The World Cup is supposed to be an economic windfall. But ‘you’re seeing a lot of headwinds’ now

When FIFA awarded the 2026 World Cup to North America, the pitch was irresistible.

The U.S. was set to benefit from its broad offering of existing football mega-stadiums that could be adapted for soccer, a growing domestic fan base, and a new format that expanded the tournament to 48 teams from 32. That combination was meant to make it the biggest and most lucrative World Cup in the worldwide soccer governing body’s history. 

A study by FIFA and the World Trade Organization published last year predicted the 39-day event would bring in 6.5 million fans and yield an overall $30.5 billion economic impact in the U.S. alone for just $11.1 billion in expenditures. A year ago, the tourism outlook also looked “promising,” according to the report.

“The influx of visitors will likely generate billions of dollars in economic activity, benefiting the hospitality, transportation, and retail sectors. Host city hotels anticipate record occupancy, and local businesses will benefit from increased visitor traffic,” the report read.

But with the tournament just over two months away, geopolitical shocks and immigration obstacles in the U.S. are threatening to discourage international visitors and potentially dim the World Cup’s initially rosy ambitions.

“You’re seeing a number of headwinds coming to what many thought was going to be a crowning and incredibly successful event,” said Mark Conrad, a professor of law and ethics at Fordham University’s business school and director of its sports business concentration.

Attendance is now at risk, he told Fortune. More than a month after the U.S. attacked Iran, Brent crude prices have held above the psychological threshold of $100 per barrel for just over a week and were sitting at $109 per barrel as of Friday afternoon. As Iran blocks the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of all global oil flows, the U.S. and other countries are starting to panic.

Gas in the U.S. hit an average of over $4 per gallon this week for the first time since 2022, potentially meaning fewer people will drive to nearby states to attend a game. The price of plane tickets is also increasing as jet fuel, which makes up more than 40% of airlines’ operating costs, has nearly doubled over the past several weeks. The average cost has shot up 148% for an intercontinental flight to $414 by the middle of March from $167 in late February, according to an analysis by Deutsche Bank.

Other issues, may factor in. Even before the war in Iran, 150,000 people in the Netherlands signed a petition in January calling for the Dutch national team to boycott the games over “aggressive U.S. military intervention,” as President Donald Trump threatened to take over Greenland, which is a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark. 

Obstacles for tourists

All this turmoil spells trouble for the single biggest sporting event on the planet, according to Conrad. There will be 104 matches total, most of which will take place in the U.S. across 11 cities. Matches will also be played in five cities across Canada and Mexico. Yet, international fans may have more trouble attending games in the U.S. 

The Trump administration has made it difficult or inconvenient for foreigners to visit the U.S. Some of these policies include a sweeping travel ban that would prevent fans from qualifying teams such as Iran, Haiti, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo from attending games in the U.S. All three teams have games scheduled in the U.S. 

Even travelers who aren’t banned still face other hurdles. As part of Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, the price of the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) doubled to $40 from $21 for many European visitors. Europe has 16 teams in the tournament. The base price of non-immigrant visas, such as tourist visas, for citizens of countries not eligible for ESTA rose to $185 from $160 previously. And while it’s not yet being collected, a $250 “visa integrity fee” would bring the total price of tourist visas from countries like Mexico and Brazil to $435 per person.

In addition to the increased fees, visitors from other qualifying nations with games in the U.S., including Algeria, Cape Verde, Ivory Coast, and Senegal, must also pay a bond of either $5,000, $10,000, or $15,000, that will be decided at their visa interview.

That still leaves the issue of Iran’s participation. While Trump said last month Iran’s players should skip the World Cup “for their own life and safety,” FIFA President Gianni Infantino said this week Iran’s team would play in the tournament. It’s unclear whether he meant they will play in the U.S. as scheduled.   

On top of the added costs, worries about Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which has previously arrested tourists with valid visas, may make soccer fans not want to attend anyway, Conrad said.

“If I’m from a certain country, I may think twice to go through that, you know, to feel not welcome, if you will,” he said.

But despite all the anxiety, the short-term rental data tells a more optimistic story so far. Jamie Lane, the chief economist at AirDNA, a firm that tracks short-term rental bookings, says demand for this category of accommodation during the tournament dates between June and July is higher than it was last year during the same period across U.S. host cities.

“We expect in most markets to essentially not have enough in the short term rental inventory to house all the people that want to stay in short term rentals around the games,” he said.

In Boston, for example, occupancy for short term rentals during the group stage in June is already sitting at 47%, compared to 26% at the same point last year. Some property owners for Airbnbs near host stadiums have spiked their prices more than 100% in anticipation for World Cup games. Airbnb has also offered up to $750 to incentive first time home renters.

The increase in bookings may also not just be limited to host cities, but may trickle into surrounding areas. Lane said in the Buffalo-Niagara Falls area—an hour flight away from New Jersey where games will be played at Met Life Stadium—overall demand for June is up about 30% year over year, an abnormal spike which Lane said could be attributed to trips being planned by World Cup attendees while they are in the U.S.

“This doesn’t appear to be an increased demand just in these [host] cities,” Lane said. “It does appear that it’s going to drive overall stronger bookings this summer.” 

To be sure, there is some evidence hotels aren’t seeing the boost they expected. The City reported late last month that hotel bookings in New York City for the dates of the World Cup were trending 2% below the same time last year when no major event was scheduled. The New York City comptroller also estimated in a report that even if the event met the high expectations set by FIFA of bringing in $3 billion in economic activity and 1.2 million visitors, the city may still lose money because of costs like policing, The City reported.

“The bookings have been softer than expected,” Sarah Bratko, the vice president and policy counsel for the American Hotels & Lodging Association, told the outlet.

While international visitors may not come to the U.S. in droves as previously expected, domestic tourism may pick up some of the slack, and the event has the potential to be successful anyway, said Conrad. 

“I don’t think it will be a complete disaster by any means,” he said. But for tourists, “it’s not going to be as easy for a lot of reasons.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com