FIFA has proposed creating a new commercial entity called FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) to manage revenue-generating operations of major tournaments, including the men’s and women’s World Cups. FIFA plans to sell a 21% stake in FFE to external investors, with the aim of providing member associations up to $20 million immediately for projects, plus funding through 2030. The investment group would be led by Thrive Capital, founded by billionaire Josh Kushner. Accepting this plan requires approval from most member associations and the FIFA Council, but UEFA has already threatened to boycott future FIFA tournaments if the sale proceeds.

Currently, FIFA, under Swiss law, operates as a nonprofit governing body with 211 member associations worldwide. Each association has an equal vote regardless of its size or wealth. FIFA generates billions from World Cup-related revenue streams such as broadcasting, sponsorships, hospitality, and ticket sales, which fund its football development programs globally. The governing body argues these revenues support its mission to develop and promote the sport, but critics warn that selling stakes to private investors risks turning the World Cup into a commercial asset prioritized for profit rather than its sporting legacy.

From a tax perspective, FIFA is structured as a nonprofit under Swiss law, which allows commercial activities as long as profits support its broader mission. However, bringing in private investors expecting financial returns could blur the nonprofit status, complicating FIFA’s argument that the World Cup revenue solely furthers football development. The involvement of private capital may also affect future hosting agreements, as countries currently provide tax breaks for FIFA events partly justified by the tournament’s nonprofit status and development goals. This shift could generate political and tax-related challenges for both FIFA and host nations.

Had FIFA been organized in the U.S., maintaining tax-exempt status under IRS rules might be difficult if private investors gained significant control, since nonprofit organizations must primarily serve public rather than private interests. FIFA’s U.S. subsidiary for the 2026 World Cup holds 501(c)(4) status, which offers some flexibility but still forbids benefiting private parties primarily. The final outcome of FIFA’s proposal depends on member association approval, FIFA Council decisions, and how governance and investor rights are structured—factors that remain uncertain while UEFA’s boycott threat looms, risking the participation of some of the sport’s top teams in upcoming World Cups.