October 13: Revelations that FIFA president Gianni Infantino has cut his salary and benefits at FIFA, paid for by both FIFA in Switzerland and one of FIFA’s World Cup operating companies in the US, only pile more pressure on calls for him to support the release of £10m to each of FIFA’s member associations at Thursday’s FIFA Council meeting.
Late last week, UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin (pictured left) and Concacaf president Victor Montagliani (pictured right) wrote to Infantino with a second recommendation that $10 million should and could be released from FIFA’s reserves without affecting the world governing body’s operations.
The letter presents a detailed case for the provision of $2.1 billion in additional FIFA funding for FIFA’s 211 member associations.
To put this proposal into context, Infantino had at no time earmarked a one-off additional payment to FIFA members following the record $16 billion in revenue from the 2026 World Cup that will push FIFA’s reserves to more than $6 billion.
Instead, Infantino’s solution was to get more money from the member associations through a plan to raise $4.2 billion for a 20% stake in a newly formed American business, FIFA Football Enterprise, which would own all television rights, sponsor agreements, licenses and ticketing rights in perpetuity for FIFA competitions. He valued the entirety of FIFA’s rights at $20 billion.
As an incentive (bribe?) Infantino offered a one-off payment of $20 million to member federations that agreed to the rights sale, but with a very short and time-bound offer, and with few details about what the new entity entailed.
Ceferin and Montagliani’s proposal shows that FIFA does not have to sell off its revenue streams to get more money to its member associations immediately, while protecting its revenue stream for future generations of football, and establishing a “simpler and more accessible” route to allow member associations to receive their subsidy rights. It also sets a precedent for potentially similar financial distributions in the future.
The letter compares FIFA’s level of reserves with external businesses stating that “holding reserves equivalent to approximately six months of expenses can serve as a useful long-term benchmark.” However, they say that “a more conservative approach is appropriate. That is why we propose to hold reserves equivalent to approximately one year of expected recurring expenditure.”
Their calculations are made on recurring spending rather than total cycle spending. “Costs associated with the FIFA Men’s World Cup and the FIFA Men’s Club World Cup are exceptional and event-specific and are largely supported by revenue generated by these competitions. We therefore do not believe they should be treated as part of FIFA’s recurring cost base.”
Ceferin and Montagliani base their numbers for the 2027-30 cycle and use the 2027-30 budget approved by FIFA as the basis for their assessment.
This budget anticipates about $13.9 billion in total investment and spending over the cycle. Once the expenditure specifically attributed to the Men’s World Cup and the Club World Cup is excluded, “we propose a prudent reserve of 2.3 billion dollars, which represents one year of expected recurring expenditure”.
“Our initially proposed single allocation of $10 million to each of FIFA’s 211 member associations … is conservative and more than manageable. This would be in addition to FIFA Forward funding already contemplated for the next cycle. FIFA has indicated that Forward funding for 2027-30 would increase to approximately $10 million per member association; Therefore, the additional allocation of $10 million would represent a further 100% increase in development investment per Member Association.”
Confederations and regional associations should also benefit
Ceferin and Montagliani also propose that the same principle of additional investment applies to the six confederations and 13 zonal/regional associations, apparently echoing a point made to them by Infantino.
“Taking into account the announced 20% increase for FIFA Forward 4.0, each Confederation would receive $72 million over the four-year cycle, while each zonal/regional association would receive up to $6 million,” the letter says.
“We are proposing to apply a 50% increase for Confederations as a one-time additional investment, which would result in an additional $36 million per Confederation, or $216 million in total.
“The same approach would provide an additional $3 million per zone/regional association. FIFA currently recognizes 13 such associations under the Forward Programme, which would represent an additional aggregate allocation of $39 million.”
With year-end reserves expected to reach $6 billion, the proposed additional disbursements “would leave FIFA with ample reserves of approximately $3.6 billion, or more than 55% above our proposed prudent reserve level of approximately $2.3 billion.”
And if FIFA’s reserves exceed $6 billion, then “the additional amount available for distribution should be revalued accordingly, with a view to increasing development funding.”
Infantino, who has built a large part of his power base around his control of the issuing of grants from member associations, now finds himself in a very embarrassing and uncomfortable position with his supporter base.
Ceferin and Montagliani’s proposal gives them double the money, which Infantino promised to release. Essentially, the proposal illustrates that Infantino has been selling FIFA’s member associations short and that he financially does not have their footballing best interests at heart, never mind the ethics of using his own money to pressure them into political obedience.
There is also the matter of the potentially fraudulent FFE scheme and the attempt to bribe federations with the promise of $20 million. If FIFA has so much money in reserves that it doesn’t know what to do with, why does Infantino feel the need to sell the proceeds to a third party? Why? It really needs to clarify the reasons and it needs to be much more than an apology. To put it in basic terms, Infantino’s American financiers and political supporters would understand; If you try to shoot someone and then apologize, you still tried to shoot them.
Infantino must also understand that accepting the proposal that everyone absolutely wants does not let him off the hook.
People in Turkey don’t vote for Christmas. But by backing the Ceferin/Montagliani proposal, FIFA’s member associations could be looking at a very happy end to the year.
Contact the writer of this story at (email protected)