UEFA has issued a strongly worded rebuke of FIFA’s proposal to sell minority stakes linked to the FIFA World Cup to private investors, warning that the “soul and governance of football are not assets to trade”. The comments came after FIFA outlined plans for a new commercial structure designed to unlock more than $10bn in development funding over the next four years, subject to approval by its member associations.
In a statement reported by Sky Sports, UEFA said:
“This crosses a line that football's governing institutions should never cross. UEFA takes it extremely seriously. So should every National Football Association.”
UEFA added that the issue should concern all parts of the game, including leagues, clubs, players and supporters, arguing there was “zero transparency as to who gains financially” from the project.
What FIFA is proposing: a new commercial subsidiary
FIFA says it is exploring the creation of a new commercial subsidiary, FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), which would consolidate commercial rights across its tournaments. According to FIFA’s detailed statement, those rights would include broadcasting, sponsorship, ticketing and licensing, alongside the operational delivery of FIFA tournaments.
Under the proposal as described by Sky Sports, FIFA would seek to raise up to $4.2bn (£3.1bn) from external investors by selling minority, non-controlling stakes in FFE, with the entity valued at around $20bn (£15bn).
FIFA’s stated objective is to generate “$10bn-plus” in development funding, with FIFA arguing the structure could deliver more than $10bn in football development funding over the next four years, depending on approvals through its governance processes.
Infographic-style stats block
Proposed vehicle: FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE)
Stake sale (target): Up to $4.2bn (£3.1bn) from external investors
Implied valuation (reported): Around $20bn (£15bn)
Development ambition (reported): More than $10bn over the next four years
FIFA member associations: 211
UEFA’s objection: governance, transparency and precedent
UEFA’s public pushback is notable not only for its language but for the breadth of its warning. In the Sky Sports report, UEFA said football’s governance should not be treated as a tradable commodity and urged national associations and stakeholders to take the matter seriously.
UEFA’s statement included the line:
“The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade… None of us are the owners of football. It is not.”
The subtext is clear: UEFA fears the creation of an investor-backed commercial vehicle tied to FIFA’s flagship properties could shift incentives and influence in ways that are difficult to unwind—particularly if commercial rights, tournament delivery and development funding are packaged together.
While UEFA is not the regulator of FIFA, its stance matters because European associations and European club football remain central to the World Cup ecosystem—commercially, politically and in terms of player release. The dispute also lands at a time when the global calendar and the balance of power between governing bodies are already sensitive issues.
FIFA’s response: consultation, minority stakes and “control” assurances
FIFA has moved to clarify elements of the plan amid the reaction. A FIFA spokesperson told Sky Sports News that FIFA is beginning a consultation process after receiving a proposal that is currently under review.
FIFA also confirmed to Sky Sports News that JP Morgan is acting as financial adviser on the project and would continue to support the analysis. Sky Sports reported that Thrive Capital, led by chief executive Josh Kushner, is expected to lead the proposed investor group, with FIFA adding that Jared Kushner is not an investor.
FIFA stressed that any outside investors would hold only a minority stake and that the investment would be in a FIFA subsidiary rather than FIFA itself. FIFA also said it was “inaccurate” to suggest staff had signed non-disclosure agreements and maintained it is open to “innovative projects” to boost development worldwide.
On governance, FIFA insisted it would retain sole control over football governance, competitions, the international match calendar and all sporting and regulatory decisions. FIFA also dismissed suggestions that president Gianni Infantino could become chief executive of the new entity when his final term ends, saying such a move has “never been discussed”.
Infantino, FIFA said, told all 211 member associations on July 18 that, following the success of the 2026 World Cup, the priority is to “unleash the commercial potential and opportunity that FIFA has”. Any proposal would need to be approved through FIFA’s democratic structures, with plans to be presented to member associations and the FIFA Council, which FIFA described as the sole decision-makers on whether to proceed.
FIFA also linked the project to increased distributions via its FIFA Forward programme, saying the additional funding would allow it to increase payments to member associations from the currently budgeted $8m to $20m per association for the 2027-2030 cycle, with the possibility of up to $20m in optional one-off funding for major projects, according to Sky Sports.
What happens next is a political process as much as a financial one: FIFA must convince its membership that the promised development upside is worth the reputational and governance risks being highlighted by UEFA. With consultation now under way, the next flashpoints will be the presentation of the plan to member associations and the FIFA Council—and any further public positioning by confederations and national federations as details emerge.
Source: Sky Sports
