FIFA wants to sell a stake in the World Cup to private investors.
On 28 July, the creation of FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) was announced: a separate company that will pool and manage the commercial rights to the World Cup and the main international competitions, including the Club World Cup. Initial valuation: 20 billion dollars. The plan: sell up to 20% to private minority investors, raising around 4.2 billion. JPMorgan is advising on the deal.
The potential investors also include Thrive Eternal, a financial vehicle linked to Joshua Kushner: brother of Jared Kushner, who is married to Ivanka Trump. It is no coincidence, then, that (according to the Times of London) FIFA consulted the Trump administration itself while preparing the plan.
The news shocked the public and split the football world. UEFA responded by taking a stance. What emerges from all this is a problem that concerns any major public institution: who owns what no one has built alone?
FIFA vs UEFA
FIFA wants to sell a stake in the World Cup to private investors.
On 28 July, the creation of FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) was announced: a separate company that will pool and manage the commercial rights to the World Cup and the main international competitions, including the Club World Cup. Initial valuation: 20 billion dollars. The plan: sell up to 20% to private minority investors, raising around 4.2 billion. JPMorgan is advising on the deal.
The potential investors also include Thrive Eternal, a financial vehicle linked to Joshua Kushner: brother of Jared Kushner, who is married to Ivanka Trump. It is no coincidence, then, that (according to The Times of London) FIFA consulted none other than the Trump administration while preparing the plan.
The news shocked the public and split the football world. UEFA responded by taking a stance. What emerges above all from this is a governance problem that concerns any major institution: who owns what no one has built alone?
The political context that makes everything more complex
The relationship between Infantino and Trump does not begin with this announcement. In December 2025 FIFA awarded Trump a ‘FIFA Peace Prize’, an honour without precedent in the federation’s history. FIFA has rented space inside Trump Tower in New York as its operational base for the 2026 World Cup.
Seen in this context, the FFE plan takes on the contours of a political and commercial axis. And if football were to turn into a commercial holding company with private shareholders driven by returns, the way decisions are taken in the game (and who must answer for them) would change radically.
What this case says about the governance of global institutions
FIFA is not the only global institution governing a collective asset while under pressure to privatise its revenues. It is simply the one making the mechanism most visible right now.
When an institution stops answering to its principals and starts answering to private investors, its ability to protect the collective interest erodes. Perhaps not out of bad faith, but it is only natural that it happens. It is a structural effect. Private investors optimise for returns. Public institutions should optimise for their mission. The two logics can coexist for a time, but they tend to diverge.
The lack of transparency is therefore the central risk. If no one knows for certain who will profit, by how much and on what terms, there is no longer any control over what used to be the most valuable asset.
The World Cup does not belong to Infantino, just as a city does not belong to its mayor. Governance of a collective asset is a temporary mandate, not ownership. Those who forget this distinction create the conditions for a conflict of interest that democratic institutions will struggle to correct.
In football, it is now a free-for-all. How this clash is resolved is entirely a question of governance.
Domande frequenti
What difference does it make that the investors hold minority stakes and have no voting rights?
A non-voting minority stake removes formal control, but it does not remove influence. Investors with significant economic interests in an organisation develop relationships, expectations and informal pressures that, over time, can steer its decisions. The issue is not only what the FFE’s articles of association provide. Whoever invests four billion in a structure expects a return, and that return also depends on decisions that FIFA formally continues to control. Sound Brand Governance builds a serious system that does not stop at defining roles and voting rights: it makes dependencies visible, monitors external influence and sets limits capable of protecting the organisation’s decision-making autonomy.
Is the link between Kushner and Trump direct enough to constitute a conflict of interest?
Joshua Kushner is not Trump’s direct brother-in-law: he is the brother of Jared Kushner, the American president’s son-in-law. The family tie is therefore indirect, but real. The most significant point, however, is not the individual investor. It is the web of relationships between FIFA and the Trump administration, documented over time through the Peace Prize, the Trump Tower lease, the consultation on the FFE and the staging of the 2026 World Cup on American soil. Individually, each of these elements can be explained. Taken together, they form a system of political and economic proximity that would call for greater transparency and stronger safeguards against conflicts of interest, even merely perceived ones.
Does UEFA have the tools to block the plan?
UEFA cannot unilaterally block a FIFA decision. It can, however, mobilise its 55 member associations to vote against the plan at the congress convened to approve it. It can also exert political pressure through European governments, build alliances with other confederations and threaten to scale back its cooperation with FIFA on international competitions. This week’s statement therefore looks more like the first step in a coordinated campaign than an isolated communiqué. The final showdown will come in the vote of the 211 national associations: that is where UEFA’s real ability to build an opposing majority will be measured.