FIFA has unveiled plans to create a new commercial subsidiary valued at about $20 billion to oversee the World Cup and its other major competitions, marking one of the most significant restructurings in the organization’s history and triggering a fierce backlash from UEFA, which accused world football’s governing body of attempting to “sell the soul” of the sport.

The proposal would see FIFA establish FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), a standalone commercial entity responsible for managing the governing body’s commercial rights and event operations. While FIFA would retain full control over governance, competitions and regulatory matters, it plans to sell minority stakes of up to 20% in the subsidiary to external investors, potentially raising about $4.2 billion to fund football development worldwide.

The move signals FIFA’s ambition to unlock the growing commercial value of global football while tapping private capital to accelerate investment in infrastructure, grassroots development and women’s football. It also represents another step in FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s plan to expand the commercial reach of the sport beyond its traditional European power base.

According to Reuters, a vehicle established by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Jared Kushner, U.S. President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, is expected to lead the proposed investor consortium. FIFA said investment bank JPMorgan is advising on bringing in outside investors, while former Liberty Media CEO Greg Maffei has served as a commercial adviser on the transaction.

The proposal comes after FIFA staged its biggest-ever World Cup across the United States, Canada and Mexico, a tournament that further demonstrated the immense commercial appeal of the competition through record sponsorship, broadcasting and hospitality revenues.

Unlike a sale of FIFA itself, the governing body stressed that investors would only acquire minority interests in the commercial subsidiary and would have no operational authority over football governance.

“Football is the world’s most popular sport and an extraordinary engine of human and social development,” FIFA President Gianni Infantino said.

“Parts of the game have turned that popularity into remarkable commercial value, and we celebrate that success and want it to continue, because it lifts the whole game.

“Our job is to make sure the rest of football grows with it: FIFA exists to support sustainable, inclusive development in every corner of the world.”

FIFA emphasized that it would retain exclusive authority over the Laws of the Game, international competitions, the match calendar and all sporting and regulatory decisions.

The organization said proceeds from the capital raise would fund an optional development program under which each of FIFA’s 211 member associations could receive up to $20 million in one-time funding for projects including football infrastructure, coaching, youth development, national teams, grassroots football and the women’s game. That amount would increase to $24 million during the 2035-2038 funding cycle.

Infantino, who is seeking another term as FIFA president next year, said the initiative is intended to spread football’s financial success more evenly across the world.

“This is about the democratization of football worldwide,” he said.

UEFA Attacks Proposal

The announcement immediately deepened long-running tensions between FIFA and UEFA, whose relationship has deteriorated over disagreements over tournament expansion, governance, scheduling and commercial strategy.

UEFA issued an unusually strong rebuke, warning that football’s governing institutions should never monetize ownership of the sport’s flagship competitions.

“UEFA takes it extremely seriously,” the European governing body said.

“So should every National Football Association. So should every stakeholder: leagues, clubs, players, supporters, governments and everyone who cares about the future of the game.

“The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade, especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA’s to sell.”

The criticism is born out of concerns within European football that increasing reliance on private capital could reshape how major tournaments are managed and monetized, even if FIFA retains formal control over governance. Relations between the two organizations have become increasingly strained in recent years. UEFA President Aleksander Ceferin notably skipped the most recent World Cup final following disagreements over disciplinary matters, refereeing logistics and tournament operations.

Political and Academic Criticism

The proposal also attracted criticism outside football. British Prime Minister Andy Burnham warned that the World Cup should not become an investment asset.

“The World Cup is not a product. It is the greatest competition in world sport, and it was never anyone’s to sell,” Burnham wrote on X.

“Dress the deal up however you like. Once you have sold a piece of it, you have sold out.”

According to Reuters, Richard Sheehan, a finance professor at the University of Notre Dame who specializes in sports economics, described the proposal as inconsistent with FIFA’s status as a not-for-profit governing body.

“From the perspective of a not-for-profit organization, theoretically raising money to make soccer available to everyone, this move is a farce,” Sheehan said.

A Broader Shift in Sports Finance

In recent years, investment firms have deployed billions of dollars into sports assets ranging from Formula One and Major League Baseball franchises to European football clubs and media rights businesses, attracted by predictable long-term cash flows and growing global audiences.

Should the transaction proceed, FIFA would become one of the largest international sporting organizations to carve out its commercial operations into a separate investment vehicle while maintaining regulatory control, potentially creating a model that other sports governing bodies could examine.

Supporters believe the structure would unlock billions of dollars for football development without surrendering sporting authority. Critics, however, contend it risks increasing financial influence over one of the world’s most important sporting institutions and raises questions about transparency, accountability and the long-term commercialization of the World Cup.

The proposal will now be presented to FIFA’s 211 member associations and the FIFA Council, which will have the final authority to approve or reject the plan. Approval would mark a historic shift in how football’s richest governing body finances its future and could reshape the commercial aspect of the global game for decades.

Mark Zuckerberg has laid out fresh ideas as he pushes to shape the debate over artificial intelligence, noting this time that the technology should be open, broadly accessible and designed to empower individuals rather than concentrate power in the hands of a few companies.

Over the past week, the Meta Platforms chief executive laid out his vision for AI through an open letter, an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal and a rare interview with The New York Times, presenting a consistent message that contrasts with the more cautious approach adopted by several leading AI developers.

His remarks come as competition among major technology companies intensifies over the development of increasingly powerful AI models, with policymakers also debating how the technology should be governed and who should control access to it.

AI Should Remain Open and Decentralized

A central theme of Zuckerberg’s recent public appearances was his opposition to concentrating advanced AI capabilities within a small number of companies. He argued that the United States’ technological leadership has historically been driven by open innovation rather than centralized control and warned that restricting access to advanced AI models could ultimately weaken America’s competitive position.

In his open letter, Zuckerberg wrote that America’s “advantage is decentralized and open innovation,” adding that limiting access to AI models in an effort to prevent China from benefiting would “only disadvantage the U.S. and its allies.”

Meta, Zuckerberg’s social media conglomerate, has a long-standing strategy of making many of its AI models openly available, a position that differs from companies that keep their most advanced systems proprietary.

During his interview with The New York Times, Zuckerberg also challenged what he described as overly pessimistic narratives surrounding artificial intelligence.

“So much of the discourse from a lot of the other labs that are developing this is overwhelmingly filled with doom,” he said.

“There needs to be a voice or several voices that are bringing realism to this debate.”

He also questioned whether a single AI system could ever fairly represent the interests of billions of people.

“I think it is literally impossible to have a single benevolent superintelligence that is simultaneously aligned with everyone at once,” Zuckerberg said.

Meta has for long held a broader argument that allowing multiple organizations to develop AI systems could produce greater diversity, competition and innovation than concentrating the technology under a handful of developers.

Rejecting Predictions of Widespread Job Losses

Zuckerberg also dismissed concerns that AI will eliminate large numbers of jobs, taking a more optimistic stance than some economists and technology executives who have warned of significant labor market disruption.

“I don’t understand why anyone who believes that AI will eliminate most jobs and much of humanity’s relevance would rush to build that future,” he wrote in his Wall Street Journal essay.

Instead, Zuckerberg argued that widely available AI will lower barriers to entrepreneurship, enable more people to build businesses and ultimately create new employment opportunities. He said the technology would expand economic activity by making sophisticated capabilities accessible to individuals and smaller companies that previously lacked the necessary resources.

The comments stand in contrast to growing concerns across industries that generative AI could automate administrative work, software development, customer service, content creation and other white-collar occupations.

While many economists expect AI to reshape labor markets, there remains considerable debate over whether the technology will primarily displace existing jobs or create new categories of work over the longer term.

AI’s Greatest Value Lies In Enabling Invention

Rather than viewing artificial intelligence primarily as a tool for replacing human labor, Zuckerberg noted that its most significant contribution will be helping people create products, solve scientific challenges and accelerate innovation.

“Invention, not automation, will be the greatest contribution of superintelligence,” he wrote in The Wall Street Journal.

According to Zuckerberg, AI could help accelerate breakthroughs ranging from new medicines and scientific discoveries to technologies that make it easier for entrepreneurs to develop businesses and tackle complex problems.

He also emphasized that individuals should retain the freedom to determine how they use increasingly capable AI systems.

“The history of democracy and economics has shown that there is no single objective answer to how people define the best life,” Zuckerberg wrote.

“And therefore the best approach is letting people decide what matters to them.”

Zuckerberg’s latest assertions underpin an increasingly clear philosophical divide within the AI industry.

While several leading AI companies have emphasized the need for tighter safeguards, centralized oversight and careful deployment of increasingly powerful models, Meta continues to advocate for broader access and open development, betting that innovation is more likely to flourish when advanced AI tools are widely distributed.

The world’s largest semiconductor companies have lost about $1.3 trillion in market value this week as investors rapidly reduced exposure to artificial intelligence-linked chip stocks, raising fresh questions about valuations, AI spending sustainability and the impact of growing Chinese competition.

The selloff has hit the biggest beneficiaries of the AI boom, with investors who poured billions of dollars into semiconductor companies now reassessing whether recent gains have moved too far ahead of underlying earnings growth.

According to a CNBC analysis using FactSet data, 20 of the world’s most valuable chip stocks have shed $1.3 trillion in combined market capitalization since Friday’s market close.

Nvidia led the losses, losing about $238 billion in market value. Memory chipmakers SK Hynix, Samsung Electronics and Micron Technology lost approximately $176 billion, $173 billion and $113 billion, respectively.

Other major casualties included Advanced Micro Devices, which shed about $110 billion, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, which lost about $119 billion.

The decline marks a sharp reversal for a sector that has driven global equity gains over the past year on expectations that artificial intelligence would create a prolonged boom in demand for chips, data centers and advanced computing infrastructure.

The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index (SOX), which tracks 30 major U.S.-listed semiconductor companies, has gained 92% over the past 12 months, even after falling nearly 20% over the past month.

Analysts said the latest correction appears to be driven more by investor sentiment and positioning than by a deterioration in company fundamentals.

“This decline appears to be driven largely by sentiment rather than fundamentals,” said Michael Field, chief equity strategist at Morningstar.

“Numerous firms, including ASM and Samsung, have reported earnings that continue to show strong growth, with results generally beating estimates and many firms even raising forward guidance.”

However, Field noted that valuations had become stretched in parts of the semiconductor industry.

“So the recent declines in companies such as AMD and Micron have simply brought valuations back to more reasonable levels,” he said.

Asian Chip Stocks Extend Losses

The selloff continued across Asian markets on Wednesday, with semiconductor companies leading declines after another weak session for U.S. technology stocks.

South Korea remained at the center of the turmoil.

SK Hynix shares dropped 9.61% after falling more than 15% earlier in the session, despite reporting record quarterly revenue and profit. Investors focused instead on the company’s failure to exceed elevated market expectations.

Samsung Electronics fell more than 5%, while LG Innotek declined 10.89% and Seoul Semiconductor dropped 8.89%.

The weakness reflected concerns that AI-related semiconductor stocks had become overly crowded trades, particularly after months of aggressive retail and institutional buying.

“The ongoing deleveraging process in Korea and softer sentiment towards global technology stocks” have contributed to the recent weakness, said Kieron Poon, investment director of Asian equities at Aberdeen Investments.

However, he added that the volatility “has not changed our long-term positive view.”

Japanese chip stocks also suffered losses.

Kioxia Holdings dropped 13.85%, while Tokyo Electron declined 10.59%.

SoftBank Group, which has significant exposure to artificial intelligence through its investment in Arm Holdings, fell 6.95%.

TSMC, the world’s largest contract chip manufacturer, declined 3.51%.

European chip stocks were mixed, with ASML falling 1.77%, ASM International down 3.28%, while BE Semiconductor Industries gained 1.67%.

AI Financing Concerns Weigh On Sentiment

The latest market decline reflects broader investor concerns about whether the AI investment cycle can maintain its current pace.

Technology companies have committed hundreds of billions of dollars toward AI infrastructure, including advanced chips, data centers and cloud computing capacity. Investors have increasingly questioned whether those investments will generate sufficient returns and whether rising debt levels could pressure future profitability.

Recent advances by Chinese semiconductor companies have added another source of uncertainty. Investors have become concerned that China’s progress in developing domestic chip technologies could challenge the market position of established semiconductor companies, particularly as Beijing accelerates efforts to reduce dependence on foreign suppliers.

Despite the selloff, some investors view the decline as a correction rather than the beginning of a structural downturn. Aberdeen said the pullback has created opportunities to buy high-quality companies at more attractive valuations.

“The recent market pullback has brought valuations to more attractive levels, creating opportunities for us to add exposure to high quality businesses at more reasonable prices,” Poon said.

David Riedel, founder and president of Riedel Research Group, said the correction represents investors removing some excess enthusiasm from the AI trade.

“The recent pullback in AI-related chip stocks reflects investors giving back a little bit of the froth that was in the AI market,” Riedel told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Asia.”

While acknowledging concerns over AI financing and Chinese competition, he said “the market is healthy” and added that memory chipmakers “will be fine” but “just have to give back some of those sudden gains.”

Market Rotation Emerges

Not all technology stocks suffered. Chinese internet companies listed in Hong Kong moved higher, bucking the broader regional weakness.

Tencent gained 4.29%, while Meituan rose 2.05%. Alibaba Group, Baidu and Kuaishou Technology also traded higher.

The divergence is seen as an indication that investors are not abandoning technology broadly but are rotating away from the most expensive AI-linked semiconductor names after a historic rally.