UEFA has launched a fierce attack on FIFA after the global governing body unveiled plans to invite private investors into its commercial operations, including those linked to the World Cup.

The proposal, first reported by the Financial Times and The Times, would see FIFA create a new commercial subsidiary called FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE). The organisation says the new company would manage its commercial and event operations while allowing outside investors to buy minority, non controlling stakes.

FIFA says the move is designed to generate more than $10 billion in football development funding, significantly increasing the money available to national associations around the world.

The proposal still requires approval from FIFA’s 211 member associations. If it is backed, American venture capital firm Thrive Eternal is expected to lead the investor group behind FFE. Thrive was founded by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Jared Kushner, the son in law of US President Donald Trump.

Reports have suggested the plans could ultimately earn FIFA President Gianni Infantino tens of millions of pounds. However, FIFA sources have denied there has been any discussion about Infantino, or anyone else, becoming chief executive of the new company.

In its official announcement, FIFA said Infantino and the organisation have a responsibility to oversee the project, although it has not provided any further details about what role he would personally play.

As part of the proposal, every FIFA member association could receive up to $20 million in one off funding to support football development projects.

Infantino defended the plans, arguing that football’s commercial success should benefit every nation.

He said parts of the sport have generated enormous commercial value and that FIFA’s responsibility is to ensure the rest of the football world grows alongside it through sustainable and inclusive investment.

UEFA has responded with unusually strong criticism, warning the proposal represents a fundamental shift in the governance of the game.

In a statement, European football’s governing body said FIFA had “crossed a line” and warned that football’s governance should never become something that can be traded.

It also questioned the lack of transparency surrounding the proposal and who could ultimately benefit financially, insisting that nobody owns football and that it is not FIFA’s to sell.

The Football Association also confirmed it had not been made aware of FIFA’s plans before they were announced publicly.

FIFA insists it would retain full control over football governance, competitions, the international match calendar and all sporting and regulatory decisions, despite allowing outside investors into its commercial business.

Behind the disagreement is a much wider battle over the future direction of world football.

Critics fear that bringing in private investment will increase pressure to expand FIFA competitions in order to maximise revenue. That could mean even larger World Cups, more frequent Club World Cups and an increasingly congested football calendar.

There are also concerns that future tournaments could be pushed into the winter months, creating further disruption for domestic leagues and existing competitions.

One senior English football executive told the BBC the proposal is the most significant development in football since the failed European Super League project, adding that it raises similarly serious concerns about the future of the sport.

While the proposed $20 million development payments would represent a relatively modest amount for wealthier football nations, they would provide a substantial financial boost for many smaller associations, making it likely that the plans will attract significant international support.

The proposal is expected to be discussed by the FIFA Council later this year before potentially being put to a vote by all 211 member associations at the FIFA Congress in Morocco next March.