Why the FIFA World Cup Won’t Save the United States’ International Tourism Industry

Mia Ruddock | United States Fellow

Image sourced from Fauzan Saari via Unsplash

In 2025, global tourism reached a record high for the post-pandemic era, with over 1.5 billion tourists traveling internationally. Yet, despite this boom, international tourism to the United States (US) continues to decline steadily. According to the World Tourism Barometer, tourism to the US decreased by 5.4% in 2025. That’s a loss of around four million potential visitors.

The 2026 Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) World Cup was touted as a potential lifeline for the struggling US tourism industry. The international tournament was co-hosted for the first time by three countries: Canada, Mexico and the US.

Skyrocketing ticket prices, sluggish early ticket sales, and complex visa requirements painted a bleak picture for American tourism in the lead-up to the tournament. Yet, once the World Cup began, viral stories of cross-cultural exchanges between international visitors and Americans suggested that the event might still provide the boost US international tourism had been hoping for.

Did the World Cup reinvigorate tourism to the United States – and perhaps help restore its image abroad in the process?

Or was it simply a temporary bright spot for an industry facing broader and more persistent challenges?

Promising economic projections, uneven distribution

Early predictions about the World Cup’s impact on US tourism were mixed. According to a May 2026 report by the American Lodging and Hotel Association (ALHA), 80% of respondents representing hotels in major host cities said booking levels were not meeting the expectations of early projections.

Despite this, early economic data from the tournament seemed more optimistic. Tourism spending in Boston, according to the tourism organisation Meet Boston, rose by 20%. Analysis of card-based spending in host cities conducted by the Bank of America found that spending increased by 6.3% compared to 2025.

Not all host cities benefited equally. Early reports from Seattle indicated international visitor numbers remained below previous year levels, highlighting the inconsistent distribution of the tournament’s economic benefits.

Studies have suggested that major sporting events may not generate significant new tourism, but rather displace regular tourists. Furthermore, it is frequently sporting organisations, not host cities, that see the greatest financial returns.

Did World Cup fans discover a ‘new’ side of America?

Economic gains may not be the only measure of the US’ success as a hosting nation, however.

Prior to the tournament, there were concerns that the polarised nature of US politics might discourage international tourism for the event. Between 65-70% of respondents to the ALHA survey claimed that “visa barriers and broader geopolitical concerns” were reducing international travel to US host cities.

However, many tourists seemed surprised by their positive experiences visiting the US. Whether it was English fans chanting at baseball games, a viral news clip of a Kansas local thanking Algerian fans, or the unexpected bond between Boston and Scotland’s Tartan Army that included gifting the city of Boston an orange traffic cone, this World Cup was defined by the stories that emerged of positive interactions between international visitors and US locals.

At a time when global trust in the US continues to erode, supporters of the tournament argued that it proved that the US is still a welcoming and worthwhile travel destination. As CEO and President of the U.S. Travel Association Geoff Freeman stated, “it’s beautiful to realise we don’t have to rely on politicians […] but for Americans to be the face of America”.

Not a positive experience for all

Though many walked away with fond memories of their time in the US, not all fans shared the experience.

Several recent policies enacted by the US administration have restricted or – in some cases – prohibited nationals from certain countries from travelling to the US. Executive Order 13769, which came into effect on 1 January 2026, expanded a previous June 2025 ban to “fully or partially suspend” entry for nationals from 39 countries. Immigration visa processing is currently on halt indefinitely for 75 countries.

Most notably, on May 8, 2025, the US Department of State introduced the  Visa Bond Pilot Program for travelers from 50 countries seeking to obtain a B1/B2 tourist visa, requiring applicants to post a bond of up to US$15,000 which could be forfeited if they overstay their authorised period of visitation. The US temporarily eased the restriction for staff and players participating in the World Cup, as well as ticket holders from five qualifying countries. 

However, the waiver was narrowly defined: travellers had to purchase their ticket prior to 15 April 2026 and register for the FIFA “Priority Appointment Scheduling System” (PASS), meaning relatively few supporters were likely to qualify.

Breakout World Cup star, Cabo Verde’s goalkeeper Josimar José Évora Dias (commonly known as Vozinha) broke down in tears after his match against Spain after he was unable to secure a visa for his mother to attend.

Other participants faced similar immigration issues. Somalian referee Omar Artan was denied entry to the US due to “vetting concerns”, as the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) claimed in their official statement. Senegal and Uzbekistan’s teams reportedly faced extensive security screenings. The Iranian team, whose government remains in conflict with the United States, was placed under particularly strict restrictions that only allowed the squad to enter the US one day before their opening match.

The unwelcoming reality of current policies

Controversy further surrounded the US’ involvement in the World Cup when President Trump revealed on July 6 that he had asked FIFA President Gianni Infantino to consider repealing a red card given to US striker, Folarin Balogun. FIFA subsequently lifted the suspension that would have prevented Balogun from playing in the following US-Belgium match.

President Trump claimed that he “didn’t tell [Infantino] what to do”. Nevertheless, this decision prompted widespread criticism of Trump and Infantino, with 72 members of the European Parliament calling for an investigation against Infantino for ethical violations. After their 4-1 win against the US, several Belgium players appeared to mock Trump by recreating his viral dance moves from the 2024 election.

The red card controversy illustrated a difficult truth: disentangling the US’ reputation from the actions of its leaders may be more difficult than hosting a successful sporting event.

Current US immigration policies are likely to persist, if not become even more restrictive. Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin went so far as to claim in May that the Trump Administration was “drawing up plans” to stop flights from travelling to ‘sanctuary cities’ that refuse to cooperate with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency.

Was the World Cup a success for the US tourism industry? Initial figures suggest it was. Yet, if aggressive immigration restrictions and foreign policies continue, the tournament’s impact may prove to be relatively limited. As another tournament marked by political controversy concludes, another question remains: Did the 2026 FIFA World Cup serve as a form of  ‘sportswashing’ for the United States?

When roughly a quarter of the 48 qualifying countries faced US travel restrictions, the heartwarming stories of fan exchanges risked obscuring a more contentious reality: for many people, traveling to the United States remains more difficult than ever.

Mia Ruddock is a recent graduate of The University of Melbourne, with a Bachelor of Arts majoring in Politics and International Studies, and History. Throughout her studies, Mia has sought to shape her understanding of the United States’ current domestic and foreign policy affairs through a historical lens, exploring the rise of the United States as a global superpower in the 20th century.

Mia’s research on the United States has combined several multidisciplinary interests, ranging from the United States’ wars in the Middle East in the 2000s, to depictions of political scandals through popular culture. Outside of academics, Mia conducts archival research and writes articles for her university’s student publication, Farrago.

As the United States fellow, Mia hopes to contribute original, thoughtful, and carefully researched analysis to explore the rapidly evolving and unique geopolitical role of the United States today.

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Young Australians in International Affairs. AI tools were used by this author for grammar checks, but all content is original, and no plagiarism has been used in the preparation of this article.