
Was hosting the FIFA World Cup worth more than $1 billion in public money? As Toronto wraps up its official hosting duties, early data suggests the economic windfall many promised has been modest.
According to CBC's reporting, restaurants and bars in Toronto saw only a 3 per cent increase in overall debit and credit card spending during the tournament's first two weeks compared to the same period last year. Hotels performed better with an 18 per cent increase, but restaurant spending still fell well short of what Toronto experienced during Taylor Swift's Eras Tour.
Former Toronto mayor David Miller, who helped bring the tournament to the city, argues that the problem isn't the event itself. It's the business model.
His assessment is blunt. FIFA captures much of the financial upside while host cities shoulder most of the costs. Canada is expected to spend roughly $1.07 billion to host the tournament, with Toronto taxpayers contributing about $380 million for six matches.
Urban planning expert Tyeshia Redden echoed that concern, saying mega sporting events are often "stacked" in favour of organizations like FIFA. Cities absorb the infrastructure, policing, security and operational costs while many of the direct revenues flow elsewhere.
At the same time, many Torontonians and visitors embraced the tournament. Streets were lively, fan zones were packed, and Canada had an opportunity to showcase itself to a global audience. Those community benefits are real, even if they are difficult to measure on a balance sheet.
The bigger question is whether future host cities should negotiate much harder before signing on. If taxpayers are investing hundreds of millions of dollars, should communities receive a larger share of the financial return?
Public celebrations can absolutely be worth investing in. Public subsidies with limited public return deserve careful scrutiny.
What do you think? Was hosting the World Cup worth the cost?