Challenges and Realities of Hosting the FIFA World Cup

Countries and cities fiercely compete for the right to host the FIFA World Cup. The tournament promises economic benefits, increased tourism, and global prestige. However, recent polling and a report from insurance company Atradius highlight complexities for host cities.

FIFA and the World Trade Organization data suggest the World Cup significantly impacts the global economy. The 2026 edition is projected to contribute $40.9 billion to global GDP and create over 800,000 jobs. Despite the prestige, research reveals that hosting often costs cities more than they gain. Local governments bear expenses such as security, policing, and infrastructure upgrades. While FIFA collects most revenue, host cities take on the financial risks.

FIFA’s Perspective

A FIFA spokesperson told Newsweek about the strong partnerships at all levels within the tournament. They noted that each host city has unique challenges and priorities. FIFA collaborates with them to consider local needs and deliver a sustainable model.

FIFA remains committed to working closely with all stakeholders to maximize benefits for host cities and regions.

Past Host City Experiences

The 2026 World Cup spans 48 teams and 104 matches across the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. Concerns persist about potential losses due to issues like reduced hotel prices and unsold tickets.

Research from the University of Toronto found 12 of the last 14 World Cups resulted in net financial losses for host cities. The costs often surpass the benefits from tourism and local spending. The 1994 U.S. World Cup, despite its commercial success for FIFA, led to an estimated $9.3 billion in losses for host cities.

FIFA’s Financial Role

A FIFA spokesperson stated host cities handle transportation, public safety, and Fan Festivals, with some government assistance. They emphasized FIFA’s financial investment, covering stadium rental, infrastructure, and security costs. FIFA works with host cities to reduce costs through waiving obligations and providing flexibility.

Why Financial Projections Fall Short

FIFA forecasts $9 billion in revenue during the tournament year, compared to $5.2 billion from the 2024 Paris Olympics. Victor Matheson, a sports economics professor, suggested these estimates are promotional and overly optimistic.

Matheson attributes this to the ‘crowding out’ effect, where regular tourists avoid host cities due to congestion. Job opportunities during the Cup are often temporary, disappearing after the event. A study from Oxford Economics described GDP and job growth as marginal and short-lived.

Saxo, an online trading platform, highlighted that infrastructure delays can lead to accelerated costs that public finances absorb. Previous World Cup investments in costly stadiums often resulted in underused facilities after the events. However, American cities may need less investment due to existing infrastructure.

Host Cities’ Optimism

A Toronto spokesperson expressed optimism about a successful 2026 FIFA World Cup in the city. With a $380 million budget and support from the Canadian and Ontario governments, Toronto aims to meet its hosting obligations and generate benefits for residents, businesses, and visitors.

Interest in the World Cup

Despite the event’s scale, criticism persists over ticket prices, and concerns about ticket sales and hotel bookings question interest in the tournament.

An Emerson College poll found 45% of 1,200 respondents had no interest in the 2026 World Cup. Reports of slow ticket sales have surfaced, but FIFA claims strong interest, offering tickets starting at USD 60.

Reports indicated thousands of tickets were unsold before the tournament’s start, with significant hotel bookings lagging behind expectations. This trend is not exclusive to 2026, as past tournaments also faced attendance issues despite sold-out matches.