FIFA president Gianni Infantino has abandoned a proposal to bring private equity investment into a new company controlling major World Cup commercial revenues, following broad opposition from regional football confederations and senior figures inside the organisation.
The plan, reported by The Associated Press, would have moved FIFA’s main commercial operations, including the men’s and women’s World Cups and Club World Cups, into a subsidiary valued at about $20 billion. Private investors would have held a 20% stake, with a New York investment firm founded by Joshua Kushner described by FIFA as the proposed anchor investor.
Infantino said on Friday that the proposal would not proceed after it became clear it had caused significant division. In a statement, he said FIFA had listened to the views raised and concluded that the project was no longer aligned with its stated purpose.
The withdrawal followed objections from UEFA, CONCACAF and the Asian Football Confederation, leaving the FIFA president facing resistance across Europe, North America and Asia. UEFA’s 55 member associations had earlier agreed to boycott the World Cup and other FIFA competitions if the plan went ahead, according to the AP report.
UEFA framed its opposition around the principle that the World Cup should remain under football’s control. The European body said the tournament “belongs to football” and should not be put up for sale, reflecting concerns among national associations that private investors could gain influence over one of sport’s most important global assets.
The proposal also prompted internal dissent. Carlos Cordeiro, a former Goldman Sachs banker and senior adviser to Infantino, resigned on Friday from his FIFA role. Cordeiro had represented FIFA on a White House task force linked to the World Cup and said he could not support any move to sell a stake in the tournament.
Kevin Lamour, FIFA’s chief operating officer and a long-time colleague of Infantino, also criticised the plan in a statement to The Associated Press. Lamour said staff had not been properly informed during the development of the proposal and argued that it should not continue.
The episode has exposed tensions over how FIFA funds and manages its expanding competitions. The World Cup generates the bulk of FIFA’s income, which is then used to finance operations, development grants and tournament costs across its 211 member associations. Any structural change to those revenues is therefore closely watched by regional confederations and national federations, particularly those dependent on FIFA funding for football infrastructure and administration.
FIFA has in recent years sought to broaden its competition portfolio, including an expanded Club World Cup and larger men’s and women’s World Cup formats. Those changes require significant commercial income, but they have also led to disputes over governance, player workload, broadcasting markets and the balance of power between FIFA and continental bodies.
The private equity proposal appeared to raise a more fundamental question: whether outside investors should share in the commercial returns of competitions that FIFA presents as global public sporting assets. Supporters of outside investment in sport often argue it can provide capital for growth, media development and new competitions. Critics say it can dilute institutional control and prioritise financial returns over sporting governance.
The opposition from CONCACAF and the Asian Football Confederation was particularly important because it showed the concerns were not confined to Europe, where UEFA and FIFA have frequently clashed over scheduling, revenue and authority. With the next men’s World Cup being hosted in North America, any dispute involving CONCACAF would have carried added significance for tournament planning and commercial delivery.
The next FIFA competition on the calendar is the Women’s Under-20 World Cup, scheduled to begin on 5 September in Poland. UEFA members had indicated they would boycott that event if the private equity plan advanced, creating an immediate operational risk for FIFA as well as a wider governance crisis.
Infantino has led FIFA since 2016 and was re-elected without opposition in 2019 and 2023. Under FIFA rules, he is eligible for one further four-year term. The next presidential election process is due to close for candidates on 18 November, four months before the vote in Rabat, Morocco.
While Infantino’s position has often appeared secure, the collapse of the proposal may have consequences within FIFA’s political structure. Public objections from senior officials and the alignment of major confederations against the plan indicate a level of resistance that could shape future debates over commercial strategy and institutional oversight.
For now, FIFA has stepped back from a proposal that would have changed how the World Cup’s commercial value is held and developed. The decision leaves unresolved the wider question of how the governing body will finance its expanding tournament ambitions while maintaining the confidence of regional confederations, national associations and the officials responsible for delivering global football competitions.
