The Man Who Gets Paid $6 Million to Run FIFA
Gianni Infantino sits at the top of world football with a pay package that few other sports administrators can match. In recent years the FIFA president’s total compensation has hovered around $6 million annually, a figure that has drawn both fascination and sharp criticism as the organisation reaps record revenues from an expanded World Cup and a newly ambitious Club World Cup.
According to US tax filings and FIFA’s own transparency reports, Infantino’s total cost to the organisation reached $6.133 million in 2024. That included a base of roughly $2.95 million, bonuses of $1.87 million, other reportable compensation of about $1.15 million, and retirement contributions. For 2025 the picture remained similar. FIFA reported a base salary of 2.6 million Swiss francs (approximately $3.3 million) and a bonus that rose 33 per cent to 2.2 million Swiss francs after the successful staging of the expanded 32-team Club World Cup in the United States. The overall package again landed near the $6 million mark.
Ten years earlier the numbers looked very different. When Infantino took office in February 2016, FIFA reported compensation of around $1.5 million. Over the course of a decade his pay has effectively quadrupled while the organisation’s revenues have soared from roughly €500 million a year to more than €2 billion in non-World Cup years, with the 2023-2026 cycle now projected to exceed $15 billion.
From Swiss Lawyer to Global Power Broker
Born Giovanni Vincenzo Infantino on 23 March 1970 in the small Swiss town of Brig, he is the son of Italian immigrants. He studied law at the University of Fribourg and entered sports administration through the International Centre for Sports Studies before joining UEFA in 2000. By 2009 he had risen to Secretary General, working closely with Michel Platini. When the FIFA corruption crisis of 2015 forced Sepp Blatter from office, Infantino emerged as the reform candidate and won the presidency in 2016.
He has since overseen three men’s World Cups — Russia 2018, Qatar 2022 and the expanded 48-team tournament across the United States, Mexico and Canada in 2026 — plus a dramatically enlarged Club World Cup. Under his leadership FIFA introduced the FIFA Forward development programme, which channels hundreds of millions of dollars to the 211 member associations every cycle. Supporters credit him with restoring financial stability after the post-Blatter sponsor exodus and with professionalising commercial operations. Critics argue the organisation has become more presidential, more commercially aggressive, and less transparent than the reform rhetoric of 2016 promised.
How the Money Is Structured
FIFA is registered as a non-profit in Switzerland and is required to file Form 990 returns with the US Internal Revenue Service because of its American activities and tax-exempt status dating back to the 1994 World Cup. Those filings, together with FIFA’s annual reports, provide the public with the clearest picture of executive pay.
The president’s compensation is set by an independent Compensation Sub-Committee. It consists of a fixed base, a variable bonus linked to commercial and organisational performance, and various benefits. Reports have noted additional costs related to housing in Switzerland and Florida, travel arrangements, and family support, though the exact extent of these is not always fully detailed in the headline figures.
By comparison, FIFA Secretary General Mattias Grafström’s 2024 package was reported at around $2.3 million. The gap between the president and other senior executives is significant, though not unusual for large international sports bodies when measured against the commercial scale of the World Cup.
Record Revenues and Rising Ambitions
The 2026 World Cup, the first with 48 teams, has been a commercial landmark. FIFA had budgeted roughly $13 billion for the entire 2023-2026 cycle. After the tournament, Infantino told member associations the figure could top $15 billion, driven by strong broadcast deals, sponsorship, ticketing and a lucrative secondary market in which FIFA takes a cut from both buyers and sellers.
The previous year’s Club World Cup alone generated more than $2 billion. These sums allow FIFA to increase development funding — projected at $2.7 billion for the next four-year cycle — while still building reserves. Infantino has repeatedly argued that higher revenues mean more money for the grassroots game worldwide.
Yet the same commercial success has also fuelled questions about personal reward. After the Club World Cup, Infantino’s bonus rose by a third. With another World Cup year now complete, further increases in variable pay are widely expected.
The Private Equity Plan That Collapsed
In late July 2026, just days after the World Cup final, reports emerged of a more radical proposal: the creation of FIFA Forward Enterprises, a commercial subsidiary that would handle media rights, sponsorship, ticketing and event operations for the World Cup and other competitions. FIFA planned to sell a minority stake — around 20-21 per cent — to private investors for an estimated $4.2 billion. The lead investor group was expected to include Thrive Eternal, associated with Joshua Kushner, brother of Jared Kushner.
Reports also suggested Infantino could move into a leading role at the new entity after his presidency, with a potential annual salary in the region of $30 million plus performance bonuses — figures comparable to the highest-paid commissioners in American professional sport.
The plan triggered immediate and fierce opposition. UEFA’s 55 member associations threatened to boycott future FIFA competitions. Concacaf and the Asian Football Confederation also rejected the idea. Senior FIFA officials, including a long-time adviser and the chief operating officer, publicly criticised the process. Within days Infantino was forced into a complete U-turn. On 31 July 2026 FIFA announced the proposal would not proceed, citing the divisions it had created.
The episode left Infantino politically weakened just as attention turns to the 2027 presidential election. While he still commands significant support among many member associations that benefit from increased funding, the private-equity episode has raised fresh questions about governance, transparency and the concentration of power.
The Broader Debate
Is $6 million too much for the president of a global non-profit? Defenders note that the role involves constant high-level diplomacy, commercial negotiations worth billions, and responsibility for an organisation whose flagship event now rivals the Olympics in scale and revenue. Comparable figures exist in other major sports, and Infantino’s total package remains well below the earnings of star players or the heads of the wealthiest clubs and leagues.
Critics counter that FIFA’s unique position — a monopoly over the world’s most popular sport, funded largely by public interest and broadcast rights sold into nearly every country — demands stricter standards. They point to the contrast between the organisation’s non-profit status and the growing personal fortunes of its leadership, and to the perception that commercial expansion has sometimes outpaced accountability.
As FIFA digests the financial windfall of the 2026 World Cup and prepares for the next cycle, the salary of its president will continue to serve as a lightning rod. Gianni Infantino has transformed the economics of the organisation he leads. Whether the compensation that accompanies that transformation is proportionate remains one of the most persistent questions in world football.
About The Author
