The International Federation of Association Football -FIFA- is proposing to allocate $6.35 billion to football development between 2027 and 2030, according to a document reviewed by ‘Associated Press’. The proposal includes $25 million per national association, $99 million per confederation and more than $3.5 billion drawn from reserves. The plan emerges ahead of Thursday’s Council meeting in Zurich, Switzerland, positioning Gianni Infantino as the advocate of increased funding while his critics demand institutional reform. The amounts have not yet been approved.
The comparison requires three distinct reference points. FIFA Forward 3.0 provides for up to $8 million per association for 2023-2026, alongside additional assistance for associations meeting specific criteria. For 2027-2030, AP reports an earlier planned allocation of $10 million, which the new proposal would raise to $25 million: an increase of $15 million over the cycle. Meanwhile, the Union of European Football Associations -UEFA- and the Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football -CONCACAF- had called for at least $10 million in additional funding on top of Forward commitments. The proposed total allocation and that request for an additional distribution are different measures, whose practical value also depends on the conditions for accessing them.
Reserves change the approach
The document described by AP links the funding to the commercial success of the 48-team World Cup and places particular emphasis on women’s and youth football. Drawing on reserves reflects the argument made by those who maintained that FIFA could increase support without selling stakes linked to its competitions. The withdrawn FIFA Forward Enterprise -FFE- project sought to generate resources through a new commercial structure and private investment. The current alternative changes the source of funding for that increase, although assessing its sustainability requires consideration of future commitments and the financial headroom FIFA would retain.
The reported timetable envisages finalising the plan at December’s Council meeting and submitting it to Congress for approval in March 2027. Thursday’s meeting should therefore not be confused with the completion of the entire process. In his letter of 28 September, reviewed by ‘Reuters’, Infantino made any distribution subject to financial checks and formal approval. He also identified the amounts, timing, required reserves and eligibility, reporting and audit requirements as matters for the Council to determine. The proposed figures do not represent immediate payments or establish that funding would be unconditional.
A financial response to his critics
The proposal could change Infantino’s position in the negotiations: he moves from agreeing to examine his critics’ request to advocating a specific funding increase. An association could support that increase while maintaining its objections to FIFA’s leadership. That possibility requires a distinction between backing a budget and backing a president. The commercial success cited provides an economic justification for expanding funding; the timing alongside the institutional and electoral dispute does not, in itself, establish a campaign motive.
The European demands address issues that a larger allocation would not automatically resolve. On 8 October, UEFA and 54 of its associations, with Azerbaijan the exception, backed proposals to separate presidential and management functions, strengthen Council involvement before commitments are made and protect oversight bodies. They also called for a transparent reserves policy and guaranteed Forward allocations for compliant associations, protected from political interference. That position predates the new financial proposal and should not be interpreted as a response to it.
Funding, trust and pending decisions
The electoral dimension arises because the 211 beneficiary associations also participate in the presidential election scheduled for March. However, distributing resources is an institutional function of FIFA, and support for a development measure does not reveal how an association will vote. The European disagreement includes a loss of confidence in the current leadership and a call for change. Infantino’s political opportunity would depend on how associations assess the proposal and its implementation, while demands concerning FFE and accountability require separate answers.
Thursday’s agenda lists the review of FFE, FIFA’s reserves and association funding, and its governance framework as separate items. That distinction will help separate progress on the budget from an agreement on oversight or a mandate for further assessment. Infantino has already expressed willingness to put an independent external review and consultations on decision-making before the Council. The meeting will establish which steps are taken on each issue, while the timetable reported by AP envisages December and March for the finalisation and approval of the new financial plan.
Last related articles
