FIFA backs off World Cup private equity pitch after global fury: 5 things to know
The Hill · C · trust 46/100
Comments: by Dominick Mastrangelo - 08/03/26 6:00 AM ET Comments: Link copied by Dominick Mastrangelo - 08/03/26 6:00 AM ET Comments: Link copied FIFA President Gianni Infantino speaks during a news conference at the stadium in Mexico City, Wednesday, June 10, 2026, a day before the opening FIFA World Cup match between Mexico and South Africa. (AP Photo/Eduardo Verdugo) FIFA pulled back late last week on an effort to cash in on the popularity of the World Cup by selling it to private equity as part of a broader investment strategy, a move that had sparked an international controversy and threatened the participation in the world’s most popular sporting event.
At the center of it all was FIFA President Gianni Infantino, a familiar face in President Trump’s second-term orbit whose plan was the subject of outrage among football fans and governments across the world.
Here are five things to know about the plan, the controversy surrounding it and how it fell apart.
The World Cup hosted by the United States, Canada and Mexico captured the attention of hundreds of millions around the globe and generated what is estimated to be more than $15 billion in revenue for FIFA, more than double its total haul from the 2022 tournament.
Most observers have correlated that spike to a boom in “soccer” fanhood in America, which is home to the world’s fastest growing and most robust consumer economy.
Television ratings for matches involving the U.S. Men’s National Team, as well as other countries like England and Mexico, broke records on both broadcast and streaming platforms, even as some fans complained about new “hydration” breaks that allowed for more commercials.
Not long after Spain defeated Argentina in the final, Infantino unveiled a plan designed to make even more money.
Infantino’s proposal essentially sought private investment to the tune of around $10 billion in exchange for rights to operate, broadcast and promote the World Cup.
“Parts of the game have turned that popularity into remarkable commercial value – and we celebrate that success and want it to continue, because it lifts the whole game,” Infantino said in a statement laying out the plans. “Our job is to make sure the rest of football grows with it: FIFA exists to support sustainable, inclusive development in every corner of the world.”
It’s unclear how much top FIFA officials would have personally stood to gain from such a deal, but critics accused Infantino of attempting to enrich himself and others atop FIFA’s masthead.
UEFA, which represents European football associations and backs the annual Champions League competition for clubs, threatened to pull its members out of the next World Cup if the private equity was not squashed.
That would remove UEFA’s 55 members from the competition, including powers such as Spain, France, Germany, Portugal and England.
Nigel Farage, the Leader of Reform UK, in a social media post this week wrote “Football is for the people. UEFA are right to take a stand and Gianni Infantino must resign.”
“FIFA’s plan is worse than the Super League,” commented Miguel Delaney, chief football writer at The Independent, who referred to an effort by some European clubs to create an alternative to the UEFA Champions League.
Complicating the saga was the presence of Josh Kushner, the brother of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kusher, as a lead investor for the project, injecting a political dimension into an already controversial bid.
JP Morgan Chase was the firm assisting FIFA with its bid, raising further questions about the American economy’s role in Infantino’s calculus and strategy.
In the months leading up to and during the 2026 World Cup, Infantino went to great lengths to link himself to Trump and his allies.
FIFA late last year awarded Trump its first ever “Peace Prize,” while Infantino rallied support for the president as he ran for a second term in 2024.
As hype for the tournament grew, some voices criticized the U.S. government for not doing more to protect against what many saw as price gouging and shady ticketing practices by FIFA in North America.
Once the tournament was in full swing, Trump’s involvement in winning the suspension of a red card penalty called against a top U.S. player raised allegations of corruption.
“The most recent quid pro quo that FIFA and President Trump orchestrated is not a victimless crime. It hurts Americans,” Rep. Jame Raskin (D-Maryland) wrote in a letter to FIFA this week. “FIFA has taken its newfound favored status in the Trump Administration as a sign that it may rip off its consumers, most notably, by employing illegal price gouging and fraudulent sales tactics for the World Cup.”
Many saw Infantino’s latest gambit as a shameless utilization of his good rapport with the Trump family and other prominent figures in the U.S.
“What FIFA is doing right now is so brazenly corrupt ... that now we’re going to sell off the World Cup to the Trump kids,” sports radio host Dan LeBatard said on a recent episode of his show.
“It’s not overstating it to say this is as brazenly corrupt as anything you will see in sports and there needs to be a worldwide backlash to stop these people from doing this thing,” he said.
The most intense criticism of FIFA’s new pitch for investment came from UEFA and CONCACAF, which governs North American football.
After UEFA’s boycott threat, CONCACAF rejected Infantino’s plans, and said FIFA was “losing sight of its values.”
During an emergency meeting of its membership, the federation said, nations “expressed deep concerns about the lack of due process surrounding the proposal, the artificially short deadline imposed, and the absence of any review or approval by the relevant…
Read the original at The Hill →
Open in TruthVane →