Chicago Opts Out of 2026 World Cup Amid Financial Risks

As the 2026 FIFA World Cup approaches, one major U.S. city has opted out of hosting any matches - Chicago. Authorities in the third-largest city in the country were not convinced that the potential economic benefits of hosting the event would outweigh the financial risks.

According to Kara Bachman, the executive director of the Chicago Sport Commission, FIFA's "demands" rather than "requests" left the city with no power to negotiate the hosting contract. Bachman also claimed she was unable to speak directly with FIFA officials, which she described as a "red flag." Other host cities have reportedly encountered similar challenges and quietly wish they had taken Chicago's stance.

The costs of hosting the World Cup can be significant, as evidenced by the $37 million spent upgrading MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, the venue for the final. Additionally, the state of New Jersey will spend $65 million on travel security for the event. These expenses, along with the need to manage "safety, security and protection" for such a large-scale competition, have led some cities to question whether hosting the World Cup is truly worth it.

While the World Cup can turn host cities into lively hubs of activity, the financial benefits for local residents are often overstated. Experts have found that projections of the economic impact are frequently optimistic, if not outright unrealistic. Chicago's decision to opt out suggests that some cities are becoming more cautious about the true costs and potential returns of hosting the world's biggest football tournament.