Former U.S. President Donald Trump has taken to his Truth Social platform to caution the global governing body of football, FIFA, that dismissing its current president, Gianni Infantino, would constitute a "terrible mistake" for the sport. In a post early on Tuesday, Trump praised Infantino for overseeing what he described as the most lucrative World Cup in history, claiming that the tournament had generated four times the revenue of any previous edition.
He warned that removing Infantino would jeopardize the financial success and overall growth of the competition. The controversy surrounding Infantino stems from a proposal he advanced earlier this year to create a commercial entity known as FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE).
The plan called for the sale of roughly 20 percent of the World Cup’s commercial rights to private investors, a move that was intended to generate a substantial cash infusion for the organization. However, the idea was met with swift and vehement opposition from several of FIFA’s continental confederations, including UEFA (Europe), CONCACAF (North and Central America and the Caribbean), and the AFC (Asia).
These bodies accused Infantino of deception and a fundamental breach of trust, arguing that the sale would undermine the integrity of the sport and betray the interests of its member associations. In a three‑page open letter addressed to the "football family," the three confederations condemned the proposal without naming Infantino directly, describing it as an abandonment of duty and a profound failure of judgment. The letter emphasized that the attempt to commercialise a portion of the World Cup was not merely a procedural misstep but a serious violation of the trust placed in FIFA’s leadership.
It also highlighted that the confederations had previously rejected the plan and that UEFA had even announced a boycott of FIFA competitions while Infantino remained in office. Trump’s endorsement of Infantino came at a time when the president was facing mounting criticism not only over the World Cup commercialisation scheme but also over personal allegations.
UEFA recently disclosed that it had made a "departure payment" to a former female employee who allegedly had a relationship with Infantino when he served as UEFA’s general secretary. Reports indicated that the payment was a six‑figure sum accompanied by funding for an MBA program, which UEFA said complied with the regulations in place at the time. While FIFA did not directly reference this settlement, it issued a broad statement accusing critics of attempting to undermine Infantino’s authority and calling for a proper re‑election process rather than extra‑legal tactics. FIFA’s response to the backlash was defensive and emphatic.
The organization accused detractors of spreading misinformation and of trying to weaken the president’s mandate through unsubstantiated claims. In a lengthy statement, FIFA asserted that its president had devoted more than three decades to the development of European and world football, expanding access, resources, and opportunities across the globe. The statement acknowledged that change often threatens entrenched interests but warned that disagreement does not justify attempts to subvert the democratic processes that underpin FIFA’s governance. The controversy also prompted calls for broader reforms from other national federations.
Both U.S. Soccer and Canada Soccer, two of the three federations that co‑hosted the 2026 World Cup, issued statements urging meaningful change to improve FIFA’s governance, transparency, and accountability. Their joint declaration, which also included the Caribbean Football Union (CFU) and the Central American Football Union (UNCAF), emphasized the need for stronger oversight mechanisms to prevent future missteps.
Amid these developments, the FIFA management committee convened in Morocco for a meeting that concluded with a public endorsement of Infantino. Critics argued that the meeting failed to address the broader leadership issues within FIFA’s headquarters in Switzerland, suggesting that the organization was sidestepping deeper accountability. The open letters from UEFA, CONCACAF, and AFC described the situation as one where “silence replaces accountability and distance replaces openness,” underscoring the perception that the current leadership was more focused on protecting its own interests than on serving the global football community.
Despite the turbulence, Trump’s message was unequivocal: removing Infantino would be a costly error. He wrote, "He is fantastic, having just presided over the most successful World Cup, by four times, ever presented. If he is gone, it will never be as successful or profitable again!" This endorsement reflects Trump’s broader pattern of aligning with high‑profile figures he perceives as successful, regardless of the surrounding controversies.
The debate over the World Cup commercialisation plan and Infantino’s future continues to polarise football stakeholders. Supporters argue that the infusion of private capital could fund grassroots programmes, improve stadium infrastructure, and expand the sport’s reach into emerging markets. Opponents counter that selling a stake in the World Cup threatens the sport’s egalitarian principles, potentially leading to a scenario where profit motives outweigh the interests of fans, players, and smaller football associations. As the situation unfolds, FIFA faces a critical juncture.
It must balance the desire for financial growth with the imperative to maintain trust among its 211 member associations. The organization’s ability to navigate these challenges will likely shape the future of international football governance and determine whether the sport can sustain its global appeal without compromising its foundational values.
In the meantime, Trump’s warning adds another layer of political intrigue to an already complex saga, highlighting how football’s governing bodies are increasingly entwined with broader cultural and political narratives.