Countries and cities aim to host the FIFA World Cup with hopes of benefiting from economic boosts, tourism influx, and global recognition. However, recent surveys and a report by insurance company Atradius reveal that these expectations might not always match reality.
Economic Impact of the World Cup
According to data from FIFA and the World Trade Organization, World Cup tournaments significantly influence the global economy. The 2026 edition is expected to contribute $40.9 billion in global GDP and create over 800,000 jobs. Yet, despite the prestige of hosting, most World Cups cost host cities more than they gain. Host cities bear substantial expenses like security operations, policing, transportation upgrades, crowd management, fan festivals, and logistical support. While FIFA earns most of the revenue, cities face substantial risks.
A FIFA spokesperson shared with Newsweek about strong partnerships with host cities in Canada, Mexico, and the U.S., noting efforts to accommodate local needs for sustainability. The spokesperson emphasized economic activity, visibility, and legacy opportunities for regions, stating FIFA’s ongoing commitment to maximizing benefits.
Historical Financial Challenges
As the 2026 World Cup approaches, hosting 48 teams playing 104 matches across 16 cities in North America, questions arise about profitability. Atradius reports signal concerns with cities experiencing steep hotel price cuts, high airfares, and unsold tickets. Such losses are not surprising—research from the University of Toronto indicates that 12 of the last 14 World Cups resulted in net economic losses for hosts. The costs often outweigh benefits from tourism and local spending.
Take the 1994 World Cup in the U.S. for example. Though a commercial success for FIFA, researchers estimated $9.3 billion in losses for host cities. FIFA has highlighted financial investments in stadium rentals, overlays, infrastructure, broadcast operations, security, and venue management. Yet, costs often remain a burden for cities.
Planning and Projections
Despite FIFA predicting $9 billion revenue during the tournament year and $13 billion over four years, estimates are frequently overstated. Victor Matheson, a sports economics professor at the College of the Holy Cross, advised skepticism of projections, explaining the “crowding out” effect where regular tourism declines due to event congestion.
Jobs created by the World Cup tend to be short-term. Oxford Economics noted growth in leisure and hospitality sectors, but overall impact on GDP and job growth was “marginal” and “short-lived.” Infrastructure costs contribute to missed projections, especially when delays force hasty construction funded by public finances.
Fortunately, for American cities, existing sports facilities reduce infrastructure needs. FIFA confirms that minimal new investment is necessary, with stadiums mainly utilized in their current configuration.
Optimism Amid Concerns
Yet, cities remain hopeful. Toronto’s spokesperson expressed commitment to delivering a successful World Cup, with a council-approved budget of $380 million supported by federal and provincial governments. Revenue and expenses are reviewed continuously, ensuring accountability post-tournament.
Interest in World Cup Declining?
Despite the event’s scale, concerns about ticket prices and waning interest persist. An Emerson College poll revealed 45 percent of respondents showed little interest in the 2026 World Cup. Ticket sales and hotel bookings remain below expectations, though FIFA assures strong interest and competitive ticket prices.
Reports indicate thousands of tickets were available the day before the opening match, and 80 percent of surveyed hotels reported lagging bookings. While partially filled stadiums pose challenges, this isn’t unique—previous tournaments like Qatar 2022 encountered similar issues with attendance and empty seats.