The headline number matters, but the breakdown matters more.
That figure underlines a familiar World Cup reality: host cities do not simply open stadium gates and collect the glow. They pay for transport planning, venue operations, crowd management and the sort of temporary infrastructure that a tournament demands but rarely leaves behind in full.
A large part of the conversation appears to be about security rather than sport.
That is not unusual for an event spread across multiple cities and three host nations. The United States, Canada and Mexico are sharing the 2026 World Cup, which increases coordination demands even if it spreads the hosting burden. Security, transport and intergovernmental planning tend to expand quickly once the event moves from bid document to operational reality.
The key issue now is value. Tournament organisers will point to tourism, visibility and long-term infrastructure gains. Critics will focus on whether public money on this scale delivers benefits that outlast June and July.
That debate is only likely to intensify as the tournament gets closer. The next storyline to watch is whether projected costs hold steady - or rise again - as Toronto and Vancouver move from planning mode into final delivery.