FIFA Hits Back at UEFA in Legal Dispute, Accusing European Body of ‘Misinformation’ Campaign Over Infantino’s Shelved World Cup Investment Plan
FIFA has launched a blistering attack on European football’s governing body UEFA, accusing it of running a “misinformation” campaign and attempting to interfere in next year’s FIFA presidential election through legal maneuvers. The accusations were made in a court filing in Florida, where FIFA is responding to UEFA’s attempts to force the release of documents relating to FIFA president Gianni Infantino’s controversial—and since abandoned—plan to sell off stakes in some of the sport’s most prestigious competitions, including the World Cup. The documents are central to a wider legal battle between the two continental confederations, who have been at loggerheads for years over issues of governance, commercial power, and the global calendar. In its response, FIFA asserts that UEFA’s demands are not merely about transparency but are a calculated political move designed to weaken Infantino ahead of the vote, which is scheduled for March next year. The filing characterizes UEFA’s requests as a “strategic” attempt to gain an advantage in what has become a deeply personal and increasingly hostile rivalry between world football’s governing body and its wealthiest, most influential continental member.
The core of FIFA’s defense in the Florida case rests on what it describes as a pattern of “false or misleading statements” made by UEFA about both Infantino and the world body itself. According to the filing, UEFA has made a series of allegations that are baseless and designed to smear the FIFA president, most notably the claim that “Infantino sought to profit personally from the FFE proposal.” This refers to the FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) initiative, a plan unveiled in July that would have created a new commercial subsidiary to manage and market FIFA’s flagship events, such as the men’s and women’s World Cups and the expanded Club World Cup. Under the proposal, private investors would have been allowed to purchase equity in this new company, effectively giving outside commercial parties a direct stake in the revenue streams of global football. FIFA argues that this was a legitimate attempt to maximize income for the good of the game, but the backlash was immediate and ferocious. Within days, the proposal was shelved, but the controversy has continued to fester, with UEFA using it as a key piece of ammunition in its ongoing campaign against Infantino’s leadership.
In its court filing, FIFA does not pull its punches, framing UEFA’s legal action as a cynical attempt to politicize what should be a straightforward commercial and administrative matter. The world governing body argues that UEFA’s bid to access the internal documents is not driven by a genuine need for information but by a desire to “influence” the outcome of the FIFA presidential election. The timing of the legal push, coming just months before the vote, is seen in Zurich as highly suspicious. FIFA contends that UEFA sees Infantino as a threat to its own power and influence within the sport, and that the European body has been actively seeking to engineer his downfall. UEFA, for its part, has positioned itself as the leader of the opposition to Infantino, with several of its most powerful member associations—including the federations of World Cup holders Spain, as well as France, England, and Germany—reportedly supportive of efforts to unseat him. This political battle has spilled over into multiple arenas, including the courts, where UEFA is attempting to scrutinize the decision-making processes behind the now-defunct FFE plan.
The FFE proposal, and the chaos that followed its brief public life, has become a defining episode in Infantino’s tenure. When first announced, the initiative was presented as a groundbreaking way to unlock private capital and accelerate investment in football development worldwide. The idea was to create a dedicated company—a “special purpose vehicle”—that would commercially exploit FIFA’s key tournaments, with investors buying equity and sharing in the profits. For a debt-ridden and often scandal-plagued organization like FIFA, the appeal was clear: a potential flood of new money without having to rely solely on traditional sponsorship and broadcasting deals. However, critics, led by UEFA, immediately condemned the plan as a reckless and dangerous move that could cede control of football’s most sacred assets to outside profiteers. The backlash was so intense, with threats of legal action and outright rebellion from several national associations, that Infantino was forced to execute a tactical retreat. He formally withdrew the proposal, but the damage had been done, cementing the perception among his detractors that he was willing to make perilous compromises in the pursuit of revenue.
Infantino, however, shows no sign of backing down, and FIFA has confirmed that he will stand for re-election in March, despite the controversy. In a letter sent this week to all 211 member associations, Infantino sought to seize back the narrative by focusing on the tangible benefits his leadership has brought to the sport, particularly for developing nations. In the letter, seen by AFP, he promised to support “the greatest level of additional funding that can responsibly be delivered” from FIFA’s substantial cash reserves. He also revisited the FFE fiasco, insisting that his intentions had been honorable. “The recent commercial proposal, now withdrawn, was intended to enable FIFA to invest more in football,” Infantino wrote, trying to frame the debacle not as a power grab or a reckless gamble, but as a well-meaning idea that was misunderstood and unfairly attacked. This appeal to the broader FIFA membership, many of whom are the beneficiaries of FIFA’s financial support, is a clear counter-strategy to UEFA’s more public and aggressive criticism.
As the court case in Florida progresses and the election campaign begins to heat up, Infantino is not without powerful allies. Last month, he received a significant public endorsement from Saudi Arabia, the hosts of the 2034 World Cup, signaling a strong geopolitical divide within the sport. He also continues to enjoy the backing of the African Football Confederation (CAF) and South America’s CONMEBOL, both of whom rely heavily on FIFA’s financial support and development programs. This makes the upcoming election less of a one-sided contest than UEFA might hope. While UEFA and its wealthy European members wield enormous influence, they face a formidable opponent in Infantino, who has cultivated close relationships with federations across Africa, Asia, and the Americas, often by redistributing FIFA’s wealth. The battle is not just about personality, but about the direction of global football. FIFA’s aggressive legal response to UEFA is a clear warning that it will not allow its president to be undermined without a fight, setting the stage for a bitter and divisive contest that could reshape the governance of the sport for years to come. For now, the Florida court’s ruling on the document request will be closely watched, as it may well determine whether this conflict plays out in public or remains behind closed doors.