Tottenham Hotspur’s 2024-25 accounts detail a worst-ever pre-tax loss and a growing need for cash, even amid record revenues.
The north London club won the Europa League last season yet finished 17th in the Premier League and the club’s latest financials, published on Tuesday, mirror those on-field contradictions.
Spurs’ deficit tumbled to £120.6million ($160m), a near-£100m worsening on a season earlier, though the club’s income statement is subject to several quirks not applicable to other Premier League sides. Tottenham Hotspur Stadium (THS) generated a huge £57.6m ($76m) paper depreciation charge, an accounting concept that writes down the value of fixed assets over a deemed lifespan.
That is around triple the league’s next highest figure and a byproduct of Spurs building such an expensive home and writing it down over a relatively short timeframe. Depreciation costs are deductible from a profitability and sustainability rules (PSR) standpoint.
While the loss figure deserves treating with nuance — a further £23.4m ($30.9m) last season was attributable to the shifting value of warrant rights, whereby warrant holders have an opportunity to buy club shares at a fixed price, and so is not reflective of the club’s underlying performance — of greater concern is how much recent years’ activity has eaten into Spurs’ cash balance.
At the end of June 2025, the club held just £20.4m ($26.9m) in liquid cash, a 10-year low and a reduction of nearly £180m ($237.8m) in the last two years. That is just a snapshot in time, and there is reason to doubt the efficacy of holding huge amounts of cash without utilising them, but there are wider signals that Spurs are less self-sustaining than they have been at any other time under ENIC’s quarter-century of ownership, even as this season saw a return to the Champions League and the riches that brings.
The Athletic highlighted Spurs’ tightening cash position a year ago, and the latest accounts only serve to underline the matter. Spurs continue to be hugely cash generative at the operating level — they made £92m ($121.5m) from the day-to-day last season, a level only Arsenal, Liverpool and Manchester United top (Manchester City do not disclose their cash flow statement) — but the size of the club’s outgoings, principally on transfer fees, has seen them turn evermore to other sources of funding.
Spurs’ free cash flow — cash generated after covering operating costs and capital spending, like that on transfers — has been consistently negative since the mid-2010s. That was obvious for the first few years: they had a £1bn-plus stadium to build.
The stadium build naturally brought with it significant external borrowing, but the cash situation has not improved since its completion in 2019. Spurs have shifted to big spending in the transfer market, with a net outlay of £561.6m ($742m) on players in the past six seasons. At the end of June 2025, Spurs’ net transfer debt to other clubs was £242.8m ($320.8m). A further net £159m ($210m) was spent on players last summer.
Owner ENIC took the largely unprecedented move of injecting £97.5m ($128.7m) as shares in May 2022. That was announced by the club, but much less fanfare was afforded to a £35m ($46.2m) equity raise in December 2024. Likewise, these accounts detail a further share issue from ENIC in October 2025, but do not deign to disclose the sum involved: £100m ($132m).
That £35m ($46.2m) combined with Spurs delving into nearly £60m ($79.2m) of the club’s existing cash to offset the negative free cash flow of £91.7m ($121m) last season. It is the second year in succession that free cash has dipped nearly £100m ($132m) into the red.
This season’s return to elite European competition should confer improved resources — The Athletic estimates the journey to the round of 16 generated £74m ($97.7m) in prize money — but of course, Spurs have not slowed their transfer spending. Stadium debts were acquired under former chairman Daniel Levy at impressively low rates, particularly in today’s economy, but still seize £30m ($39.6m) in annual cash from club coffers.
The £100m of ENIC funding in October came soon after another transaction only sparingly alluded to in these accounts. In early September, around the time Levy departed, the club entered into a shorter-term arrangement with Macquarie, a regular lender to football clubs.
Spurs’ lending with Macquarie is referenced as a ‘factoring arrangement’ in the accounts; in essence, Spurs have pulled forward Premier League prize money distributions, receiving money now in exchange for Macquarie taking a cut of proceeds that would otherwise wholly go to the club. It is not rare for clubs to do this; it is rare for Spurs.
How Spurs’ finances look going forward will be defined by on-field events in the immediate future. Winless since December and just one point above the Premier League relegation zone with seven games remaining this season, that cash squeeze could be about to get even worse.