The 2026 World Cup will be held in 23 American cities, Canada and Mexico. These cities are optimistic that tourism and increasing international presence will help boost the local economy.

Restricting infrastructure costs is key to economic success for any country that wants to host sporting events, said Victor Matheson, an economics professor at College of the Holy Cross. The 1994 World Cup in the United States was more economically successful than the last 5 World Cups. They only spent $5 million on stadiums, compared to $ 3.6 billion in Brazil in 2014.

So the 2026 World Cup is also expected to follow this pattern. 15 of the 17 stadiums proposed by the United States are home to American football teams in the national championship (NFL). To host the World Cup, they may need to be renovated. However, Matheson said the new stadiums are specifically designed to still be able to make a normal soccer field.

“The cost of public will not be large,” documents US officials submitted to FIFA said. The US estimates this event will generate the additional $ 5 billion in short-term economic activity.

However, many people still warn of the previous World Cup shows more harm than good. The 2014 World Cup in Brazil cost $15 billion. “This is a wasteful, costly job,” said Brian Winter, vice president of policy at the American Business Council. “All the promises are in vain.”

Plans to invest in high-speed trains or new airplanes have been lengthened, as the country has poured money into building giant stadiums, hoping to create more economic opportunities. However, Ludovic Subran – chief economist at Euler Hermes – said that these were only false hopes. “It is like building a stadium in Rust Belt (an area of ​​the US) and saying that it will stimulate the economy of the country. I do have it”.