The Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) is reportedly gearing up to file criminal charges against FIFA’s president, Gianni Infantino, over a controversial plan to sell portions of the World Cup to private investors. The information comes from legal documents that were obtained by Sky News, which reveal that UEFA has issued subpoenas to FIFA and several financial institutions operating in the United States in order to gather evidence related to the proposed transaction. According to the filings, the intended legal proceedings will be launched in Switzerland, the country that hosts FIFA’s headquarters.
By taking this step, UEFA is signalling that it wants to go beyond merely seeking Infantino’s removal from office; it is aiming to hold him and possibly other FIFA officials accountable for what it describes as a serious breach of fiduciary duty. A document reviewed by Sky News states: "UEFA and other interested parties are preparing to bring criminal claims in Switzerland against Infantino and possibly other FIFA officials and advisors for criminal mismanagement under Article 158 of the Swiss Criminal Code and such further or alternative charges as the developed factual record may support, arising out of the secretive structuring, valuation, financing, and marketing of a transaction that inflicted direct and concrete injury on FIFA's reputation, governance authority, and commercial relationships to the detriment of FIFA as well as its 211 members, including UEFA's 55 member associations." The passage makes clear that UEFA believes the alleged scheme caused tangible damage not only to FIFA’s brand and governance but also to the commercial ties that underpin the global game.
The organization argues that the secretive nature of the deal—its valuation, financing arrangements, and the way it was marketed—undermined confidence among sponsors, broadcasters, and national associations, thereby harming the entire football ecosystem. The legal maneuver began with an application filed by UEFA in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
That filing names JP Morgan Bank as a defendant, alongside Thrive Capital, a venture‑capital firm slated to lead the investment, and its chief executive, Joshua Kushner. Kushner is notably the brother of Jared Kushner, who is married to former President Donald Trump’s daughter.
By targeting these parties, UEFA appears to be attempting to trace the financial flow behind the proposed privatization and to hold the intermediaries responsible for any wrongdoing. In addition to the New York filing, UEFA is also pursuing action in Miami, where FIFA’s legal department is based. The dual‑jurisdiction strategy suggests that UEFA is prepared to use every available legal avenue to compel the release of documents, force transparency, and potentially secure sanctions against those it believes have acted improperly. The broader context of this dispute is the ongoing tension between UEFA and FIFA over governance and control of the sport.
UEFA, which represents 55 national associations within Europe, has long been critical of Infantino’s leadership style and his push for reforms that many European officials view as consolidating power at the global level. The alleged attempt to commercialise a share of the World Cup—arguably the most lucrative event in football—has been framed by UEFA as an effort to privatise a public good, thereby jeopardising the collective interests of the sport’s stakeholders.
If UEFA’s criminal complaints succeed, they could trigger a series of investigations under Swiss law, where Article 158 of the Swiss Criminal Code addresses breaches of duty by persons in positions of trust. Convictions could lead to fines, bans from football administration, or even imprisonment for those found guilty. Moreover, the case could set a precedent for how football’s governing bodies are held accountable for financial decisions that affect the entire ecosystem.
The potential fallout extends beyond legal penalties. A conviction or even a prolonged legal battle could damage FIFA’s relationships with sponsors, broadcasters, and national federations, many of which have already expressed concern about the lack of transparency surrounding the deal. It could also embolden other continental confederations to challenge FIFA’s authority, potentially reshaping the power dynamics that have defined world football for decades.
Critics of UEFA’s approach argue that the organization is over‑reaching, suggesting that the dispute should be settled through internal football governance mechanisms rather than criminal courts. They point out that the complexities of international sport finance often require nuanced solutions that may not fit neatly within criminal statutes.
Nevertheless, UEFA maintains that the alleged actions constitute clear criminal mismanagement, and that the only way to protect the integrity of the sport is through robust legal action. As the case unfolds, both sides are likely to marshal extensive legal teams and public relations campaigns. FIFA will probably argue that the proposed investment was a legitimate effort to diversify revenue streams and that any procedural shortcomings were inadvertent rather than malicious. UEFA, on the other hand, will emphasize the lack of consultation with its member associations and the potential conflict of interest inherent in allowing private capital to influence the World Cup’s governance.
The situation also raises broader questions about the commercialization of sport and the role of private capital in events traditionally managed by public or non‑profit entities. While the infusion of private investment can bring new resources and innovation, it also carries risks of profit‑driven decision‑making that may clash with the sport’s cultural and social responsibilities.
In the meantime, the legal filings have already sparked intense debate within the football community, with fans, journalists, and officials weighing in on the merits of UEFA’s strategy. Some view the move as a necessary check on a powerful FIFA leadership, while others caution that criminal proceedings could further polarise an already divided sport. Regardless of the outcome, the case underscores the growing importance of transparency, accountability, and good governance in global football.
As UEFA prepares to bring its criminal claims before Swiss courts, the world will be watching to see whether this unprecedented legal challenge will reshape the balance of power between the sport’s continental and global governing bodies. Play Super 6 for a chance to win £1m!
Enter for free.