The Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) is reportedly gearing up to file criminal charges against FIFA President Gianni Infantino in connection with a controversial plan to sell portions of the World Cup to private investors. This development emerges from legal documents that were obtained by Sky News, which reveal that UEFA has issued subpoenas to FIFA and several financial institutions in the United States, demanding the production of records related to the proposed transaction. According to the filings, the intended legal proceedings will be launched in Switzerland, the jurisdiction where FIFA’s headquarters are located.
By taking this step, UEFA is signaling that its strategy extends far beyond merely attempting to remove Infantino from his leadership role; it seeks to hold him accountable for what UEFA characterises as a serious breach of fiduciary duty and an attempt to privatise a segment of the world’s most prestigious football tournament. A confidential legal memorandum 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." This language underscores the breadth of the allegations, suggesting that the alleged scheme not only jeopardised FIFA’s brand and governance but also threatened the financial interests of every national association affiliated with the global body. The procedural history of the case begins with UEFA filing a civil complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint targets JP Morgan Chase, which acted as a financial adviser on the deal, as well as Thrive Capital, a venture‑capital firm identified as the prospective lead investor.
Thrive’s chief executive, Joshua Kushner, is noted for his familial connection to the Trump administration, being the brother of Jared Kushner, former senior adviser to President Donald Trump. By naming these parties, UEFA appears to be constructing a multi‑jurisdictional legal strategy that leverages both U.S. and Swiss courts to compel the disclosure of documents and to potentially pursue criminal liability. In parallel, UEFA has indicated that it will also pursue actions in Miami, where FIFA’s legal department is based.
This dual‑track approach suggests that UEFA is prepared to use every available legal avenue to scrutinise the transaction, extract evidence, and ultimately bring charges against any individuals it believes have acted in breach of their duties to the sport. The controversy centers on a proposal that would have allowed private capital to acquire a stake in the commercial rights associated with the World Cup. Critics argue that such a move could undermine the principle that the World Cup is a global public good, managed collectively by the sport’s governing bodies for the benefit of all member associations.
By attempting to monetize a portion of the tournament’s revenue streams, opponents fear that the integrity of the competition could be compromised, with private investors potentially exerting influence over scheduling, broadcasting, and sponsorship decisions. Supporters of the plan, however, have claimed that bringing in private investment could inject much‑needed capital into the sport, enabling FIFA to fund development projects, improve infrastructure, and enhance the fan experience. They argue that a carefully structured partnership could align the interests of investors with those of the football community, provided that robust safeguards are put in place to protect the sport’s governance. UEFA’s move to pursue criminal proceedings marks a significant escalation in the ongoing power struggle between the two organisations.
Historically, UEFA has often been at odds with FIFA over issues ranging from competition formats to financial transparency. This latest action could set a precedent for how football’s governing bodies handle allegations of financial misconduct and could reshape the balance of power within the sport’s hierarchy.
If UEFA’s allegations are substantiated, the ramifications could be far‑reaching. A conviction under Article 158 of the Swiss Criminal Code— which deals with breaches of duty and mismanagement— could lead to fines, bans from football administration, and potentially even imprisonment for those found guilty.
Moreover, the reputational damage to FIFA could be severe, eroding trust among sponsors, broadcasters, and fans worldwide. The case also raises broader questions about the governance of global sport. As football continues to generate billions of dollars in revenue, the need for transparent, accountable management becomes ever more critical. Stakeholders—including national associations, clubs, players, and supporters—are increasingly demanding that the sport’s leadership operate with the same level of scrutiny applied to other major industries.
In the coming weeks, both UEFA and FIFA are expected to present further evidence and legal arguments. Observers will be watching closely to see whether the Swiss authorities will open a criminal investigation, how the U.S. courts will handle the civil complaint, and what impact this will have on the planned privatization scheme.
Regardless of the outcome, the episode underscores the growing complexity of football’s financial ecosystem and the importance of robust oversight mechanisms to protect the sport’s integrity for future generations. Play Super 6 for a chance to win £1m! Enter for free.