The FIA vs. Red Bull: Is This the End of a Formula 1 Empire?

In a sport defined by ruthless precision and microscopic margins, Red Bull Racing has long stood at the summit of Formula 1, a juggernaut of engineering brilliance, strategic cunning, and sheer dominance. But now, after years of dictating the tempo of the grid, Red Bull finds itself under siege — and not from its traditional rivals like Mercedes or Ferrari, but from within the very fabric of the sport itself: the FIA.

A political storm has erupted in the wake of a series of high-profile upheavals, none more shocking than the ousting of team principal Christian Horner — a stalwart who not only orchestrated Red Bull’s rise but defended its empire against wave after wave of scrutiny. And with Dietrich Mateschitz, Red Bull’s founder and spiritual godfather, no longer pulling the strings from behind the curtain, the timing for an attack on Red Bull’s power structure couldn’t be more opportune. The FIA appears ready to strike — and strike hard.

A Targeted Rule Change

Insiders suggest a tailor-made regulatory offensive is brewing, one that could upend Red Bull’s operational foundation. The key issue? The contentious dual ownership model — Red Bull Racing and its so-called “sister team,” formerly Toro Rosso and now rebranded as Racing Bulls.

While dual ownership in Formula 1 isn’t technically illegal, it’s a glaring anomaly in modern global sports. In football, basketball, and nearly every major competitive league, it’s unthinkable that one entity could control two franchises. In F1, it has been tolerated — until now.

The Cracks Begin to Show

The signs of shifting tides began subtly. When Racing Bulls moved large chunks of its operations to the UK — and more pointedly, within Red Bull’s own campus — eyebrows were raised. But it wasn’t until the sudden, seamless transition of Laurent Mekies from Racing Bulls to Red Bull Racing, without so much as a day of “gardening leave,” that the alarm bells truly rang.

Normally, such a move would involve legal wrangling, transition periods, and internal reshuffles. Instead, it unfolded like a carefully orchestrated handover within the same company — which, as it turns out, it effectively was. Both Mekies and his predecessor Horner were under contract not with their individual teams, but with Red Bull GmbH in Austria. One corporate umbrella, two supposedly independent outfits.

This move, more than any prior, has reignited concerns over how separate the two teams really are. The FIA, once hesitant to interfere, is now reportedly preparing new legislation to ensure that “A and B teams” cannot collaborate or share intellectual property in a way that compromises sporting integrity.

The History: A Rescue or a Power Grab?

To understand the gravity of this situation, we must rewind to 2005. Following a mass exodus of manufacturers and the collapse of multiple new entries in 2010, Formula 1 was facing an existential crisis. Red Bull stepped in — not just as a constructor, but as a lifeline. When Minardi, a legendary but struggling privateer team, was on the brink, Red Bull bought it and rebranded it as Toro Rosso.

What was pitched as a noble rescue mission quickly evolved into a formidable power structure. With two teams under one roof, Red Bull gained advantages no other team could dream of: two driver pipelines, two data streams, and most importantly, double the voting power on the influential F1 Commission.

The Critics: Fair Play or Foul?

That influence has never sat comfortably with everyone. McLaren CEO Zak Brown has been especially vocal, calling the AB-team setup a “major conflict of interest.” He argues that Formula 1 — now governed by a strict budget cap and aiming for parity — should ban any form of dual ownership, just as every other sport does.

“We need to be really a sport of total fairness,” Brown told Sky Sports. “Anytime you have an entity that owns two teams or an A and B relationship, it really starts to compromise the integrity of sporting fairness.”

The concern isn’t just hypothetical. In a world where constructors are required to develop their own intellectual property and cannot share critical components, even the perception of coordinated development between two teams under one corporate banner is damaging. And with Racing Bulls and Red Bull Racing now sharing facilities and, seemingly, personnel without boundaries, the perception has become reality.

The Legal Gray Areas

F1 has long had workarounds for smaller teams: Haas, for instance, buys non-listed parts from Ferrari and outsources its chassis to Dallara. But the FIA strictly forbids that same supplier from working with other teams, to avoid intellectual overlap. The problem with Red Bull’s setup is more insidious — it’s not third-party outsourcing but intra-corporate alignment.

The FIA’s Nicholas Tombazis confirmed that the governing body is “working on clarifying more how teams… operate in terms of putting in provisions that stop those that have some sort of close relationship from helping each other.” Translation: the days of Red Bull running a two-team empire may be numbered.

Red Bull’s Political Shield Is Gone

For nearly two decades, Christian Horner acted as the firewall between Red Bull and regulation. Whether spinning public narratives or navigating backroom politics, he was the architect and defender of the empire. With his sudden departure — reportedly under murky internal circumstances — Red Bull is left politically vulnerable for the first time in recent memory.

This, combined with the loss of Mateschitz, has left a power vacuum, and the vultures are circling. Rivals, regulators, and critics are more emboldened than ever, sensing an opportunity to bring the empire to heel.

A Reckoning Ahead?

What happens next could define the next era of Formula 1. If the FIA moves forward with restrictions on shared ownership or collaborative operations, Red Bull may be forced to divest Racing Bulls or completely sever operational ties. That could mean new leadership, new infrastructure, and a complete strategic realignment.

It would also represent a massive blow to their influence in the sport — politically, commercially, and competitively. Years of finely-tuned synergy could be unraveled by a single regulatory stroke.

Conclusion: Masterclass or Manipulation?

Red Bull’s dual-team model has long walked the fine line between innovation and manipulation. For years, it was celebrated as a masterclass in maximizing resources. Today, under the microscope, it looks more like a structural loophole that challenges the very ethos of fair competition.

Whether this is a justified course correction or a political hit job will depend on your perspective. But one thing is clear: the age of untouchability is over.

Red Bull, once the predator, now finds itself prey. The empire that once redefined Formula 1 may soon be forced to rebuild — not on its own terms, but by the rulebook of a reawakened FIA.

Full Video: