As the 2026 FIFA World Cup unfolds in the United States, discussions have emerged around the possibility of the country bidding to host the tournament again in 2038. Andrew Giuliani, executive director of the White House’s World Cup task force, recently indicated that the U.S. is considering a bid for the event, which FIFA is expected to expand to include 64 teams.
While the current tournament has highlighted aspects of American hospitality that some observers have welcomed, the proposal for a future U.S. World Cup has sparked debate. Critics argue that the global football community would prefer the tournament to be held in other countries that have not hosted for decades or, in some cases, never before. Nations such as England, Colombia, Italy, Turkey, Australia, and India have been cited as more deserving candidates given their absence from hosting men’s World Cups for 36 years or longer.
Concerns have also been raised about the logistical challenges posed by staging another large-scale, multi-city tournament in the United States. The 2026 edition spans numerous cities across the country, making travel distances significant for teams and fans alike. Some football analysts contrast this with smaller-scale tournaments, such as the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, where all stadiums were located within a 33-mile radius, fostering a sense of community by keeping matches geographically close.
Opponents of a 2038 U.S. bid also point to the history of political and social controversies surrounding the current event. These include incidents such as the denial of U.S. entry visas to members of Iran’s backroom staff, which forced the team to relocate their base to Tijuana, Mexico, and similar visa issues encountered by Somali referee Omar Artan. Such occurrences have drawn criticism regarding the inclusivity and openness expected at a global sporting event.
Giuliani has defended the U.S. role as host, emphasizing the country’s existing infrastructure and comparatively lower costs. He noted that several stadiums used for the 2026 tournament were pre-existing, suggesting that the financial outlay was modest relative to other recent host nations. However, some observers caution that factors such as financial measures and social media presence do not fully capture the cultural and sporting significance of the World Cup.
Looking ahead, voices within the football community suggest that awarding the tournament to new or returning hosts with varying football traditions and geographic scales could enrich the experience for participants and fans worldwide. Given that the United States has hosted the men’s World Cup twice already—once in 1994 and now in 2026—some see granting the 2038 event to the U.S. as excessive.
As FIFA continues to explore expansion and future host selections, the debate over where the World Cup should travel next remains a focal point for fans and officials alike.