FIFA Accuses UEFA of ‘Misinformation Campaign’ and Election Interference Over Scrapped Investment Plan
In a sharply worded legal response, FIFA has accused UEFA of waging a deliberate “misinformation campaign” and attempting to influence the upcoming race for the FIFA presidency, as world football’s governing body pushed back against a US court request tied to a controversial investment proposal that was abandoned last summer. The dispute centres on a now-defunct plan to transfer World Cup commercial rights to a subsidiary called FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), which UEFA alleges was developed in secret by FIFA president Gianni Infantino and a small circle of advisers and investors. UEFA had asked a US federal court for permission to obtain testimony and documents for use in a planned criminal complaint in Switzerland against Infantino. However, in its formal response filed on September 28 in the Southern District of Florida, FIFA said UEFA’s brief contained “numerous false or misleading statements about FIFA and Infantino,” and urged the court to reject the discovery request outright. The filing marks a dramatic escalation in the ongoing power struggle between European football’s governing body and the global federation, with FIFA explicitly framing UEFA’s legal manoeuvres as an effort to taint Infantino’s reputation ahead of his expected re-election bid.
UEFA’s application, submitted in August, invoked a US statute that allows parties to gather evidence for use in foreign proceedings, specifically seeking discovery from FIFA (AMERICAS) and FWC2026 US, two Florida-based FIFA entities. According to the legal filing seen by Reuters, UEFA intends to use the material in a criminal complaint it plans to file in Switzerland against Infantino over the FFE project. UEFA alleged that Infantino developed the proposal with a small group of advisers and investors, bypassing FIFA’s normal governance processes and failing to consult FIFA’s Council, regional confederations, or member associations. The filing also claimed that investors would have paid US$4.2 billion (S$5.4 billion) for a stake in FFE, valuing the business at about US$20 billion. UEFA argued that this valuation significantly undervalued FIFA’s commercial rights, noting that it was not subjected to an open auction or tested by an independent valuer. The implication, although not explicitly stated, was that the structure could have allowed private investors to secure control of valuable World Cup-related assets at an unfairly low price, potentially enriching insiders at the expense of FIFA and the wider football community.
FIFA’s response dismissed these allegations as baseless and categorically denied any wrongdoing by Infantino. “With no basis whatsoever, UEFA suggests that Mr Infantino sought to profit personally from the FFE proposal,” FIFA said in its filing, which opposed UEFA’s motion for discovery. The organisation stressed that the FFE plan was subject to approval by both the FIFA member associations and the FIFA Council, and that FFE would have been subject to oversight by both groups within FIFA. “UEFA’s suggestions that Mr Infantino violated any law or ethical principle are categorically without merit,” the filing continued. On the specific question of valuation, FIFA argued that UEFA had made a fundamental error, conflating equity value with enterprise value. FIFA explained that while FFE’s initial equity valuation was indeed US$20 billion, the total enterprise value — meaning the entire value of the business, including debts and other obligations — was “well over US$30 billion.” According to FIFA, materials distributed to member associations revealed that the enterprise value was “well in excess of twice the equity value, and therefore far above the value UEFA says would be fair.” This point was central to FIFA’s attempt to undermine UEFA’s central claim that the proposal undervalued FIFA’s assets.
The FFE project was abandoned in July after fierce opposition from several confederations, including UEFA, CONCACAF, and the Asian Football Confederation, all of which complained about a lack of consultation and transparency. The controversy reignited long-standing criticisms of FIFA’s governance, with critics alleging that key decisions were being made by a small group without proper oversight from member associations or regional bodies. In response to the backlash, Infantino last week wrote to all 211 member associations proposing an independent review of FIFA’s decision-making processes. That move was widely interpreted as an attempt to calm the storm and demonstrate a willingness to reform, but it has done little to ease tensions with UEFA. The European body has been increasingly vocal in its demands for changes to FIFA’s governance, and the FFE episode has become a flashpoint in that broader struggle. FIFA’s legal filing now casts UEFA’s discovery request not as a legitimate effort to pursue potential wrongdoing, but as part of a coordinated campaign to destabilise Infantino and undermine confidence in FIFA’s leadership ahead of a critical election.
The timing of UEFA’s legal filings is central to FIFA’s argument. Infantino is up for re-election in March 2027, and FIFA alleges that UEFA’s applications, filed just before the election season, are designed to influence its outcome. “Just before FIFA’s election, UEFA filed this 1782 Application (and three others) spreading misinformation regarding Mr Infantino,” FIFA said. “This court should reject any attempt to influence FIFA’s presidential election based on these grounds.” By invoking the phrase “and three others,” FIFA suggests that UEFA has launched multiple legal actions across different jurisdictions, all seemingly timed to maximum political effect. FIFA’s filing does not specify exactly which other applications it is referring to, but the mention indicates that this is not an isolated legal skirmish. Instead, FIFA appears to be arguing that UEFA is waging a broader legal and public relations war against Infantino, using discovery requests and criminal complaints as weapons. UEFA, which has declined to comment on FIFA’s latest filing, has not directly responded to these accusations of election interference, leaving the dispute to be settled in court and in the court of public opinion.
As the legal battle moves forward, the stakes for both organisations are considerable. For FIFA, a ruling in favour of UEFA could open the door to further discovery and potentially expose internal documents related to the FFE proposal, which could prove embarrassing and strengthen calls for governance reform. For UEFA, the outcome will determine whether it can obtain evidence from US-based FIFA entities to support its planned criminal complaint in Switzerland, a move that could escalate the confrontation from a commercial and governance dispute into a formal criminal matter. For now, FIFA has gone on the offensive, accusing UEFA of distorting facts and attempting to manipulate the presidential election. The organisation has also sought to reframe the narrative, presenting the FFE plan as a properly governed initiative that would have been subject to approval and oversight, and dismissing UEFA’s valuation concerns as a misunderstanding of basic financial terms. Whether a US court will accept FIFA’s arguments and reject UEFA’s discovery request remains to be seen. Regardless of the outcome, the dispute has already deepened the rift between world football’s governing body and its most powerful regional confederation, ensuring that the fight over FIFA’s future will continue well beyond the courtroom.