Infantino backed down: plan for partial privatization of FIFA World Cups withdrawn

FIFA President Gianni Infantino, following strong protests from the football confederations of Europe, Asia, and North America, withdrew his proposal to allow private investors to organize World Cups, writes the BBC.

“After carefully listening to all opinions, I clearly understood that this project caused such a division that, regardless of the level of its support, it no longer serves the goals for which it was proposed,” Reuters reports Infantino, the Swiss national, as saying.

Infantino's project was condemned in the strongest possible terms by the football confederations of Europe, North and Central America, and Asia. This meant that his proposal would likely not have garnered a majority of votes in FIFA anyway: these three confederations comprise almost two-thirds of the world's national football federations and unions.

“FIFA must stop using our sport for its own enrichment and the enrichment of its friends,” stated the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA).

Plan involving Kushner

Infantino's plan, whose existence FIFA officially announced on July 28, envisaged the creation of a commercial subsidiary company, FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), under the International Federation of Football Associations, which would be responsible for organizing competitions under the auspices of FIFA.

Minority stakes in this company, which would not grant control over it, were proposed to be sold to private investors.

According to Infantino's idea, the group of initial investors was to be led by the venture company Thrive Eternal, founded by Joshua Kushner – brother of Jared Kushner, son-in-law of US President Donald Trump. The firm was established under Joshua Kushner's venture company Thrive Capital Management just three months ago, at the end of April.

On Friday, Donald Trump stated that he had not discussed these plans with Infantino. During his second presidential term, Trump maintained very close relations with the head of FIFA, partly because this year's World Cup was held primarily in the USA. In December, during the tournament draw, Infantino presented Trump with a specially established “FIFA Peace Award.”

One ultimatum and two protests from three parts of the world

At an emergency meeting on Thursday, UEFA decided to boycott tournaments under FIFA's auspices, including the World Cups, if Infantino did not abandon his plan.

“We unanimously and unconditionally reject FIFA’s proposal to transfer ownership rights of the World Cup and other tournaments under FIFA’s auspices to private investors […] No national team affiliated with UEFA will participate in any FIFA competitions as long as this proposal remains in force, until it is fully withdrawn, and until we receive legally binding guarantees that FIFA will never again allow private owners to manage its tournaments,” UEFA stated.

A few hours later, the Europeans were supported by CONCACAF – the confederation of North and Central America and the Caribbean, and the next day, the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) joined them.

CONCACAF and AFC, unlike UEFA, did not threaten a boycott but also sharply criticized Infantino.

The other three confederations — South America, Africa, and Oceania — made no official statements and planned to discuss Infantino's proposal in August.

Advisor's Resignation and Executive Director's Statement

On Friday, Carlos Cordeiro resigned in protest; he had served as Infantino's senior advisor for global strategy and governance for almost five years and also represented FIFA in the White House working group for the 2026 World Cup preparations.

“FIFA's task is not to maximize commercial profit at any cost, but to protect and strengthen football for future generations,” he wrote. “When these principles clash, football must come first.”

“Most concerning is the lack of answers to fundamental questions,” he added. “Why is this deal needed? Why now? What will the control be? Who benefits from this?”

On the same day, FIFA Executive Director Kevin Lamour made a sharp statement, accusing Infantino of deceiving the organization's employees. At the end of his statement, he wrote that even if he lost his job over this, he would at least be able to sleep peacefully.

“What was announced the other day and what has been happening behind the scenes for the past few months is incomprehensible and seems unimaginable,” Lamour's statement, delivered to the press, said.

“It is becoming increasingly difficult for the FIFA administration to work under such conditions and fulfill its mission,” he wrote. “I am not authorized to speak on behalf of my colleagues, and I may be mistaken. But I have the impression that we all want to be proud of working at FIFA, and today, unfortunately, many of us no longer feel that way.”

Even the new Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Andy Burnham, spoke out about Infantino's plan, calling it outrageous.

“The very fact that this idea could even be put forward shows that, in my opinion, he is not the person who should lead this organization,” Burnham said.

Poor countries could have supported

According to experts, Infantino's plan could have been supported by football officials from many less wealthy countries, as it envisaged an increase in subsidies from FIFA.

In an explanatory letter sent to national federations on July 29, Infantino promised that if the project were adopted, in the next financial cycle, beginning January 1, 2027, each national association would receive up to $40 million.

In total, the FFE project planned to attract an additional $20 billion.

Rogers Byamukama from the Uganda Football Federation noted that, for example, European associations are much less dependent on FIFA funding than associations in other regions of the world.

“For instance, in Uganda, FIFA has funded a number of infrastructure projects using funds obtained from World Cup ticket sales and sponsors. Additionally, FIFA finances many grassroots programs, including football schools,” Byamukama explained.

Therefore, in his opinion, any method to attract additional resources can be considered beneficial.

• 1
• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0
• 0