News

The FIFA World Cup, which is set to begin in just a few weeks in the United States, Canada and Mexico, is threatening to become a stress test for America’s political and organisational capabilities: security bottlenecks, delays and investment risks are mounting. “Of all countries, the world’s largest economy is struggling to turn a major sporting event into an economic and political success,” comments Thorsten Fischer, Managing Director and Head of Portfolio Management at Moventum AM.

When the 2026 FIFA World Cup kicks off on 11 June in the United States, Mexico and Canada, it will be not only a sporting event but also a political one. Ironically, co-host nation the United States is facing significant operational challenges on home soil.

Take the Department of Homeland Security, for example: after nearly two months of partial shutdown due to political deadlock, considerable after-effects are looming—right in the middle of the tournament’s peak period. Although an agreement between Republicans and Democrats to reopen the department is emerging in Congress, the consequences of the more than eight-week shutdown are real: hundreds of employees of the Transportation Security Administration have left their posts. According to internal assessments, rebuilding capacity will take months.

Airports provide another example: millions of additional travellers are expected during the World Cup, arriving to find already thinned-out security structures. Experts warn of significantly longer waiting times, potential flight delays and a substantial reputational risk for the United States as host nation.

The situation at host venues also raises concerns: the state-of-the-art SoFi Stadium in Inglewood, Los Angeles, is regarded as one of the tournament’s flagship locations. While local authorities remain publicly optimistic, uncertainty prevails behind the scenes. Federal funds amounting to around USD 625 million for security and infrastructure are only being disbursed slowly—a classic case of “too little, too late”.

Domestic political developments are also affecting the economics of the World Cup. The renewed tightening of migration policy under Donald Trump has led to an increased presence of the immigration authority ICE at airports and border crossings. Initial data indicate that the number of international visitors is declining. What may appear to be a soft factor carries hard economic consequences for tourism, hospitality and local service providers.

Against this backdrop, it is questionable whether the World Cup can deliver the anticipated economic boost. The US government expects an additional economic impact of around USD 30 billion and up to 185,000 new jobs as a result of the tournament. “However, these assumptions are based on smooth travel processes and functioning logistics chains,” Fischer notes. “Both are currently in doubt.” Municipalities also fear they may be left bearing additional infrastructure and security costs should the anticipated influx of visitors fail to materialise.

According to Fischer, the World Cup illustrates a new pattern for investors and market observers: political dysfunction is becoming an operational risk. What was once dismissed as “Washington noise” is now directly affecting the real economy and major events. The event economy—previously a reliable driver of growth—is being called into question by the lack of political functionality.

The decline in international travel could serve as an early warning signal. “Confidence in the United States as a global hub can no longer be taken for granted,” Fischer explains. Accordingly, investors should factor in rising cost and delay risks when considering event-driven investments in the US service sector or infrastructure projects.

Moreover, the current military escalation between the United States and Iran could create an exceptional situation—with immediate implications for Iran’s participation in the tournament. Both a withdrawal by Iran and indirect political pressure hindering or preventing the team’s entry currently cannot be ruled out. This would place a noticeable strain on the World Cup’s role as a supposedly apolitical, globally unifying mega-event. At the same time, it would confirm a structural trend: geopolitical tensions no longer have merely indirect effects but are increasingly impacting the operational execution of global mega-events—bringing corresponding consequences for planning certainty, demand and investment returns.