Manchester City’s strategy in its appeal against an independent commission’s findings on Premier League financial rules has come under scrutiny following a 2015 statement by its main sponsor, Etihad Airways.

City is expected to argue that additional funding for sponsorship agreements between 2009 and 2018 came from the Abu Dhabi government rather than the club’s majority owners, Abu Dhabi United Group ADUG, according to reports on the club’s appeal.

However, a submission made by Etihad to the US Departments of Commerce, Transportation and State in May 2015 appears to contradict that position.

In the submission, Etihad said claims that the Abu Dhabi government paid for its sponsorship of Manchester City were false, adding that the airline had funded the sponsorship from its own liquidity.

Etihad also stated that although it was owned by the Abu Dhabi government, it did not receive government subsidies and was financed through equity, shareholder loans and commercial loans.

An independent disciplinary commission recently found Manchester City guilty of financial rule breaches, concluding that about £830 million in owner funding had been disguised as sponsorship income over nine seasons between 2009 and 2018.

The commission rejected City’s explanation that the additional sponsorship funding came from the Abu Dhabi government, describing the account in its published judgment as an explanation developed after the events to conceal the alleged funding arrangement.

City has denied wrongdoing and lodged an appeal against the commission’s findings.

The club’s current position also differs from evidence presented during its successful 2020 appeal against a UEFA financial fair play ban at the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne.

At that hearing, former Etihad chief executive James Hogan gave evidence that sponsorship obligations to Manchester City had been paid from Etihad’s own funds.

The latest appeal therefore places renewed focus on how the club explains the source of sponsorship payments and the relationship between the Abu Dhabi government, Etihad and its ownership structure.

Manchester City maintains that it has evidence to challenge the commission’s findings, while the appeal process is expected to determine whether the club’s arguments overturn or alter the conclusions reached by the independent panel.