The United States' bid to host the 2031 Women's World Cup is in limbo. FIFA hasn't received the required government guarantees from the White House, and US host cities are refusing to commit until they get a better financial deal than the one that left them picking up the tab for 2026.
These aren't minor procedural speed bumps. They're the two central reasons FIFA quietly shelved its plan to confirm the bid at the April 30 Congress in Vancouver, opting instead to convene an Extraordinary Congress before the end of 2026. The official explanation — that it deserved a "stand-alone event" to highlight women's football — doesn't square with what's actually happening behind the scenes.
Missing signatures at the top
For any World Cup bid, FIFA requires seven government guarantees covering visas, tax exemptions, and safety and security arrangements. They need to be signed by the head of state — in this case, Donald Trump — or the relevant federal minister. As of now, those signatures haven't arrived.
The FIFA World Cup 2026 Task Force, directed by Andrew Giuliani, declined to comment. The White House didn't respond at all. US Soccer sources, speaking anonymously, acknowledged the guarantees are missing but insisted there's been "positive dialogue" and that they see "a path forward." That's the kind of language you use when you don't have anything concrete to report.
The bid was formally submitted in November with 28 potential US host cities, six in Mexico, and one each in Costa Rica and Jamaica — 50 stadiums across four countries. The tournament would also be the first women's edition to feature 48 teams, up from 32. Enormous scale. And right now, it doesn't have a signed commitment from the government of the country hosting most of it.
Cities have done the 2026 math and don't like it
The host cities' hesitation is, if anything, more straightforward. Under 2026 terms, FIFA takes everything — ticketing, broadcast deals, in-stadium sponsorship, concessions, parking. The cities cover safety and security costs for public areas, fan fests, airports, transport hubs, police escorts for teams and officials (including Gianni Infantino's delegation), plus medical services and fire protection, all free of charge.
Boston's situation made the full picture plain. The town of Foxboro, home to Gillette Stadium, refused to absorb $7.8 million in security costs for 2026 until venue owner Robert Kraft stepped in to backstop the funding. That kind of standoff is exactly what cities don't want to repeat in 2031.
So far, the host cities have signed only Memorandums of Understanding with FIFA — documents described by those familiar with them as statements of intent rather than binding contracts. They include a pledge for further "dialogue," not much more. The cities want a share of ticketing revenue, higher stadium rental fees, greater FIFA contributions to security costs, and broader coverage for fan festivals. The core demand: stop making us eat the losses on a tournament we're told will generate a "historic $4 billion" in revenue — roughly eight times what the 2023 edition pulled in.
US Soccer president Cindy Parlow Cone acknowledged the situation at the Sports Business Journal Business of Soccer Conference this week, saying the operating model for 2031 has "some time to figure it out" and that there will be "a ton of learnings" from 2026. That's a reasonable position. But learnings take time, and FIFA needs commitments now.
Both the US-led bid for 2031 and the UK-led bid for 2035 currently face no opposing bidders — the path to confirmation should be straightforward. The fact that it isn't tells you everything about where negotiations actually stand.
