FIFA's ambitious plan to bring private investors into the commercial operations of the FIFA World Cup has ignited one of the biggest governance disputes in modern soccer, with critics accusing the organization of putting the sport's most prestigious tournament up for sale.
The controversy erupted after FIFA announced it intends to create a new commercial subsidiary, FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), valued at approximately $20 billion. The new company would oversee the commercial and event operations of the World Cup and other FIFA competitions, while selling minority stakes of up to 20% to outside investors in a deal expected to raise as much as $4.2 billion.
FIFA says it would retain full control over the venture, including all sporting and governance decisions, with President Gianni Infantino arguing the organization should capitalize on the tournament's unprecedented financial momentum.
"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 FIFA's announcement.
"Our next stage of growth needs a structure built for it, one where the commercial side of the game operates as a focused, dedicated business, with its value shared more and better all around the world," he added.
According to FIFA, the funds generated through the new entity would dramatically increase investment in global soccer development. The governing body has pledged to expand football development funding to more than $10 billion over the coming years, including offering each of its 211 member associations access to as much as $20 million in one-time project funding if the proposal is approved.
But the plan has drawn fierce opposition from UEFA, European soccer's governing body, which argues the World Cup should never become a financial asset for private investors. "The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade, especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially," UEFA said in its initial response.
"None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA's to sell." The organization doubled down a day later on social media, accusing FIFA of prioritizing financial interests over the sport itself. "FIFA cannot continue to use our sport to enrich themselves and their friends," UEFA said. "We can grow the game correctly. It's time to prioritize associations, clubs, leagues, players and fans."
Reuters reported that regional confederations, including CONCACAF and the Asian Football Confederation, were caught off guard by the proposal and complained they learned about the plan through media reports rather than formal consultation, raising concerns about transparency and governance.
Another point of controversy involves the investors backing the proposal. FIFA confirmed that Joshua Kushner's investment firm, Thrive Capital, supports the deal, while JPMorgan has been hired to help manage the transaction.
Kushner is the brother of Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump's son-in-law, adding another political dimension to a proposal already generating intense scrutiny because of Infantino's close relationship with Trump during the recent World Cup. The proposal now faces a critical vote.
To move forward, it must receive approval from a majority of FIFA's 211 member associations as well as the organization's 37-member FIFA Council. While European members have discussed the possibility of a boycott, Infantino may hold an advantage because FIFA distributes billions of dollars in development funding to smaller soccer nations.
Football finance expert Kieran Maguire told CNBC that the organization's financial model creates an influential voting dynamic. "FIFA under Infantino gives lots of money to small countries, who in turn vote for him to be re-elected as president," Maguire said.
