Apr 5, 2026
Is Gianni Infantino right? Would football not exist in ‘150 countries’ without FIFA?
[ad_1]
Football in 150 countries would not exist without FIFA.
That is the view of Gianni Infantino, the president of world football’s governing body, who espoused as much during a talk at the World Sports Summit in Dubai in late December.
For some context to the above claim, Infantino’s speech came in the weeks after the 2026 World Cup general ticket prices were announced on December 11 to widespread backlash and condemnation over their costs. This prompted FIFA to introduce a “supporter entry tier” five days later, offering around 1,000 tickets per game for $60 to supporters of the two competing teams in each encounter.
The FIFA president used the platform in Dubai, where he was speaking publicly for the first time after the fierce reaction, to offer an explanation as to why generating revenues to grow the game is paramount.
“What’s crucial is that the revenues that are generated from this are going back to the game all over the world,” Infantino said. “Without FIFA, there would be no football in 150 countries in the world. There is football because, and thanks to, these revenues we generate with, and from, the World Cup, which we reinvest all over the world.”
Earlier in December, a FIFA spokesperson also said that “without FIFA’s financial support, more than 50 per cent of FIFA’s member associations could not operate” in relation to a question about World Cup ticket prices.
Infantino’s interpretation of football’s existence could lead you to believe the concept of someone kicking a ball in one of the 150 countries would not be possible without FIFA. That is obviously nonsense.
But how much of the money trickles down to the 211 member associations, and why is it apparently so important to 150 of them?
Via FIFA Forward, the governing body’s development programme, football associations benefit from payouts over four-year cycles.
As part of the current cycle — 2023 to 2026 — each member association is entitled to receive up to $8million (£6.1m), although this cannot be spent freely. The total amount made available over this four-year period is $2.25bn. FIFA announced on March 19 that this will rise to $2.7bn for the 2027-2030 cycle.
And after Infantino launched the FIFA Forward scheme in place of the Financial Assistance Programme in 2016, the year he was first elected president, around $2.8billion was made available to member associations during its first two cycles (2016-2022).
The Athletic explains how this money is spent, how FIFA carries out its checks and balances — and whether football really wouldn’t exist without it…
What can member associations spend the money on?
The $8million over four years is split across operations, tailored projects, travel and equipment costs.
Each member association, as part of FIFA Forward, receives up to $1.25m annually for operational costs, which can include support towards their daily running costs, including rental payments, salaries and maintenance fees.
Tailored projects, which is the largest portion of the $8m allowance, can see member associations receive up to $3m for plans, which is an increase of $1m when compared to the previous cycle. This money can be used towards, in FIFA’s words, “specific football projects that contribute to the achievement of long-term football development goals”.
The governing body’s report detailing FIFA Forward goes on to mention that such projects can include football infrastructure (pitches, technical centres, training grounds, stadiums and headquarters), competitions, national teams and subsidies, among other items.
And if the member association has an annual revenue of under $4m, they can receive an additional $1m annually to put towards travel and accommodation, with $200k over four years to help buy equipment.
The six confederations (AFC, CAF, Concacaf, CONMEBOL, OFC and UEFA) each receive $60m over the four-year cycle — $15m a year — to develop, promote and organise football within the regions of its member associations.
Infantino helping the Uganda FA lay foundations for a training pitch in 2017 (Isaac Kasamani/AFP via Getty Images)
So, what have these payments got to do with the existence of football?
“It is a fact that without FIFA’s support, there would be no tournament football in 150 member countries. They simply wouldn’t have the resources to develop the necessary infrastructure, as well as to promote the training and support of teams and players,” a FIFA spokesperson told The Athletic.
The spokesperson added that by the end of the 2023-26 cycle, the governing body, via FIFA Forward, “will have invested more than $5billion into football development all around the world”.
Although $5bn is undeniably a big figure, if you break it down annually since 2016, even roughly, that is $500m a year, split between more than 200 member associations, working out at just over $2m per association.
The finances for this FIFA Forward cycle, they say, would not be possible without revenues from the 2026 men’s World Cup, which Infantino claims will generate over $11bn for FIFA, of which it expects to “reinvest more than 90 per cent of its budgeted investment for the 2023-2026 cycle back in the game to significantly boost global football development”.
FIFA citing ‘organised football’ is a fairer argument than simply saying the game would not exist without them in 150 countries, but that would indicate nothing was in place before they started dishing out grants. England and Scotland, for example, started playing international football in 1872 — 32 years before FIFA was established.
“What FIFA should do, in my view, is the opposite of what Gianni Infantino is saying,” Alan Tomlinson, Emeritus Professor of Leisure Studies at the University of Brighton and author of ‘What is FIFA For?’, tells The Athletic. “FIFA needs football more than football needs FIFA. Football existed at an advanced stage across all ages and countries long before FIFA itself started maturing. We have to recognise that.
“These monies have escalated so spectacularly over the last decade. What it does is it creates the potential for a system of patronage, ‘we will give you our vote if you give us that money’.”
It is true, however, that member associations have struggled to pay for tournaments in the past, and it is also true that many countries would not be able to fund women’s, youth and disability football without grants from FIFA, their confederation or another third party.
So, when FIFA cites ‘organised football’, you could make an argument that what that fundamentally means is participation in all of their sanctioned international tournaments.
When are the payments made?
For the annual $1.25m payment made towards each member association for its operational and running costs, $650k is released in January and up to a further $600k is paid in July, provided the member association fulfils up to 10 specific activities during the year.
These activities can include organising men’s, women’s and youth competitions, having men’s and women’s refereeing programmes, having a functional IT network and a frequently updated registration and completion management system, and having men’s, women’s and youth national teams competing in at least four matches a year.
Member associations can receive up to $3m over the cycle to spend on projects, in particular those relating to infrastructure, be it pitches, training grounds, stadia or headquarters.
The confederations receive their $15m annual contribution across two $7.5m payments in January and July.
How is the money accounted for?
One of Infantino’s key pledges on his manifesto when running for the FIFA presidency in 2016 was to increase the grant handed to member associations from $1.6m to $5m over the four-year cycle.
And when FIFA launched the new scheme in July 2016, Infantino, in a press release, noted how the cash is “about providing concrete assistance to the football community via the transparent use of funds, and changing the culture towards a greater impact of FIFA’s development activities that can systematically be measured”.
FIFA’s regulations stipulate that any member association or confederation receiving money via the FIFA Forward programme must submit an annual audit of their finances that is conducted by an auditing firm independent of the governing body.
Those reports are then sent to FIFA, and if there is a misuse of funds, then it can lead to sanctions, although that is only if there is criminal or non-ethical misuse of the money.
“If the audit reveals misuse of funds, improper categorisation of the funds, or any non-compliance with regulations, the Governance, Audit and Compliance Committee (GACC) is notified,” a FIFA spokesperson told The Athletic.
“In such instances, the GACC may take measures, including but not limited to restricting the release of payments to the member association or ultimately suspending new payments and transfers until further notice.”
The spokesperson added the GACC can also recommend a suspension of funds, which would mean all funding being halted until the member association “demonstrates clear, sustained improvements in their financial management”.
“We are given reassurance that all the money and how it is spent is monitored by ‘world-class’ auditors,” Tomlinson says of the auditing process. “But you cannot find consistent statements of what that level is. I don’t think most of us really understand what would be done if there were a big problem.”
FIFA say that as part of its checks and balances, there is also a formal mechanism for member associations to make their proposals, which requires a tender process and evidence on how that money is going to be spent.
They are also required to show receipts of funds and to which companies they were given. Projects are monitored by the governing body’s member associations division via its 11 regional development offices around the world.
The annual audits, however, are not made publicly available. And this is something that FairSquare, a non-profit organisation and advocacy group which focuses predominantly on global labour migration rights, political repression and sport, criticised in a major report in October 2024.
“There is a critical lack of transparency over how member associations spend FIFA’s development funds distributed under the FIFA Forward Development Programme since 2016,” the report read.
“In 2019, FIFA said it would subject all its member associations, upon whom the FIFA President relies for his political power under FIFA’s one-member-one-vote system, to independent external audits. However, there does not appear to be any public repository of these audits.”
What are some of the standout examples of how federations have spent FIFA money?
In October 2024, FIFA Forward made $3m available to U.S. Soccer to help fund its Innovate to Grow (ITG) initiative, which is aimed at increasing participation in grassroots football.
On FIFA’s website, the governing body provides an interactive map that breaks down exactly how much money has been paid to member associations since FIFA Forward launched in 2016. U.S. Soccer, for example, has been allocated $17.75m, with $17.25m being committed by the federation to projects.
Operational funds account for $9m of that allocation, while national team support stands at just over $5m.
The interactive tool highlights, as another example, that Comoros, an archipelago off Africa’s east coast, has received $17.5m from an allocation of over $20.6m. Over $3.5m of this is attributed to infrastructure, including a technical centre and stadia. Nearly $3m has gone towards travel and equipment costs.
The English Football Association has been entitled to $17.75m, with $17.15m of that being committed across operational ($9.9m) and infrastructure costs ($7.25m).
The FA has used the FIFA Forward funding to predominantly invest in grassroots initiatives, infrastructure and strengthening the pathway in women’s and girls’ football. For example, the FA Wildcats, a non-competitive football initiative for girls aged between five and 11 years old, was launched in 2017 and has received funding from FIFA.
FIFA Forward made $3m available to U.S. Soccer in 2024 (Franck Fife/AFP via Getty Images)
Are there any examples of member associations misusing funds?
Yes. In May 2024, for example, five former and incumbent officials of the Bangladesh Football Federation (BFF) were sanctioned.
This included Abu Nayeem Shohag, the former general secretary of the BFF, and Abdus Salam Murshedy, senior vice-president of the BFF and chairman of its finance committee.
Shohag was banned from taking part in any football-related activity for three years and fined CHF 20,000, while Murshedy was fined CHF 10,000.
“The adjudicatory chamber was comfortably satisfied that the above individuals were involved with and/or participated in a number of transactions supported with false and/or falsified documentation, which were paid, or expected to be paid, with FIFA funds,” a FIFA statement in May 2024 read.
Other examples of sanctions included some officials from the Panamanian Football Association, the Venezuelan Football Association, the Equatorial Guinea Football Association, and the Football Association of the Maldives.
On the whole, FIFA’s money has benefited federations across the globe.
While it is unfair to say that football would not exist in 150 countries without FIFA, there is probably an argument to be made that organised football — i.e. international tournaments — would not be in the same shape without the governing body.
[ad_2]
Is Gianni Infantino right? Would football not exist in ‘150 countries’ without FIFA?