UEFA expects revenues of 2.4 billion euros from the current tournament, leaves a large part of the costs to the host cities, and pays hardly any taxes. But its image is better than that of the world football association FIFA. How can that be?
The UEFA headquarters are in a glass palace in a prime location on Lake Geneva. When the weather is good, officials can see all the way up to Mont Blanc on the other side of the lake. Footpaths lead to the sports fields and the 60 million Swiss franc representative building, the ring-shaped Bâtiment Clairière, where VIP guests are received.
The sophisticated grandeur in Nyon contrasts with the down-to-earth exuberance in the German Euro fan zones. But it is precisely there that UEFA is omnipresent and cashes in without restraint. It secures its profits even more uncompromisingly than the world football association. But unlike FIFA, its image remains largely intact – and that has something to do with the top officials.
Before the tournament, every host city had to commit to operating such a fan zone. And although taxpayers from Stuttgart to Hamburg are covering all the costs, the commercial rights remain with UEFA: its contractual partners have priority when it comes to operating food and drink stands. This is what the media company Correctiv and the portal “Ask the State” report based on contracts that each city had to sign.
Venues are played against each other
According to reports, the host cities’ total expenditure in connection with the European Championship will amount to 295 million euros, 66 million more than initially planned. In addition to the fan zones, security measures are a major financial burden. UEFA, in turn, expects revenue of 2.4 billion euros from the tournament. The sale of the European Championship television rights went brilliantly, in contrast to many national football leagues, where revenues are falling (France, Switzerland) or, at best, remaining stable (England, Germany).
In order to keep its own expenses to a minimum and to push through all its ideas, UEFA is rigorously exploiting the fact that there is an oversupply of interested parties. Bremen is said to have failed in the application process because it did not agree to all of the association’s requirements. Even before the cross-border European Championship in 2021, host cities were being played off against each other. Bilbao and Dublin were dropped at the last minute because they did not want to guarantee that they would allow spectators to attend the games despite the pandemic.
For UEFA, the Champions League is an even more reliable guarantee of economic success than the European Championship. Thanks to the annual showdown between the best European clubs, the continental association’s income in Nyon is significantly more stable than that of the world football association in Zurich, where revenues are only high in World Cup years. Over four-year periods, UEFA earns more than FIFA.
Given the different revenue structures, it is obvious why FIFA is desperately trying to expand the Club World Cup into a major tournament lasting several weeks from 2025: it wants to torpedo the Champions League. Whether the plan will work, however, is an open question. So far, sponsor interest has been limited.
At UEFA, the forecasts continue to point in only one direction: upwards. In the 2024/2025 season, revenues from club competitions are expected to rise from 3.7 to 4.5 billion euros. And despite its documented intransigence towards contractual partners, UEFA has a better image than FIFA. The world football association is primarily blamed for negative developments in football.
It is somewhat astonishing how much public perception differs. FIFA, for example, has been criticized for its financial ties to autocracies, although UEFA is only slightly behind in this respect. The 13 global sponsors of the current European Championship include the tourism campaign “Visit Qatar”. There are also five advertising partners from China: the online retailer Ali Express, the payment platform Ali Pay, the car company BYD, the electronics group Hisense and the technology company Vivo.
UEFA has also contractually ensured that the logos of the aforementioned sponsors are permanently visible during these days: only advertising from the association’s partners is permitted around the European Championship stadiums.
Debate about low taxes nipped in the bud
Before the last World Cup, FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s closeness to host Qatar was a constant media topic. The fact that the emirate also has power at UEFA is less frequently discussed. Nasser al-Khelaifi, a Qatari businessman and president of the Paris Saint-Germain club, sits on the association’s executive committee.
Both football organizations have in common that they pay very little money to the tax authorities. Last year, UEFA recorded taxes and other expenses such as interest of just 28.5 million euros. That was just 0.65 percent of turnover. At FIFA, taxes in the 2022 World Cup year were comparable at 22.7 million dollars.
Here too, FIFA is the one being pilloried. When a debate arose a few weeks ago about whether the association was planning to move away from Zurich, local politicians pointed to the privileged taxation, as if they could hardly wait to remove the preferential treatment.
A similar debate about UEFA took place several years ago. After the 2008 European Championship in Switzerland and Austria, individual parliamentarians questioned the preferential fiscal treatment. A Green National Council member at the time demanded: “UEFA must be taxed correctly.”
The Federal Council vehemently rejected the proposal at the time. “The tax exemption for international sports associations must (. . .) be seen in a broader context,” said the government’s statement. International sport contributes to international understanding. Sports programs are a recognized element of peacebuilding. After this committed reply, the issue was settled.
UEFA and FIFA are also almost in step with ticket prices at major tournaments. At the 2024 European Championship, seats at regular group matches cost up to 200 euros and in the final up to 1,000 euros. At the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, the price for a top-category seat in group matches was the equivalent of 190 euros and in the final 1,390 euros.
Given the many similarities, there is only one plausible reason for UEFA’s better image: its president, Aleksander Ceferin, presents himself more favorably than his counterpart, Gianni Infantino. Ceferin was more credible in criticizing the plans of some clubs to establish their own super league. There are no known secret meetings between him and former federal prosecutor Michael Lauber. And while Infantino is likely to remain in office for a long time, Ceferin has decided not to run for re-election in 2027. He wants to step down in three years, although the term limit that is now in force would not yet be binding on him. That is enough to be comparatively popular as an official. The expectations are low.
Swiss officials, UEFA and FIFA: Who bites the hand that feeds them?
Anyone who wonders why Swiss officials often remain silent about events in the football umbrella organizations FIFA and UEFA will find answers in the flow of money. Ultimately, FIFA and UEFA finance Swiss football. Thanks to their competitions, the A-team can be marketed excellently – during the qualification phases and now, for example, at the European Championships in Germany.
Swiss footballers bring in two thirds of the Swiss Football Association’s (SFV) annual revenue of 70 to 80 million francs. This is mainly thanks to television and commercial rights and thanks to final round bonuses, which can be regularly factored in because the team has only missed one tournament since 2004.
The European Championship money includes, on the one hand, the contractually fixed European Championship contribution from the SFV partners, and, on the other hand, the tournament bonuses from UEFA. In 2021, the quarter-final qualification for the SFV brought in 19 million Euros, and in 2022 in Qatar, 17 million Euros for the World Cup. The operating costs and bonuses for the (coaching) staff and players swallow up the lion’s share of this. For the 2021 European Championship, the protagonists, who are already paid millions in their clubs, received 9 million, and for the 2021 European Championship, 10 million.
The bottom line is that the respective A teams, UEFA and FIFA finance the regional associations. In addition to the generous tournament income, contributions from the UEFA and FIFA aid programs are added every year. In 2023, that was almost 10 million in the SFV.
The SFV subsidizes in many ways. The Football Development Directorate receives around 10 million, half of which goes to refereeing. In the women’s department, the need rose to 10 million in view of the 2025 European Championship in Switzerland. Additional UEFA and FIFA money is earmarked for the youth performance centers and the women’s team. Or the girls’ training center in Biel.
In short: almost everything depends on UEFA, FIFA and the A-team. Another example: in 2023, over 3 million flowed from the SFV into the Swiss Football League. In other words, into Swiss club football, which is economically on shaky ground. (One.)