Kenneth Glad
The International Football Association wants to raise up to €3.7 billion by selling a minority stake in a new commercial subsidiary. UEFA and national federations have questioned its transparency and the lack of consultation, while critics warn the proposal could fundamentally change how world football is governed.
UEFA has condemned FIFA’s proposal to bring private investors into a subsidiary responsible for its commercial and event operations, setting the stage for what could become one of the governing body’s biggest political battles in years.
The Financial Times first reported that FIFA was working with JPMorgan on a transaction involving about 20 per cent of FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE). The proposed deal would value the company at approximately €17.5 billion.
Approval is still required from a majority of FIFA’s 211 member associations. FIFA says the transaction could raise up to €3.7 billion and argues the money would be used to expand investment in football development around the world.
According to the Financial Times, investor Joshua Kushner is discussing a leading role through his Thrive Eternal fund. His brother, Jared Kushner, is US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law. FIFA told The Times that Jared Kushner was not an investor in the proposed deal.
The governing body has described the initiative as a way of unlocking additional resources while keeping control of football’s sporting decisions within FIFA. It says investors would acquire a minority stake in the commercial subsidiary rather than in FIFA itself.
Critics fear football is changing
UEFA responded with unusually strong language, arguing that the proposal represents a fundamental shift in how football is governed:
“The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade — especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially.”
The European governing body also argued that football does not belong to any single organisation and that FIFA has no mandate to sell commercial interests linked to the sport’s governance.
Click to display external content from t.co,
- You can always enable and disable third-party content.
You agree to display external third-party content. Personal data may be sent to the provider of the content and other third-party services.
National associations have also reacted cautiously. The Danish Football Association told TV 2 that it viewed the proposal as potentially far-reaching and needed more information before taking a position.
Norway’s Football Federation similarly told NRK that it had not been informed in advance and would study the proposal before commenting further. The broadcaster’s sports commentator Jan Petter Saltvedt believes the proposal represents a historic turning point for world football:
“It is the end of football as we know it. It is the end of FIFA.”
He argued that FIFA was originally established to serve its member associations rather than operate as a profit-driven business:
“Here they are moving from being an organisation that is supposed to safeguard what is best for football to becoming a purely commercial actor. You simply cannot continue like that.”
Saltvedt also compared the proposal with the failed European Super League project, saying private investment could push football even further towards commercial priorities:
“This is the Super League in a new format. Here football is openly and honestly only about making money. We have to remind ourselves what this is really about. It is about enjoying the world’s most popular sport, not exploiting every possible opportunity to make money.”
Concerns also extend beyond ownership itself. Critics fear investors could eventually seek greater influence over broadcasting rights, sponsorship agreements, tournament scheduling or the future format of FIFA’s most valuable competitions, even if they hold only a minority stake.
FIFA maintains that shareholders would own part of the subsidiary only and would have no authority over tournaments, sporting decisions or the international football calendar, according to TV 2.
FIFA promises greater funding
The association says the proposal would significantly increase funding for football development across the world.
The Financial Times reported that every one of FIFA’s 211 member associations would receive a one-off payment of approximately €17.5 million if the proposal is approved. Annual development funding would also increase from around €1.8 million to approximately €4.4 million between 2027 and 2030.
In its own announcement, FIFA said the broader programme could increase investment in football development to more than €8.8 billion over the next four-year cycle, describing the initiative as part of what president Gianni Infantino has called the “democratisation of football worldwide.”
The proposal follows a period of exceptional commercial growth. Revenue is expected to reach at least €11.4 billion during the current four-year cycle, compared with approximately €6.7 billion previously, writes the Financial Times. Much of that increase came from the first 48-team World Cup, jointly hosted by the United States, Canada and Mexico.
The tournament also highlighted FIFA’s increasingly commercial approach. The organisation charged significantly higher ticket prices than at previous World Cups and also took a share of revenue generated through official ticket resales, moves that attracted criticism from supporter groups.
The investor proposal comes as FIFA continues expanding its commercial ambitions. In recent years it has relaunched the Club World Cup, explored further expansion of the competition and considered additional changes to the men’s World Cup format, all of which have increased tensions with leagues and continental governing bodies over the growing international match calendar.
For now, the future of FIFA Forward Enterprise depends on the organisation’s member associations. Their vote will determine whether FIFA proceeds with one of the most significant commercial restructurings in the history of international football.
Sources: Financial Times, The Times, NRK, TV 2, FIFA and UEFA
