The White House just kicked a world cup own-goal

A day at the soccer pitch should offer a nice distraction from trade wars and tariff talk. Next year's FIFA World Cup, to be jointly hosted by Canada, Mexico and the US, will test that theory. Can the US, in particular, stage a successful tournament that attracts fans from around the world? Or will tensions, tariffs and deportations alienate visitors and businesses?

President Donald Trump certainly sees nothing but opportunity ahead for one of the world's biggest sporting events. "Tension is a good thing," he recently said, when asked about the tournament in the Oval Office. "It makes it much more exciting."

The problem is, tensions are likely to make the World Cup far less lucrative, undermining attendance, sponsorships and some of the long-term economic and social benefits that are supposed to justify holding a mega-event in the first place.

We don't have to wait until next year to see the peril. Just take a look at the situation facing the upcoming 2025 FIFA Club World Cup, which kicks off in 11 US cities this June. The Club World Cup highlights professional teams from different countries, typically with players of different nationalities, while the World Cup features national teams representing their countries.

Unfortunately for FIFA,  ticket sales for this year's Club event have been underwhelming for months. 

It's not hard to figure out why. Overseas fans, long key to the success of global sporting events, are avoiding the US, thanks to tariffs and aggressive deportations of legitimate visa holders. For example, in March overseas visits to the US dropped 11.6% compared to the same period last year, and air travel from Mexico declined 23%, while land and air crossings from Canada dipped 32%  and 13.5%, respectively. Visitors from the UK, historically one of the largest sources of overseas US-bound tourists, were down 14.3% during the same period.

That's bad news for FIFA, soccer's governing body, which last month projected that 40% of Club World Cup match attendees would be foreigners. According to its calculations, those fans should collectively spend in excess of $1.6 billion during the month-long event.

For the organization, there's a greater, looming concern. If tariffs and tensions don't dissipate soon, they'll affect overseas attendance at the far more popular and lucrative 2026 World Cup. It's not out of the question, even at an event notorious for nationalist fan enthusiasm.

For example, in 2018 UK fans avoided traveling to the World Cup in Russia due to concerns over anti-British hostility and a diplomatic breach. At a quarter-final match between Sweden and England, 10,000 seats went unsold.

Could it happen again? Canadians, many of whom are already avoiding US travel and products, are strong candidates to stay away. That leaves a lot of money on the table. According to a 2024 study commissioned by the Los Angeles 2026 World Cup Host Committee, visiting fans generally shell out far more — in 2002, 1.8 times higher — than other overseas tourists.

With LA projected to host 150,000 more foreign tourists during the event than would ordinarily visit the area, the losses could hit the $343 million in direct spending that organizers are expecting during the tournament.

It's not just tourist dollars that will go missing. Advertising and marketing is also likely to be affected, especially for products and companies that are heavily tariffed. Consider the dilemma faced by Lenovo Group Ltd., the Chinese consumer electronics giant. In October, it became an official FIFA partner (at a reported likely nine-figure cost) with rights to market itself alongside FIFA and World Cup logos, among other benefits.

At the time, it probably seemed like a great way to reach American sports fans. But now, with the company's Chinese-made products facing a future of high Trump duties, Lenovo could be re-thinking its plans to activate that sponsorship via expensive US-based marketing campaigns.

It's probably not alone. Hyundai Motor Co.'s Kia Corp. and Adidas AG are also among the FIFA partners with products facing high tariffs — and decisions to make on whether they should advertise to US consumers. Meanwhile, American advertisers are already holding back. In February, a survey of 100 "advertising decision-makers" by the Interactive Advertising Bureau found that 94% of respondents were concerned that tariffs would  influence ad spending — and 45% were already planning to reduce their outlays.

Those are short- to medium-term shocks, but tariffs could be even more corrosive in the long-term. They may obstruct FIFA's plans to build a post-Cup legacy of health, fitness and increased youth sports participation (which ultimately translates into a bigger US soccer market). Last week, for example, the organization announced $1 million grants to support the building of pitches for youth soccer.

It's a great idea that comes as parents are already struggling to afford youth sports. According to Todd Smith, president of the Sports & Fitness Industry Association, a trade group representing sports equipment manufacturers, the cost of outfitting a kid with cleats, a uniform, shin pads, and a ball had increased between 40% and 50% from 2017 to 2023.

Unfortunately, tariffs are poised to push those costs even further out of reach (much of the sport equipment sold in the US is manufactured overseas), especially for kids who are already struggling to pay to play.

So long as tariffs and tension persist, the US will fail to realize the benefits and joy that should accompany hosting one of the world's most popular — and lucrative — sporting events. It's not too late to turn things around; an unwillingness to do so is an avoidable and unnecessary own-goal.

Adam Minter is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering the business of sports. He is the author, most recently, of "Secondhand: Travels in the New Global Garage Sale."

Disclaimer: This opinion first appeared on Bloomberg, and is published by special syndication arrangement.