Fifa’s sale of the century: how Kushners and Trump are at centre of a tangled web
Fifa president Gianni Infantino’s proposal to sell a 20% stake in a new commercial World Cup enterprise has drawn political scrutiny in the United States because Joshua Kushner’s investment fund is expected to lead the deal. Critics, including Democratic congressman Jamie Raskin, argue that the arrangement raises concerns about Trump family connections, given Joshua’s brother Jared is Donald Trump’s son-in-law and Fifa has other links to the president.
Raskin has called on Infantino to appear before the House judiciary committee and requested records concerning gifts, benefits and Fifa’s Trump Tower office arrangements. The article says Joshua Kushner’s Thrive Eternal would be lead investor in Fifa Forward Enterprise, while critics fear a 20% minority stake could still give investors significant influence over the World Cup; the controversy is heightened by Trump’s claimed intervention over a USA player’s World Cup suspension.
- Fifa’s World Cup stake sale faces scrutiny over Kushner and Trump ties.
- Joshua Kushner’s fund is expected to lead the proposed investment.
- A US congressman has requested Infantino and related Fifa records.
New here? Start with this
Fifa, the international football governing body, is proposing to sell a stake in a new company that would manage World Cup commercial rights. The sale of a 20 per cent share is expected to be led by an investment fund controlled by Joshua Kushner, brother of Jared Kushner, who is married to Donald Trump's daughter Ivanka.
The proposed deal has drawn scrutiny from American politicians concerned about the Trump family's proximity to Fifa and potential influence over World Cup matters. Fifa also maintains offices in Trump Tower in New York, further raising questions about the relationship between the American president and the international sports organisation.
Democratic congressman Jamie Raskin has called on Fifa president Gianni Infantino to appear before Congress and has requested documents about agreements and gifts. Critics worry that even a minority stake could give the investors substantial influence over how the World Cup operates in future.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
A major private investment could give Fifa capital and commercial expertise to develop its new enterprise, while a 20% minority stake would not by itself establish investor control. Scrutiny of the Kushner family connection may be warranted, but the relationship alone does not show that Joshua Kushner’s fund will receive improper favour or influence.
The case against
The investment merits close scrutiny because Jared Kushner’s family ties to President Trump create a potential conflict-of-interest concern, especially amid Fifa’s other connections to the president. Even a minority stake could carry meaningful influence, so lawmakers can reasonably seek records and testimony to assess governance, any benefits exchanged, and whether political involvement affected Fifa decisions.