Who has been charged in America, and with what?

A 47-count indictmenthas charged 14 defendants with offences including racketeering, wire fraud and money laundering conspiracies, in connection with the alleged taking and giving of bribes and backhanders over 24 years. This was allegedly to secure support for World Cup hosting rights, or to ensure that tournament broadcast or marketing rights went to certain parties. Those charged include current and former senior FIFA officials, including Jeffrey Webb and Jack Warner, the current and former presidents of CONCACAF, the regional football organisation in North and Central America. Federal authorities also believe Jérôme Valcke, FIFA's secretary general, is implicated in the scandal, according to reports on June 1st. Other defendants include several sports-marketing executives who allegedly paid or agreed to pay well over $150m in bribes and bungs for media and marketing rights to tournaments.

Arrests at FIFA should be the first step in a long and overdue process of reform What laws are the Americans using?

The case is essentially about bribery, yet there are no bribery charges. That is because federal bribery laws cover only bribery of government officials, not those from non-governmental bodies like FIFA. So prosecutors had to get creative—something they are increasingly doing in America, sometimes controversially. One of the laws they are bringing charges under is the Travel Act, points out Heather Lowe of Global Financial Integrity, an advocacy group. The relevant part of the law essentially says that it is illegal to engage in interstate or foreign travel, or use the mails or “any facility in interstate commerce” to promote, manage, establish or carry on an illegal activity. That activity can be illegal under either federal or state law. Bribery is definitely included on the list of what is considered an illegal activity under the Travel Act. Any relevant transaction, even if it is only tangentially related to America, can be targeted. In one instance, a representative of FirstCaribbean International Bank in the Bahamas flew to New York to pick up a cheque for $250,000 (the alleged bribe) from the bribe recipient to transport it safely back to the defendant’s bank account.

Why does America have the ability to do this sort of thing?

The arm of American law is famously long. The country’s law enforcers claim the right to go after anyone using dollars, its banking system or its territory to plan or conduct an illegal act. It can try them in its courts, subject to successful extradition. Chuck Blazer, a defendant who turned co-operator, was based in New York. Accused FIFA officials and marketing executives allegedly discussed or engaged in palm-greasing while passing through America; several of the more than 30 banks and branches that handled tainted transactions are American. For any bank or company that does substantial business in the country, corporate charges have to be taken very seriously—and are usually settled promptly.

What next?

Loretta Lynch, the United States Attorney General, made it clear that those charged are not the only ones in her sights. Another official spoke of being “fairly confident” that there will be further indictments. It is not clear if Sepp Blatter, FIFA's president, is a target. He has denied all knowledge of wrongdoing. Some of those already in trouble might offer to co-operate and give up others to save their own skins, just as Mr Blazer did after being accused of tax evasion.

Will other countries join America’s crusade against corruption in football?

Switzerland’s attorney general has launched a probe into how Russia and Qatar won the right to host the World Cups of 2018 and 2022, respectively, targeting a number of officials for suspected “criminal mismanagement” and money-laundering. Said to be in the works for months, the probe was made public on the same day America unsealed its indictments. The Swiss have frozen some FIFA officials’ accounts and seized records. Britain’s Serious Fraud Office has launched its own investigation, into the role of banks that handled questionable transactions.

Might bankers face charges too?

At least 31 different banks or bank branches, located in at least 14 different countries, were identified (though not charged) in the indictment—including Barclays and HSBC. There is only one instance in the reams of indictments of a bank raising any objection to a transfer request. So the case could be a big test of bank liability in such matters. The case comes at a time when regulators have sharply raised their expectations for banks' efforts to spot, monitor and report suspicious transactions. And even if banks were not knowingly involved in laundering money, they could be subject to big fines, if their anti-laundering controls were shown to be wanting. However, according to the indictments some of the bribe payments were designed to evade such controls. One official, for instance, allegedly had the bribe payer pay the company that was building his pool instead of paying him directly. Such attempted deception could provide banks with legal cover for not having reported transactions.