, all assets of any named individuals would be frozen.
So far there are no signs of that taking place, and sources close to Abramovich insist he has done nothing that would make him liable to sanctions.
But even were it to happen, it is understood to be unlikely there would be ANY impact on Chelsea – at least in the short term.
Legal experts believe that the Government would agree an official “carve out” of Chelsea from any prospective actions to avoid significant impact on a club that employs hundreds of people and is supported by thousands.
That would mean Chelsea could continue as a business, including receiving future broadcast money from the Premier League and Uefa – and paying out wages to staff.
Without the “carve out”, things could get tricky, as it would be illegal for anybody to provide any benefit “directly or indirectly” to sanctioned individuals or their companies.
Abramovich has ploughed more than £1.5billion into the club since his 2003 takeover sparked two decades of unprecedented success including two Champions League triumphs and five Prem crowns.
Last year, the cost of Covid saw the Russian cough up a further £19.9million to balance the books.
But the return of full houses is worth around £3m in income for every game at Stamford Bridge, likely to add up to nearly £90m this season, on top of the TV and sponsorship revenues.
However, were Abramovich to be named – still felt to be less than likely – it would prevent further owner funding.
That COULD impact on Chelsea’s ability to spend money in the transfer market in the longer term, although the club’s recent dealings suggest they are likely to remain self-funders in a normal business environment.
Things, though, might be more testing for Everton if they were considering asking Usmanov for future investments.
Without a UK government licence – and the approval of pre-dated contract agreements – clubs would not be permitted to receive further funds from a sanctioned individual or from any company worldwide owned by that person.
