The FIFA Clearing House, endorsed by the FIFA Council in October 2018 and introduced in November 2022, was FIFA’s response to a deeply flawed transfer system. Prior to its introduction, payments were made directly between clubs, and claims only submitted to FIFA after disputes occurred. The result was a system in which training clubs were routinely underpaid or received nothing at all.

In 2022 alone, only $73.1 million in solidarity contributions and $12.1 million in training compensation were paid globally, roughly one fifth of amounts due, with over 2,000 claims relating to solidarity payments and transfer compensation submitted to  FIFA’s Dispute Resolution Chamber. FIFA’s answer to this flawed system was the FIFA Clearing House.

WHAT IS THE FIFA CLEARING HOUSE?

The FIFA Clearing House (FCH) is an independent financial institution based in Paris, France, fully financed by FIFA and regulated by the French banking supervisory authority. Its specific objectives are set out in Article 2.1 of the FIFA Clearing House Regulations.

Specific Objectives:

The primary objective of the FIFA Clearing House is to ensure that clubs which contribute to the training and development of players in the early stages of their careers are appropriately rewarded. Second, the FIFA Clearing House promotes financial transparency, prevents fraudulent conduct and protects integrity within the international transfer system by creating a centralised payment system, subject to rigorous Know Your Customer (KYC) and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) compliance standards. 

HOW THE FIFA CLEARING HOUSE WORKS

The process of distribution of training rewards through the FIFA Clearing House involves three steps. 

Step 1: The identification of entitlement to training rewards

When an international transfer or a player’s first professional registration is registered in FIFA’s Transfer Matching System (TMS), the system automatically triggers a check for training rewards. It then generates the player’s electronic player passport (EPP), which lists all clubs with which the player was registered between the ages of 12 and 23.

Step 2: The completion of the Electronic Player Passport (EPP)

Once the EPP is generated, the clubs listed in the passport are notified through TMS and invited to review and validate the registration data. During the inspection period, typically 15 days, these parties may verify registration details, request amendments, submit missing documentation, or raise disputes where a period of a player’s training is omitted. Once all registration data has been validated and any disputes resolved by the FIFA administration, the EPP is finalised and becomes binding.

Step 3: The payments between clubs through the FCH

With the EPP finalised, FIFA calculates the amounts owed based on the player’s registration history, the transfer fee paid, and the applicable training compensation categories. An Allocation Statement is then generated, specifying exactly who owes what to whom with the FIFA Clearing House (FCH) stepping in to manage  the financial transaction. First, the FCH conducts strict compliance, “Know Your Customer” (KYC), and anti-money laundering (AML) checks on the recipient training clubs. Simultaneously, it issues a binding “Request to Pay” to the new or buying club. Once the buying club deposits the required funds into the Clearing House, the FCH automatically distributes the money directly to the verified training clubs.

THE IMPACTS OF FIFA CLEARING HOUSE. 

More than three years into operation, the FIFA Clearing House has delivered measurable results that merit recognition. FIFA has allocated over $520 million to 7,500 clubs worldwide and paid out $400 million in training rewards, with 60% of total payments received by clubs from lower leagues and amateur football.This represents a fourfold increase compared to the amounts paid before the FCH was established. The system has enabled many small clubs, with no realistic  means of receiving training compensation or solidarity payments owed, to receive their funds. President Celso of Club Sportivo Obrero (Paraguay), perfectly captured this following the receipt of training rewards from Robert Morales’ transfer to Toluca:

“This is the first time in our humble provincial club’s 106-year existence that we have received such funds”, he said.

CHALLENGES OF THE FCH

 Despite these achievements, the FIFA Clearing House has created nearly as many problems as it has solved, particularly for the clubs it was designed to protect.

The first challenge is financial delays and non-payment. There have been numerous reported instances of delays between when the transfer occurs and the receipt of funds, with clubs waiting years to collect their entitlements. Of the $520 million allocated by FIFA, only approximately $400 million has been disbursed, leaving over $120 million still held within the FCH. For clubs unable to receive payments because other parties have failed to satisfy compliance requirements, the system has fallen short of the main objectives it promised.

The second challenge is the onboarding and compliance burden. For first-time clubs, especially grassroots academies without in-house legal counsel, the process can be a logistical nightmare. The procurement, certification, and submission of an extensive list of documents required to pass strict compliance checks often demands financial resources that these clubs simply do not possess.

The third challenge concerns the minimum payment threshold. In January 2026, FIFA introduced Article 12.4 of the FIFA Clearing House Regulations, which states:

“Entitlements to training rewards of an amount lower than EUR 100 (or the equivalent in another currency) will not be processed by the FIFA Clearing House.”

For many grassroots clubs, particularly a Category 4 club in Africa, this little amount serves as the window’ mite necessary for the running and functioning of the academy. This regulation therefore undermines the Clearing House’s stated objective of ensuring that all training clubs are duly rewarded.

Conclusion

Three years after its launch, the FIFA Clearing House continues to divide opinion, and the verdict is not yet settled. While it represents a landmark improvement of the football transfer system and in distribution of training rewards, it also carries limitations that require urgent attention.

As of now, FCH is best described as a work in progress. That is, a system that has demonstrated the viability of centralised and automated payment distribution but has not yet fully delivered on its promise of guaranteeing that every club which invests in the training and education of young players will be duly compensated.