Aston Villa could be due to receive a financial fair play boost that radically adjusts their strategy this summer.

Villa became the second club outside the so-called Big Six in as many years to qualify for the Champions League after Unai Emery guided them a 4th-place Premier League finish in 2024-25.

That could see their revenue rise by as much as £60m all told, with prize money, gate receipts and commercial opportunities factored in.

But after sustaining combined financial losses in excess of £160m over the last three years, they are still likely to be flirting with the upper limit of the Premier League’s spending rules.

However, an unexpected development could see their FFP (now called Profit and Sustainability Rules, or PSR) position improve dramatically.

• READ MORE: Premier League rewards Spurs with more cash than Villa despite losing top four race

Premier League clubs set to vote on new FFP proposal

It has been known for several months now that the Premier League is set to vote on whether to introduce a new squad cost control ratio and financial anchoring system at its AGM on 6th June.

This model would tie spending to a multiple of the lowest-earning club’s TV revenue and impose an 85 per cent revenue-to-spending cap on player wages, transfers and agent fees.

But as reported by The Times, a new proposal has been presented as an alternative to that system – and that could be a boon for Villa.

The model, which is the brainchild of Crystal Palace chairman Steve Parish, would essentially replace the existing system but raise the allowable losses over a rolling three-year period from £105m to £135m.

Villa are believed to be one of just three clubs ready to vote against the squad cost control ratio and anchoring system, so they will likely welcome an alternative.

Analysis: How the proposed FFP system could benefit Villa

At least in part, the aim of the proposed raising of the allowable loss limit is to aid clubs who qualify for Europe but whose lack of UEFA coefficient ranking means that it is not as lucrative a venture for them.

Clubs with a recent history in the Champions League – Man City and Liverpool, for example – can earn up to £32m per season from the coefficient pot, whereas Villa will earn next to nothing.

And while UEFA has announced that it plans to alter the system in line with the expanded Champions League format from next season, the coefficient pot will not be eliminated altogether.

This system has been described by some analysts as a way of insulating the already elite from failure and creating a financial barrier for aspirational clubs like Villa.

Raising the Premier League’s loss limit (which is a separate system from UEFA’s) would effectively allow Villa more wiggle room to compete in the long term.

If the proposal is successful, it will be introduced this summer.

That would effectively mean an extra £30m would be added to Unai Emery’s transfer budget overnight if Wes Edens and Nassef Sawiris cover the losses, which they have continually shown they are willing to do.

How likely is the new FFP system to be introduced?

There is no information about who will and will not vote for the proposal at the talks on 6th June. But we can take an educated guess.

Ambitious clubs like Villa and Newcastle United would benefit from keeping the same system in place but raining the loss ceiling.

It would mean they get more wiggle room and don’t have to make a dramatic pivot to a new model when they have been operating under the conditions of the old one for years.

And as the proposal is from Parish, we can safely assume that Palace are on board too.

Any vote at Premier League level needs a two-thirds majority to pass. That means the so-called Big Six are a powerful voting bloc.

Whether they feel it is in their interests is up for debate. But as Man United and City are believed to be ready to vote against the squad cost and anchoring system, they might favour an alternative.

Similarly, the fact Liverpool, Chelsea and Arsenal were reported to be ready to vote in favour of the new system was a shock, with some suggesting they were doing in the belief it was a foregone conclusion.

If a different strategy is put forward and has a realistic chance of being implemented, they too might be open to exploring it.

Ultimately, it depends on what they feel is in their own best interests, but also what is in the worst interests of the clubs trying to oust them from their position on football’s top perch – clubs like Villa.