Kushner-linked investors and Trump drawn into Fifa plan to sell 20% of World Cup
Joshua Kushner has emerged as a central figure in a controversial proposal to sell a minority stake in the World Cup, a plan that has placed Gianni Infantino under intense scrutiny. The proposal would transfer 20% of the tournament to a privately backed commercial enterprise and has drawn criticism from football officials and members of the US Congress.
Opposition has come from a range of quarters, not only from football fans and Uefa executives but also from Washington. The Fifa president, Gianni Infantino, faces questions from the House of Representatives Judiciary Committee and its ranking Democrat member, Jamie Raskin, over the scheme. The plan is backed by Joshua Kushner’s investment fund, and some observers have suggested President Trump plays a visible role in the matter. Family connections are tightly interwoven with the project and have been cited repeatedly in coverage of the proposal.
People familiar with the matter describe Kushner’s fund as the commercial backer advancing the transaction to buy a 20% stake in the World Cup, a move that would mark a notable shift in how the tournament is held and monetised. That prospect has alarmed officials within European football governance, who view the sale as a departure from traditional Fifa arrangements. Questions raised by Uefa and others concern the governance implications of allowing a private entity to acquire such a substantial interest in the competition. The involvement of a high-profile investment fund has intensified scrutiny of the mechanics and oversight of the proposed deal.
Congressional attention has added another layer to the controversy, with the House Judiciary Committee and Representative Jamie Raskin specifically named as interrogating elements of the plan. Those inquiries focus on the relationships and potential influence surrounding the project as well as on the transparency of the negotiations. The appearance of political figures in the debate has broadened public interest beyond the sport itself. Critics argue that the combination of private capital and political connections raises questions about accountability.
The family ties linked to the project have been portrayed as close and influential, and coverage has emphasised how those personal relationships intersect with the business proposal. For observers, the combination of a prominent investment fund and high-level political figures creates a complex situation. That complexity is at the heart of objections from parts of the football world and from some in the US political establishment. The narrative of entangled personal and commercial interests has become a central theme in reporting on the proposal.
Calls for transparency and for clearer governance arrangements have followed the emergence of the sale plan, as stakeholders in football and politics express discomfort with a private stake in the World Cup. Fifa’s move to consider selling 20% of the tournament to a privately backed commercial enterprise represents a significant departure that has provoked debate. With Joshua Kushner’s investment fund publicly linked to the backing of the plan and Gianni Infantino facing scrutiny from the House Judiciary Committee and Jamie Raskin, the proposal remains under intense examination and public scrutiny.