UEFA portrays the abandoned FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal as a governance and valuation failure requiring legal scrutiny, while Gianni Infantino’s response, as reported, accepts mistakes in how the plan was handled but stops short of conceding wrongdoing.

The dispute between football’s European and global governing bodies is moving beyond institutional politics. UEFA is seeking documents held in the United States as it weighs criminal claims in Switzerland over a proposed sale of minority interests in FIFA’s commercial rights.

Across the reports, the central allegation is consistent: UEFA says the proposal to sell a 20% stake in FIFA tournament rights for $4.2bn implied an unjustifiably low overall value and was developed without adequate transparency. Its filing says the figure was “neither the product of an open, competitive auction, nor tested by any independent valuer.”¹

UEFA has applied for US discovery from FIFA and entities connected to the proposed investment, including Thrive Capital and JPMorgan, before any possible action in Switzerland. The contemplated complaint would concern alleged criminal mismanagement under Article 158 of the Swiss Criminal Code, and could extend to other FIFA officials or advisers as the evidence develops.²

UEFA’s filing goes further than a procedural objection, alleging that the initiative “was a vehicle for Infantino and that small circle to acquire a permanent stake in and otherwise profit from FIFA’s most valuable assets.”¹ It says the process harmed FIFA’s reputation, governance authority and commercial relationships, affecting its 211 member associations.

Infantino withdrew the plan following opposition across football. According to a separate report, he and FIFA secretary general Mattias Grafström acknowledged errors in the proposal’s handling, writing: “We sincerely apologise for these errors and commit to them not happening again.” They said a review would be conducted and reported to the FIFA Council.³

That contrast now defines the conflict: UEFA frames the episode as potential criminal misconduct demanding external evidence, while FIFA’s reported response treats it as a flawed process requiring internal correction.