FIFA Accuses UEFA of Waging Misinformation Campaign as Presidential Election Looms

FIFA has launched a sharp counterattack against UEFA, accusing European football's governing body of conducting a "misinformation campaign" aimed at swaying the outcome of FIFA's upcoming presidential election. The allegation came in a court filing submitted Tuesday in the Southern District of Florida, where FIFA is urging a United States judge to deny UEFA's request to gather testimony and documents for use in a planned criminal complaint in Switzerland against FIFA President Gianni Infantino.

The legal dispute stems from a now-abandoned proposal to move the commercial rights of the World Cup into a separate subsidiary named FIFA Forward Enterprise, or FFE. UEFA contends that Infantino secretly developed the plan alongside a small circle of advisers and investors, circumventing FIFA's established governance channels and neglecting to consult the FIFA Council, regional confederations, or member associations. Those claims form the backbone of UEFA's push for discovery in the US court.

In its response, FIFA rejected UEFA's characterization as riddled with inaccuracies. The global governing body said UEFA's brief included "numerous false or misleading statements" about both FIFA and its president, and it pushed back firmly on the suggestion that Infantino stood to gain personally from the FFE arrangement. FIFA emphasized that the proposal would have required approval from both its member associations and the FIFA Council, and that FFE would have operated under the oversight of those same bodies.

"UEFA's suggestions that Mr Infantino violated any law or ethical principle are categorically without merit," FIFA stated in the filing. The organization also took aim at UEFA's financial analysis of the deal, arguing that the European body had confused equity value with enterprise value. According to FIFA, the "initial equity valuation" of FFE — the amount left for shareholders after debts are settled — stood at $20 billion, while the total enterprise value exceeded $30 billion, more than double the equity figure and well above what UEFA has described as a fair price.

UEFA's legal filing alleged that investors had offered $4.2 billion for a stake in FFE, a sum that would have valued the business at roughly $20 billion. UEFA argued this significantly undervalued FIFA's commercial rights, particularly since the proposal was never subjected to an open auction or evaluated by an independent valuer. FIFA's rebuttal seeks to dismantle that argument by drawing a distinction between the two valuation metrics.

The FFE project was shelved in July after facing resistance from multiple confederations, including UEFA, the Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football, and the Asian Football Confederation. Critics cited a lack of consultation as their central concern, and the controversy has intensified calls for reforms to FIFA's governance structure. The episode has become a flashpoint in the broader power struggle between FIFA's leadership and Europe's most influential football body.

In a move that appears intended to defuse mounting pressure, Infantino wrote last week to all 211 FIFA member associations, proposing an independent review of how the governing body makes decisions. The Swiss administrator, who is seeking re-election in March, has also indicated a willingness to discuss the disbursement of millions of dollars to member associations. The precise amounts allocated to individual nations are expected to be on the agenda when the FIFA Council convenes on October 15.

FIFA's court filing directly ties UEFA's legal maneuvers to the approaching election, alleging that the European body filed its application — along with three others — just before the vote in order to spread misinformation about Infantino. The filing asks the court to reject any effort to influence the presidential race through such means. The timing of the discovery requests, FIFA argues, reveals a political motive beneath the legal arguments.

UEFA's original request, submitted last month, sought permission from the US federal court to obtain testimony and documents that could support a criminal complaint in Switzerland. That complaint would target Infantino over the FFE plan, which UEFA claims bypassed normal governance procedures. The request falls under a US legal mechanism that allows foreign courts and litigants to gather evidence located on American soil for use in overseas proceedings.

The dispute has exposed deep fissures within the global football community. UEFA President Aleksander Ceferin has been openly critical of Infantino in recent months, and the relationship between the two organizations has deteriorated markedly. The tensions extend beyond the FFE controversy, reflecting long-standing disagreements over governance, transparency, and the concentration of decision-making power at FIFA headquarters.

FIFA's insistence that the FFE proposal was subject to internal checks contrasts with UEFA's portrayal of a process conducted in secret. The competing narratives now sit before a US judge, who must decide whether UEFA's discovery request should proceed. A ruling in FIFA's favor would deal a significant setback to UEFA's efforts to build a criminal case in Switzerland, while a win for UEFA could open the door to further scrutiny of Infantino's dealings.

Legal experts have noted that discovery requests of this kind are frequently contested, and courts often weigh whether the requested materials are relevant and whether the foreign proceeding is genuinely criminal in nature rather than politically motivated. FIFA's filing leans heavily on the political argument, framing UEFA's actions as an attempt to interfere with an election rather than a good-faith legal effort. That framing could resonate with a judge wary of being drawn into an international sports governance battle.

For FIFA's member associations, the outcome carries significant implications. Infantino's re-election bid will unfold against the backdrop of this legal fight, and the promised independent governance review may be viewed either as a genuine reform effort or as a tactical concession. The proposed financial distributions to member nations, meanwhile, serve as a reminder of the material stakes involved in the leadership contest.

The broader football world is watching closely, as the outcome could reshape the balance of power between FIFA and its regional confederations. UEFA's push for accountability and FIFA's defense of its president represent two competing visions for how the sport should be governed at the highest level. With the election set for March and the court decision pending, the confrontation between the two bodies appears unlikely to ease in the coming months.

Neither side has shown signs of backing down. FIFA's filing represents its most direct rebuttal yet to UEFA's legal offensive, and it signals that Infantino intends to fight the allegations head-on rather than settle quietly. For UEFA, the discovery request is a crucial step in assembling evidence for a Swiss criminal complaint that could, if successful, dramatically alter the leadership landscape of world football.