Multiple reports suggest that Roman Abramovich, the Russian billionaire and former owner of Chelsea FC, could owe up to £1 billion in unpaid UK taxes. The allegations stem from his offshore hedge fund dealings, which may have been structured to avoid taxation.

An investigation suggests that Abramovich used offshore entities to shield profits from tax obligations. The UK’s tax authority, HMRC, reviews whether he underpaid taxes on substantial earnings linked to hedge funds. If the findings hold, he could face one of UK history’s most significant individual tax bills.

The issue is tied to complex offshore financial arrangements that Abramovich allegedly employed for years. Sources indicate that profits from his investments may not have been adequately declared, potentially violating UK tax regulations. The exact mechanisms are still under scrutiny, but experts believe the liabilities could include penalties and interest, further inflating the total owed.

Abramovich has denied any wrongdoing. His representatives argue that he has complied with all relevant tax laws and that any evasion claims are unfounded. However, given his status as a sanctioned Russian oligarch, his financial dealings are now under heightened scrutiny.

The potential tax liability adds to the financial and legal challenges Abramovich has faced since Western sanctions were imposed following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. His UK assets, including Chelsea FC, were frozen, and he was forced to sell the football club in 2022. His international financial network has also been targeted by regulatory authorities, making it increasingly difficult for him to access or move funds.

If HMRC pursues the case, Abramovich may have limited options to contest the claims, mainly due to restrictions on his legal and financial activities in the UK. Some analysts suggest that the UK government could recover the owed taxes by seizing assets linked to Abramovich, though enforcement would depend on the legal viability of such actions.

As the investigation unfolds, the case could set a precedent for scrutinizing offshore wealth management strategies other high-net-worth individuals use to minimize tax exposure.