German antitrust authority questions Bundesliga 50+1 rule exceptions

Germany's Federal Cartel Office has declared the Bundesliga's "50+1" rule, which ensures club members retain majority voting rights, as legitimate under cartel law. However, the authority has raised concerns about exceptions granted to clubs like Bayer Leverkusen and VfL Wolfsburg, which are wholly owned by Bayer and Volkswagen, respectively. The office stated that for the rule to remain legitimate, it must be applied consistently across all clubs in the first and second divisions, without objective reasons for differentiation.

“

The Federal Cartel Office considers the 50+1 rule legitimate from a cartel law perspective. One condition, however, is that it is applied consistently and without differences, as long as there are no objective reasons for it.

Andreas Mundt, president of the Federal Cartel Office, emphasized that the German Football League (DFL) must ensure legal certainty in applying the rule to avoid conflicts with EU competition regulations. He highlighted two key areas for the DFL to address: first, ensuring open pathways for fans to become members and participate in club decisions at all clubs, and second, strictly adhering to the 50+1 rule in voting processes.

The exceptions primarily affect Bayer Leverkusen and VfL Wolfsburg, as well as RB Leipzig, where fan membership is significantly limited and tied to the energy drink company Red Bull. The office also pointed to a case involving Hannover 96, where a majority shareholder allegedly voted against a mandate from a fan assembly. The Federal Cartel Office clarified that it has not initiated and does not plan to initiate proceedings against the 50+1 rule itself, stating its current decision is a response to a DFL inquiry.

“

First, the DFL must ensure that, in all clubs of the first and second Bundesliga, there are open paths for supporters to become members of the club and participate in decisions.

This decision takes into account recent European Court of Justice rulings that permit competition-limiting rules if they serve a legitimate objective for the common good. The authority concluded that the DFL does not sufficiently ensure that all clubs offer fans the possibility of becoming members when granting licenses. Removing these exceptions, the office suggested, would end the current inequality and provide greater legal security for the rule's application.

“

Second, it must guarantee that the rule is strictly adhered to in the votes themselves.