Aston Villa have been here before.
On transfer deadline day last summer, Villa signed Harvey Elliott on a season-long loan from Liverpool, with a conditional obligation to buy.
It seemed a sensible move on paper.
Elliott was named player of the tournament at last summer’s Euro Under-21s and Villa desperately needed bodies through the door.
But the move turned sour, especially once it emerged Elliott’s move would become permanent for £35million if he made 10 appearances for Villa.
In total, Elliott played just 278 minutes for Unai Emery’s side across the entire campaign.
Garna be a Villan
Villa have now brought in another player on a season-long loan with a conditional obligation to buy in the form of Chelsea winger Alejandro Garnacho.
Although the exact obligation is yet to be defined, talkSPORT understands it is appearance-based and easily achievable.
The total package of the loan and conditional obligation is worth approximately £43m.
Curiously, Villa’s swoop for Garnacho was made official just two days after Morgan Rogers moved the opposite direction for £117m, which made him the most expensive British player in history.
Why UEFA could frown upon Garnacho deal
It also netted the reigning Europa League champions an almighty profit on the initial £8m they forked out to sign Rogers from Middlesbrough in January 2024, giving them a major boost in their efforts to avoid falling foul of UEFA’s financial regulations.
Given the two deals occurred only days apart and between the same clubs, some may have raised eyebrows as to whether it could be classified as a swap, which would have spelt bad news for Villa.
According to UEFA’s transfer rules, multiple deals completed between the same clubs within a 45-day period is classified as a swap.
In that instance, Villa would have to reduce the profit made from the Rogers sale to the difference between that figure and how much was paid for Garnacho.
But by signing Garnacho initially on loan, Villa may trigger the conditions to make the move permanent outside the 45-day window, meaning they can fully book the initial Rogers profit.
Villa take advantage of UEFA transfer ‘loophole’
Speaking on talkSPORT’s Transfer Insiders, reporter Ben Jacobs further explained how the deal exposed a UEFA ‘loophole’.
“It’s slightly different to Harvey Elliott, because it’s kind of a permanent exit as opposed to a loan with assessment, and then Unai Emery obviously didn’t want Harvey Elliott,” Jacobs explained.
“There was a low enough number that would have triggered the permanent purchase of Elliott and Villa decided to kind of freeze him out, which was unfortunate for all parties because Elliott had a phenomenal number with England U21s and it set him back.
“This deal is more about being financially creative under new UEFA FFP rules. Essentially, under FFP, to stop these mutually beneficial deals, but are two separate bits of business that each club can reflect positively on their books because you get your sale fee on your annual books, and it’s problem solved in the short term.
“You get the part that you invest amortised over the length of the contract and it’s less palatable and it helps you navigate the financial rules.
“So, what UEFA did recently is they said, ‘If in a 45-day window you do these separate or mirrored deals, then you can just declare them individually and both benefit.’ You’ve got to take the net and ultimately factor them in as if they were almost swap deals.’
“But if you do one that is £117m for Morgan Rogers and then a totally separate to a loan with a conditional obligation, there’s a loophole. And when the obligation is triggered and you finally get your fee, you’ll be outside of that 45-day window.
“So I sense that Garnacho, Villa and Chelsea all understand that this is a permanent deal wrapped up in a loan with a conditional obligation to buy structure.”
How UEFA could still prove thorn in Villa’s side
However, Villa are not necessarily out of the woods just yet.
Per UEFA’s rules, if the conditions required to trigger the obligation are ‘considered to be virtually certain’, then both clubs must book the deal as a permanent rather than a loan.
That would be less than ideal for Villa given the profit they made from selling Rogers.
The way in which UEFA would allow Garnacho’s deal to be recognised as a loan rather than a permanent from the outset is whether ‘the fulfilment of a condition cannot be assessed with sufficient certainty to trigger the permanent transfer from the inception of the loan.’
With UEFA’s 45-day window in mind, that means Villa’s mooted pursuit of Chelsea striker Nicolas Jackson may not get very far.
Jackson was offered to Villa by the Blues and is admired by Emery, who worked with the forward at Villarreal.
However, UEFA’s rules could force Villa to push any pursuit of Jackson back to January, unless they make another major sale this window that would lessen the impact of not booking the maximum profit from the Rogers sale.