FIFA has formally opposed the motion UEFA filed before the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida seeking evidence about the FIFA FORWARD ENTERPRISE (FFE) project, accusing the European governing body of acting “in bad faith and for purposes of harassment” and “not out of a legitimate need to obtain evidence”.
In its filing in the Southern District of Florida, FIFA holds UEFA responsible for waging a “disinformation campaign” and for an “attempt to influence the FIFA presidential campaign”, alleging that UEFA spread falsehoods to the media — among them the claim that FIFA was selling tournaments — in order to further its own objectives. “This Court should reject any attempt to influence the FIFA presidential elections based on such arguments,” the document states.
FIFA also rejects as false UEFA’s assertion that FIFA president Gianni Infantino “intended to have a personal financial interest in the FFE project”, maintaining that the project “was subject to the approval of both FIFA’s member associations and the FIFA Council”. The filing states that “UEFA’s insinuations that Mr. Infantino violated any law or ethical principle are categorically unfounded”, adding that “far from representing anything resembling mismanagement — let alone criminal mismanagement under Swiss law — it would have been a breach of duty if FIFA had not evaluated a project such as the FFE’s, especially given the prevalence of similar mechanisms in the sports and entertainment market”.
For FIFA, the alleged failings, combined with what it describes as UEFA’s press campaign and its conduct in the matter — including the omission of filing the application under seal of confidentiality — show that “this is a case in which the requesting party has submitted a petition under article 1782 for purposes of harassment, and not out of a legitimate need to obtain evidence”. FIFA argues that this fact “alone constitutes an independent basis for denying the application”.
FIFA further contends that UEFA “whether deliberately or out of ignorance, confuses equity value with enterprise value”. UEFA had argued that a fair valuation of FFE would have been substantially higher than 30 billion dollars and that 20 billion did not reflect a transaction carried out at arm’s length, describing it instead as an illicit and opaque agreement. FIFA counters that, in addition to “its undisputed $20 billion in equity value”, FFE included secured obligations to support another $10 billion in spending aimed at expanding football development, plus another $4.2 billion in payments to FIFA member associations and other recurring costs associated with FIFA’s non-commercial activities worth billions of dollars. The document stresses that “FFE’s enterprise value was more than double the equity value and, consequently, was far higher than the figure UEFA considers fair”, and that UEFA “would have known all this data if it had bothered to verify its claims before publicly criticizing the proposal or submitting the application to the federal court”.
UEFA sent its claim to the Florida court at the end of August under Article 158 of the Swiss Criminal Code, requesting authorisation to gain access to documents related to the project so they could be transferred to the Swiss justice system. It sought documents and communications from FIFA America and the 2026 World Cup relating to the origin, development, internal discussion and public announcement of the FFE proposal, including FIFA’s internal communications and discussions and its exchanges with the investor companies Thrive, BANN and other investors and advisors, from the earliest date on which the transaction was discussed up to the date the documentation was submitted. The request also covered any valuation work carried out in relation to the FFE proposal, including materials shared with or received from any investor or advisor, as well as the internal governance and approval process and the documentation submitted to the FIFA Council, its Congress and its board of directors at a meeting held on 18 July.
The dispute unfolds against a crowded calendar for FIFA’s leadership. November 18 is the deadline for submitting candidacies for the FIFA presidency, with the elections to be held on March 18 in Rabat. FIFA questions the fact that UEFA made its request to the Florida court while “disseminating misleading information about Mr. Infantino”, and insists that the Court should reject any attempt to influence the elections.