FIFA’s commercial proposal faces opposition

By Sanjay Menon — 30 July 2026 — 4 min read

FIFA’s commercial proposal faces opposition

FIFA’s proposal to sell a minority stake in a new commercial subsidiary has met with significant opposition from various football governing bodies. This plan aims to reshape the commercial ownership of flagship competitions, including the FIFA World Cup and Club World Cup, by transferring their commercial and event operations into a new company backed by private investment. UEFA, the Football Association (FA), and Concacaf have all raised concerns regarding the process behind this initiative.

The proposal involves establishing a subsidiary named FIFA Forward Enterprise, which would manage the organisation’s commercial and event operations. FIFA would maintain authority over governance, regulations, scheduling, and sporting decisions. Under this plan, FIFA intends to sell a 20% minority stake in the new company, estimated to be valued at $20 billion, which could generate approximately $4.2 billion in private investment.

JPMorgan, a multinational financial services firm, has been appointed to advise on the transaction. The investor consortium is expected to be led by Thrive Eternal, a fund launched by Thrive Capital founder Joshua Kushner. This proposed investment connects to a prominent political family in America.

FIFA states it would remain the majority owner of the subsidiary and continue to oversee all football governance matters. The new structure is intended to generate greater revenues for member associations. The proposal requires approval from FIFA’s 211 member associations.

Concerns and potential responses from confederations

Following criticism, FIFA President Gianni Infantino defended the proposal in a letter to all 211 member associations, describing it as a “singular and unique funding opportunity.” Member associations have a deadline to approve the proposal. Infantino indicated that accepting the proposal could make a $10 billion funding package available. He also noted that if the proposal is rejected, the planned expansion of the Forward programme, valued at $2.7 billion, would still proceed.

Under the proposal, each member association could access up to $40 million, comprising a one-off payment of up to $20 million through the proposed Fast Forward programme and an additional $20 million through FIFA Forward development funding. FIFA also suggested that annual financial support to member associations would continue to increase until 2038.

UEFA has issued a strong response, stating it was not consulted before FIFA publicly announced the plans. The European governing body described the proposal as one that “crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross.” UEFA 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.”

UEFA has accelerated plans to convene an emergency virtual meeting of its 55 member associations to discuss the proposal and potential responses, which could include a boycott of future World Cups. After learning of FIFA’s deadline, UEFA issued a second statement criticizing the ultimatum and the broader proposal, stating, “FIFA cannot continue to use our sport to enrich themselves and their friends.”

Widespread opposition and calls for transparency

The FA expressed concern over a perceived lack of transparency, stating it became aware of the proposal through media reports. “We were completely unaware of this proposal and no substantive details, including what the proposition actually is, and what conditions are attached,” the FA said. It added that it is “deeply concerned about the lack of process and governance to get to this point.”

Concacaf echoed these concerns, indicating it also learned of the proposal through media reports and subsequent public announcements. The confederation stated, “We are deeply concerned by the lack of due process.” Concacaf emphasized the importance of good governance, robust processes, and long-term stewardship in decision-making.

The Asian Football Confederation (AFC) issued a similar statement of disapproval, noting it was not consulted on the proposal. The AFC stressed that initiatives of such scale and consequence require comprehensive prior engagement with confederations, member associations, and other relevant stakeholders before any proposal is made to decision-making bodies. The AFC’s statement is understood to have the backing of the Saudi Arabian football federation.

Elite clubs, represented by the European Football Clubs organization, also expressed dissatisfaction, highlighting that FIFA had not consulted them despite a signed memorandum of understanding. The organization, which represents over 850 football clubs, stated it learned about the proposal through the media, without prior warning.

Gianni Infantino released a video addressing the backlash, describing the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal as an “opportunity but not an obligation” and part of a democratic consultation process.

Source: timesofindia.indiatimes.com