FIFA president Gianni Infantino is facing renewed pressure from European football officials after UEFA sent an extraordinary eight-page document demanding answers to 42 questions about his leadership. The concerns range from a failed attempt to bring private investors into the World Cup business to financial transparency, controversial disciplinary decisions and Infantino's relationship with Donald Trump and his family.
The letter, sent on October 19 by UEFA general secretary Theodore Theodoridis to his FIFA counterpart Mattias Grafström, gives world football's governing body until November 2 to respond. According to Sky Sports, which obtained the document, the questions cover 12 separate areas and include 10 potential conflicts of interest. The timing is particularly significant: Infantino intends to seek re-election in March 2027, and potential challengers have until November 18 to submit their nominations.
How a Plan to Sell Part of the World Cup Started the Crisis
At the centre of the dispute is FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), a controversial project that would have transferred the commercial interests of FIFA competitions, including the World Cup, into a separate company. Under the proposal, a minority stake would have been sold to outside investors, potentially giving private financial interests a share in some of football's most valuable commercial properties.
The project was reportedly valued at approximately $20 billion, with investment firm Thrive Capital identified as a potential partner. The company is led by Joshua Kushner, whose brother Jared is married to Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka. That family connection has become one of the issues raised by UEFA, which wants to know how Thrive Capital was selected and whether potential conflicts of interest were properly assessed.
The plan was abandoned in July following opposition from football officials, but withdrawing it did not end the controversy. UEFA is now questioning why FIFA's Council was not consulted before an exclusivity arrangement was reportedly agreed with Thrive Capital, who authorised the discussions and whether alternative investors were considered.
The dispute is not simply about whether private investment would have been financially beneficial. European officials want to establish who had the authority to negotiate such a significant deal and what information was withheld from the people responsible for overseeing FIFA's decisions.
Why Is Donald Trump Mentioned So Many Times?
One of the most striking aspects of UEFA's letter is the attention devoted to Infantino's relationship with Donald Trump and individuals associated with the American president.
The list of questions includes the FIFA Peace Prize, which was awarded to Trump in 2025. UEFA wants to know who decided to establish the award, what selection criteria were used and whether FIFA's Council was consulted before the prize was created and presented.
There are also questions about a reported seven-year office lease in Trump Tower in New York, worth approximately $4 million, and discussions involving people associated with Trump about a potential FIFA cryptocurrency. Another issue concerns a sponsorship arrangement with prediction-market company Kalshi, which has reported links to Donald Trump Jr.
UEFA has additionally raised concerns about a $75 million investment commitment relating to Palestine, announced during a meeting associated with Trump's Board of Peace. European officials are seeking clarification on whether the appropriate FIFA bodies were informed or asked to approve the commitment.
These matters are presented as questions about transparency and potential conflicts of interest, rather than established findings of misconduct. UEFA is seeking documentation and explanations of the decisions, while the existence of the questions does not itself prove that FIFA regulations were violated.
A Phone Call, a Red Card and a World Cup Controversy
Perhaps the most unusual issue raised in the letter concerns United States striker Folarin Balogun and a disciplinary decision during the 2026 World Cup.
Balogun had faced an automatic one-match suspension following a red card, but the sanction was suspended, allowing him to participate in the knockout match against Belgium. The decision prompted criticism and questions about the independence of FIFA's disciplinary system.
The controversy deepened after Trump publicly acknowledged contacting Infantino to request a review of Balogun's case. UEFA now wants to know exactly what was discussed during that call, whether Infantino subsequently contacted disciplinary officials and whether the review would have taken place without the American president's intervention.
FIFA has maintained that its judicial bodies operate independently. The governing organisation has also confirmed plans to amend Article 27 of its Disciplinary Code following the controversy.
For UEFA, however, the outstanding question is broader than one player's eligibility. European officials want assurances that disciplinary decisions cannot be influenced by political relationships or interventions from outside football's established judicial procedures.
Private Jets, Extra Payments and World Cup VIP Seats
The remaining questions reveal just how wide-ranging the dispute has become. UEFA is seeking information about Infantino's use of private aircraft, accommodation expenses and financial oversight of presidential spending, including travel arrangements associated with Qatar and the United States.
European officials have also asked about reports of additional remuneration paid to Infantino through FIFA's American World Cup organising entity. They want to establish the nature of those payments, whether the relevant bodies approved them and why certain sums were allegedly absent from FIFA's annual reporting.
Even the organisation of the World Cup final has come under scrutiny. UEFA has questioned the unusually long 27-minute half-time interval and the introduction of mandatory hydration breaks, asking whether the relevant football rule-making authorities were properly consulted.
Another demand concerns the identities of guests occupying VIP and VVIP seats during the World Cup final. UEFA wants to know how invitations were allocated and why some guests reportedly received priority over senior football association officials.
Individually, these questions concern very different aspects of FIFA's activities. Taken together, they represent a challenge to the way decisions have been made during Infantino's presidency.
Infantino Apologised, but UEFA Wants More Than an Apology
The latest confrontation follows a FIFA Council meeting in Zurich last week, during which Infantino acknowledged that mistakes had been made in the handling of certain matters. The FIFA president invited officials to submit written questions and indicated that he would address them at the next full Council meeting, scheduled for December 16.
UEFA considers that timetable unacceptable. Its leadership argues that explanations about decisions already taken should not be delayed until after important deadlines in the forthcoming presidential election process.
European football officials have also requested access to documentation relating to the abandoned investment project and called for a genuinely independent investigation into the decision-making process. Their concern is that a general review of FIFA's governance rules would not necessarily establish responsibility for earlier actions.
The disagreement has become particularly serious because UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin has been among the prominent critics of Infantino's handling of the proposed investment scheme. European football's governing body has supported demands for leadership changes, although no rival candidate has yet emerged to challenge Infantino in March.
Could This Threaten Infantino's Re-Election?
Infantino, who became FIFA president in 2016, plans to stand for another term in March 2027. The deadline for submitting presidential nominations is November 18, just over two weeks after the date by which UEFA wants its questions answered.
That sequence gives the dispute considerable significance. Answers provided before the nomination deadline could influence discussions among FIFA's member associations, while a refusal or further delay could intensify the disagreement between European officials and the organisation's existing leadership.
However, criticism from UEFA does not automatically mean Infantino will lose his position. FIFA is a global organisation, and its president's future depends on support from national football associations across multiple confederations, not solely on the position taken by European representatives.
For now, the most immediate issue is whether FIFA will provide the requested documents and explanations by November 2. The organisation has pointed to confidentiality obligations surrounding internal governance matters, while UEFA insists that the questions concern accountability at the highest level of world football.
What began as a dispute over the commercial future of FIFA's competitions has developed into a confrontation involving political relationships, financial decisions and the independence of football's institutions. With 42 questions now formally on the table and a presidential election approaching, Infantino faces a demanding period in which the answers could matter almost as much as the original decisions.
Published by Patrick Jane
20.10.2026