The world's most-watched sporting event is now being packaged and priced for private equity, with Trump's son-in-law on the buyer's list.

"None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA's to sell."

— UEFA, in a rare unified condemnation of FIFA's privatization plan

On Tuesday, July 28, FIFA announced it would create a new for-profit subsidiary called FIFA Forward Enterprise, valued at $20 billion, to take control of the commercial operations of the World Cup and other competitions. The entity would raise up to $4.2 billion from private investors who would purchase minority, non-controlling stakes.

The announcement sent shockwaves through European soccer within hours. UEFA, the continental governing body representing 55 national associations, called the plan an attempt to sell the soul of football. The UK prime minister, Andy Burnham, took to social media to declare that the World Cup was never anyone's to sell.

The headline-grabbing detail: among the lead investors is Thrive Eternal, an investment firm founded by Joshua Kushner. Joshua Kushner is the brother of Jared Kushner, Donald Trump's son-in-law and former senior advisor.

Translation: the family that profited from Trump's first term is now positioning itself to buy equity in the world's premier sporting event.

The plan emerged just weeks after the 2026 World Cup final in East Rutherford, New Jersey, where Trump and FIFA President Gianni Infantino stood side by side presenting the trophy to Spain's Rodri. The photo of them clutching the trophy together became one of the defining images of the tournament, and it was not accidental.

The men's World Cup that concluded in July banked record income of approximately $12 billion, according to FIFA's own estimates. The Guardian reported in mid-July that FIFA's revenues for the tournament would exceed $15 billion, significantly above the pre-tournament projection of $13 billion. Infantino has clearly decided the cash register is hot enough to justify a leveraged buyout.

FIFA is working with J.P. Morgan on the transaction. The new entity, FIFA Forward Enterprise, would manage the commercial rights of the men's World Cup, the women's World Cup, and the Club World Cup. In exchange, FIFA promises to increase development funding to each of its 211 member federations from $8 million per cycle to $20 million, then $22 million and $24 million in subsequent cycles through 2038.

The math is designed to look generous. Strip away the branding and it is a straightforward securitization: take the cash flows from the most valuable sporting property on Earth, wrap them into a corporate shell, and sell shares to the highest bidders.

Infantino called it "the democratization of football worldwide." That phrase has the hollow ring of every privatization pitch in history. The Soviet Union once said the same thing about Gorbachev. The World Commissions that sold off public infrastructure said the same thing about toll roads.

The reality is simpler. FIFA is a Swiss-based not-for-profit association. Under Infantino, it has already become one of the wealthiest organizations in global sports. The 2026 tournament alone generated more revenue than the entire annual budget of most FIFA member nations. Now the president wants to turn it into a publicly traded vehicle, with himself potentially lining up a commissioner-level salary.

The Times of London reported that Infantino reportedly wants to become chair of FIFA Forward Enterprise once he leaves the FIFA presidency, a position that would reportedly net him tens of millions of dollars per year. Insiders told the paper that the salary would be comparable to the NFL commissioner's, around $64 million annually, roughly ten times what Infantino currently earns at FIFA.

FIFA denied the report, saying "this has never been discussed," while simultaneously insisting that "the FIFA president and the FIFA administration will and must have leading roles in this entity, if approved."

Translation: the door is closed but the hinge is still turning.

This is not Infantino's first attempt to bring private capital into FIFA. In 2018, he proposed a secret $25 billion deal with SoftBank of Japan, apparently backed by Saudi Arabian money, to create new global competitions including an expanded Club World Cup. The deal fell through after UEFA pushed back, recognizing that foreign state capital would reshape the sport to serve its backers' interests.

That attempt failed. This one may not, and not because of improved transparency. It succeeded in staying under wraps until the announcement, with FIFA council members reportedly surprised by the reveal. Infantino had detailed the plan to members who met in Manhattan on July 18, ahead of the final, promising to "unleash the commercial potential and opportunity that FIFA has."

The 2018 SoftBank deal had one critical vulnerability: the threat of a European boycott. UEFA and the major European clubs, whose players and broadcasters drive the sport's global value, could simply refuse to participate. FIFA abandoned a proposal in 2021 to stage the World Cup every two years specifically because of that boycott threat.

Sources told ESPN that UEFA is accelerating efforts to hold an emergency meeting of its 55 member associations to discuss opposition measures, including a potential World Cup boycott. The same deterrent that killed the biennial World Cup proposal is being deployed again.

The Kushner family's involvement raises questions that FIFA has not answered publicly. Joshua Kushner's Thrive Eternal is described as "leading the search for investors," but the exact stake size, the governance rights attached to those stakes, and the conflict-of-interest review for a Trump son-in-law's firm buying into a global institution are all absent from FIFA's statements.

FIFA insisted that investors "will not play any operational role" and that "FIFA would retain sole control of FFE and exclusive authority over football governance, competitions, match calendar, and all regulatory and sporting decisions." Anyone who has read a shareholder agreement knows that minority investors in a $20 billion entity do not simply hand over control and walk away. They get board seats, veto rights on major decisions, and influence over strategy.

The integrity concerns are not theoretical. During the 2026 World Cup, FIFA faced a credibility crisis when Infantino reversed a red card given to U.S. striker Folarin Balogun after Trump called and personally requested the change. Norway's soccer federation, the Council of Europe, and multiple team coaches publicly questioned the integrity of the tournament. UEFA itself claimed FIFA had undermined the competition.

The administration of the sport has already bent to political pressure from the White House. The privatization plan would give investors, including one with direct family ties to that same White House, a financial stake in the outcome of every decision FIFA makes about scheduling, hosting, and governance.

The path forward requires a majority vote from FIFA's 211 member associations. There is no announced timetable for the vote. FIFA is scheduled to hold an online congress on November 23, where it will confirm hosts of the 2031 and 2035 Women's World Cups. The privatization question could land on that agenda, or Infantino could simply wait until he has mustered enough votes.

For the smaller federations that FIFA promises $20 million in increased funding, the temptation is real. Many of these associations operate on shoestring budgets and struggle to maintain basic infrastructure. The carrot of American investment dollars, delivered through a FIFA-approved channel, is not easy to refuse.

Infantino is expected to be re-elected unopposed next year and will serve through 2031. His track record shows a leader who tests boundaries repeatedly until the opposition blinks. The boycott threat from UEFA is powerful but not absolute, and the global soccer community is fractured along economic lines that Infantino knows how to exploit.

The World Cup was always going to be a commercial enterprise. But there is a difference between selling tickets and selling equity. One funds the sport. The other funds the sellers.

The question is not whether FIFA deserves its record revenues. The question is whether the most widely watched event on the planet should become a revenue stream for private investors whose names include a president's son-in-law.

Infantino says football is not for sale. His plan says otherwise.

tags: fifa, kushner, trump, world cup