FIFA aims to raise $4.2 billion by selling a stake in its tournament operations through a new subsidiary, despite concerns from UEFA about governance.
Kuwait City, Kuwait Jul 28, 2026 ALN: Paris: FIFA announced on Tuesday its intention to sell a stake in the business operations of the World Cup and its other competitions by creating a semi-private subsidiary. This move marks a significant shift in the governance structure of the world's most popular sport and could have far-reaching implications for football's financial landscape.
The governing body of world football stated it would retain a majority share in FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) while hoping to raise $4.2 billion later this year by "carefully selecting long-term investors who will purchase minority, non-controlling interests." This approach aims to attract investment while maintaining FIFA's control over key aspects of football governance.
FIFA's statement was a swift response to a report in the British newspaper The Times, which cited leaks regarding the plan from two sources. The urgency of FIFA's response highlights the sensitivity surrounding the proposed stake sale and the potential backlash from various stakeholders in the football community.
The Times reported that FIFA president Gianni Infantino, 56, could benefit from the scheme by becoming commissioner of the FFE after his expected next term concludes in 2031. If this speculation holds true, it raises questions about the motivations behind the stake sale and whether it serves the interests of the football community or merely those of its leadership.
Discussions have reportedly begun with potential investors, including Joshua Kushner, brother of US President Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared, and an arm of JP Morgan Chase, the US bank that previously attempted to finance the failed breakaway European Super League. This connection to high-profile investors and controversial financial institutions adds another layer of complexity to the situation, as it may evoke concerns about the influence of private capital in football.
European football's governing body UEFA, which has been critical of Infantino, quickly responded to the article. UEFA's statement expressed deep concern over the implications of FIFA's plan, saying, "This crosses a line that football's governing institutions should never cross. UEFA takes it extremely seriously." The governing body emphasized that "the soul and governance of football are not assets to trade - especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA's to sell." This reaction underscores the tension between FIFA and UEFA, which has often been at odds with FIFA's leadership decisions.
FIFA clarified in its statement that it would retain sole control of FFE and exclusive authority over football governance, competitions, match calendar, and all regulatory and sporting decisions. This assurance is intended to alleviate fears that the sale of a stake could undermine FIFA's regulatory role and lead to conflicts of interest.
FIFA believes that FFE could achieve an initial equity valuation of $20 billion. This optimistic projection reflects FIFA's confidence in the commercial potential of its operations, particularly in the context of growing global interest in football. The valuation also suggests that FIFA sees substantial opportunities for revenue generation through strategic partnerships and investments.
Each of FIFA's 211 member associations (MAs) will have the opportunity to take a one-off stake of $20 million in FFE, which, while representing only 0.1 percent of the total, would be a significant sum for the leaderships of FIFA's poorer or smaller members. This initiative could foster a sense of ownership among smaller football nations and provide them with a financial boost, but it also raises questions about the equity of such a distribution in the context of FIFA's overall financial health.
"Together with other existing FIFA programmes, these investments could bring FIFA's total planned development funding to more than $10 billion over the next four years," FIFA stated. This commitment to development funding is crucial, especially for nations that struggle to invest in football infrastructure and grassroots programs.
In June, ahead of the World Cup, FIFA anticipated record revenues exceeding seven billion euros ($8 billion) for 2026, as it prepares for the first World Cup with 48 teams. The expansion to 48 teams is expected to increase participation and viewership, thereby generating additional revenue streams. Infantino has indicated discussions about expanding to 64 teams for the 2030 tournament, which could further amplify FIFA's financial ambitions but also raise logistical and competitive concerns.
The Times quoted an unnamed "senior football figure" calling the plan "potentially much worse than the European Super League," as it could impact all levels of football globally. The reference to the European Super League, which faced significant backlash and was ultimately abandoned, highlights the sensitivity surrounding changes to traditional football structures and the potential repercussions for smaller clubs and leagues.
Another anonymous source informed the British paper that the plan could create "unacceptable" conflicts of interest for FIFA and Infantino. The fear of conflicts of interest is particularly relevant given the historical context of FIFA's governance and the scrutiny it has faced over corruption and transparency issues.
In 2019, a FIFA stakeholders' committee rejected an Infantino-backed proposal for a $25 billion private investment in an expanded Club World Cup, which had potential backers including SoftBank of Japan and Saudi Arabia's sovereign wealth fund. FIFA did expand that competition from seven teams to 32 clubs in 2025, indicating that while private investment may be contentious, FIFA is still keen on enhancing its commercial offerings.
The Times speculated that the establishment of FFE could influence both the World Cup and the Club World Cup, potentially leading to pressure for both events to be expanded or held more frequently than the current four-year cycle. Such changes could fundamentally alter the landscape of international football and affect the scheduling and viability of domestic leagues.
FIFA has previously faced challenges with deals that spun off commercial activities to private partners, with estimates of losses from the collapse of ISL, which negotiated World Cup rights deals, ranging from $30 million to $115 million. This history serves as a cautionary tale for FIFA as it navigates its current plans, emphasizing the need for careful management of its commercial interests.
As a not-for-profit organization effectively owned by the MAs, FIFA enjoys tax-free status in Switzerland. This status contributes to its financial stability, but it also places additional scrutiny on its financial dealings and the potential implications of introducing private investment into its operations. The balance between generating revenue and maintaining the integrity of football governance will be a critical consideration as FIFA moves forward with its plans.
To learn more about the latest developments in Golf, stay updated with our exclusive reports and analyses on AiLensNews.
