FIFA has accused UEFA of pursuing a campaign to damage its reputation after European football’s governing body sought access to documents concerning a controversial private investment proposal linked to the World Cup.
The latest confrontation emerged after UEFA approached courts in three US states seeking evidence from FIFA and companies involved in the abandoned FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) project. The European body says the documents could support potential legal proceedings against FIFA President Gianni Infantino in Switzerland.
FIFA has now asked a US court to block or delay UEFA’s requests, arguing that UEFA lacks the legal basis to demand its internal records. The governing body also claims that releasing correspondence involving Infantino, FIFA officials, advisers and business partners could expose confidential and commercially sensitive information.
The dispute represents a fresh escalation in the battle between FIFA and UEFA over the governance and commercial future of global football.
UEFA’s legal campaign follows the collapse of FIFA’s plan to introduce private investment into the commercial structure surrounding its competitions.
The proposed FIFA Forward Enterprise was designed to attract billions of dollars from investors while allowing FIFA to maintain majority ownership. The proposal reportedly targeted about $4.2 billion in investment and involved potential participation by Thrive Capital, the investment firm founded by Joshua Kushner.
The proposal faced strong resistance from several football authorities, particularly after concerns emerged over transparency, consultation and the extent to which private investors could become involved in World Cup-related commercial rights.
FIFA eventually abandoned the initiative following the backlash.
UEFA subsequently moved to gather evidence in the United States, saying the material could be used in connection with a possible complaint in Switzerland alleging criminal mismanagement.
The European body has not limited its criticism to the investment proposal. It has also questioned FIFA’s leadership structure and the concentration of authority around Infantino.
FIFA’s response centres on the legal standing of UEFA’s US applications.
According to FIFA’s court filings, UEFA cannot demand the disclosure of internal documents because no criminal proceedings have yet been opened in Switzerland or elsewhere. FIFA also argues that UEFA has not demonstrated the financial loss required to justify its requests.
The organisation further contends that UEFA should not use American courts to obtain information for a potential Swiss case.
FIFA’s position is that the discovery requests go beyond legitimate evidence gathering and could expose sensitive information relating to its operations and leadership.
The documents UEFA is seeking reportedly include communications involving:
- FIFA President Gianni Infantino;
- FIFA officials and advisers;
- Potential investors and commercial partners;
- Individuals involved in developing the FFE proposal.
The court proceedings therefore have significance beyond the abandoned investment plan, as they could reveal how the proposal was developed and who was involved in discussions surrounding it.
The dispute also has political implications for Infantino, who is seeking another term as FIFA president.
UEFA has emerged as one of his strongest critics and has indicated that it wants significant changes to FIFA’s governance. The European body has been joined by CONCACAF and the Asian Football Confederation in challenging aspects of Infantino’s leadership and the way major decisions are made within the organisation.
CONCACAF President Victor Montagliani has emerged as a potential challenger, although the FIFA election landscape remains fluid.
UEFA President Aleksander Čeferin, meanwhile, has ruled himself out of challenging Infantino.
The controversy comes after Infantino’s position appeared strengthened by the successful 2026 World Cup, but the fallout from the private investment proposal has reopened questions about his leadership and FIFA’s decision-making process.
At the heart of the FIFA-UEFA dispute is a broader disagreement over who should control football’s commercial future and how much authority FIFA’s president should wield.
UEFA, CONCACAF and the AFC have argued for greater institutional checks and transparency. FIFA, however, has rejected suggestions that the abandoned proposal demonstrated improper leadership or management.
The disagreement also reflects a longstanding tension between FIFA’s global mandate and the interests of its continental confederations.
The failed FFE initiative has become a particularly important flashpoint because it involved potentially substantial changes to how revenues from FIFA competitions could be structured and monetised.
With UEFA continuing to pursue evidence and FIFA challenging the US proceedings, the legal dispute could determine whether more details about the proposal become public.
The immediate issue is whether the US courts will allow UEFA’s discovery requests to proceed.
If UEFA succeeds, information obtained through the US proceedings could potentially be used in a future Swiss legal complaint. If FIFA prevails, UEFA’s effort to obtain evidence through the American courts could face a significant setback.
The dispute is therefore no longer simply about a cancelled investment proposal. It has evolved into a wider confrontation over FIFA’s governance, Infantino’s leadership and the commercial control of the world’s biggest football competitions.
The outcome could have consequences for the FIFA presidency and for future attempts to introduce private capital into international football.
