FIFA Seeks More Revenue for Members, but Investment Not Assured

Fifa argues that its proposal to sell World Cup stakes to private investors would provide its 211 member associations with additional funding for football development. Past experience, however, suggests that these resources have not always produced equal benefits. Millions have either disappeared or been diverted from their intended purpose, while Fifa has frequently intervened only after the money was already gone.

The proposal has drawn an immediate response. Uefa expressed anger, while Concacaf – the governing body for North America, Central America and the Caribbean – raised concerns. The Asian Football Confederation (AFC) said it was disappointed by the limited consultation. The Confederation of African Football (Caf) has not yet commented. Asian and African associations have traditionally offered Gianni Infantino strong support. Although his close relationship with Donald Trump during the World Cup, particularly amid the Folarin Balogun controversy, caused some unease, the prospect of extra funding may discourage stronger criticism from Kuala Lumpur or Cairo.

The proposed figures are substantial, with claims that more than $10bn (£7.5bn) could be distributed. Such funding could deliver major improvements, particularly in countries without the infrastructure and facilities available to football’s wealthiest nations. Nevertheless, previous monitoring has often been inadequate or delayed, making it difficult to confirm whether money sent from Switzerland reaches the projects and communities it is meant to support. This concern is reinforced by reports indicating that only around one in five federations submits audited accounts explaining how funds are used.

For instance, the Nigerian Football Federation (NFF) is thought to have received more than $20m in development funding from Fifa and Caf between 2015 and 2025. In 2024, Harrison Jalla, chairman of the Professional Footballers Association of Nigeria task force, called on the NFF to explain how the money had been spent. He questioned where the funding had gone and claimed that it had vanished while leaving significant debts behind.

In October, Nigeria’s parliament announced plans to begin an inquiry into the federation’s conduct. Lawmaker Adedayo Adesola, who introduced the motion, said that the large financial contributions had produced little visible progress in Nigerian football or at grassroots level. He argued that firm action was required to prevent the federation’s leadership from misusing further public money. The senate committee on sports later criticised the organisation for repeatedly ignoring requests to explain its spending.

In March, Jean-Guy Blaise Mayolas, president of Congo-Brazzaville’s football federation (Fecofoot), was convicted of embezzling $1.3m provided by Fifa. Prosecutors alleged that he diverted much of the funding intended for a training centre, women’s football and Covid relief. In 2019, Fifa also imposed a 10-year ban on Caf executive committee member Musa Bility after finding that he had misappropriated Fifa money.

Asian football has faced similar problems. In June, Fifa suspended Nepal’s football association because of third-party interference, although the sport had already experienced years of instability in the Himalayan country. Fifa stopped its funding in 2021 after identifying financial irregularities. Ganesh Thapa, then president of the association, was investigated by Nepal’s anti-corruption authority in 2014, but the inquiry was paused the following year. Later in 2015, Fifa banned him for 10 years after concluding that he had committed multiple acts of misconduct over an extended period.

In neighbouring India, Nilanjan Bhattacharjee, the All India Football Federation’s legal head, accused president Kalyan Chaubey in 2024 of corruption and failing to provide transparency over federation spending. Chaubey firmly rejected the allegations. After Bhattacharjee was dismissed over his remarks, the AFC asked him to provide supporting evidence. He said that he complied, but neither the AFC nor the national federation has issued an official response.

In Bangladesh, more than $7m was assigned to football initiatives between 2016 and 2022, yet reports suggest that only about $620,000 was actually spent. In 2023, Fifa released findings outlining the financial irregularities it had uncovered. Abu Nayeem Shohag, general secretary of the Bangladesh Football Federation, was subsequently barred from football.

Fifa alleged that Shohag, while serving as general secretary, took part in procurement and payment procedures within the BFF that relied on fabricated quotations and documents. Those transactions were either financed or expected to be financed through Fifa Forward funding. Shohag denied wrongdoing and appealed to the court of arbitration for sport, but the original ruling remained in force after the case was reviewed in 2024.

Regardless of the proposal’s outcome, stronger transparency and closer supervision of money generated by football would be beneficial. Previous cases demonstrate that providing federations with larger sums does not necessarily result in greater investment in the sport, despite Fifa’s assurances.