FIFA President Gianni Infantino is facing growing pressure from some of football’s most influential governing bodies after the world football organisation abandoned controversial plans to bring private investors into its biggest competitions.
The proposal, which would have seen outside investors take a stake in a new FIFA commercial entity responsible for tournaments such as the FIFA World Cup and Club World Cup, was withdrawn following strong opposition from across the global football community.
The decision has done little to calm tensions.
UEFA, European football’s governing body, said the episode had seriously damaged confidence in FIFA’s leadership, accusing the organisation of pushing forward a major financial proposal without enough openness or consultation.
“The current FIFA leadership has not only lost UEFA’s confidence but also that of many other members of the football family,” UEFA said in a statement.
The organisation argued that the proposal contradicted promises of transparency made by Infantino when he first became FIFA president in 2016. UEFA also questioned why FIFA sought private investment despite holding financial reserves exceeding $5 billion.
CONCACAF, which oversees football in North and Central America and the Caribbean, delivered an even sharper rebuke. The confederation called for “a comprehensive reckoning with this presidency”, describing the proposal as another example of poor governance.
According to CONCACAF, the initiative was advanced without proper consultation and failed to follow established decision-making processes.
The controversy began earlier this week when FIFA unveiled plans to establish a new commercial subsidiary known as FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE). FIFA said the venture could attract private investment worth up to $4.2 billion, based on a valuation of approximately $20 billion.
Under the proposal, FIFA said each of its 211 member associations could have received a one-off payment of $20 million in 2027. Funding for the following financial cycle would also have increased significantly.
Infantino defended the project as an attempt to strengthen football worldwide, particularly by increasing financial support for national associations.
However, after days of criticism, the FIFA president announced the proposal would not proceed.
“Our purpose has always been and will always be — to unite and improve,” Infantino said.
He added that, after listening to member associations and football stakeholders, it had become clear the proposal had created divisions that outweighed its intended benefits.
“Having listened carefully to all the views, it has become clear that the project has created divisions of a nature that, regardless of the level of support, are no longer in the interest of the objective set out in the first place,” he said.
The Asian Football Confederation also urged FIFA to ensure that any future proposals affecting global football are discussed openly with confederations, member associations and other stakeholders before decisions are made.
National football associations echoed those concerns.
England’s Football Association called for a full review of FIFA’s governance, while the German Football Association said the organisation needed a cultural reset that would return decision-making to its elected members.
Not every federation opposed Infantino.
Moroccan Football Federation president Fouzi Lekjaa welcomed FIFA’s decision to abandon the proposal, describing the move as “wise” and saying it demonstrated a commitment to preserving unity within world football. He also reaffirmed his support for Infantino’s wider efforts to grow the game.
The dispute comes at a sensitive moment for FIFA, with Infantino expected to seek another term as president next year.
Although the investment proposal has now been shelved, the political fallout appears far from over. For many of football’s governing bodies, the debate has shifted beyond finance to broader questions about transparency, accountability and how the global game should be governed in the years ahead.
About the Author
