Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Did Trump have any business dealings with the Scottish government prior to his presidency?
Executive summary
Yes. Donald Trump owned and operated at least two major golf resorts in Scotland — Trump Turnberry and Trump International Golf Links, Aberdeenshire — and engaged with Scottish ministers and planning processes before his presidency; Scottish ministers overruled local planning objections in the Aberdeenshire case and officials met Trump during the project phase [1] [2]. Calls for investigations and use of Unexplained Wealth Orders into how those Scottish businesses were financed have been repeatedly made by Scottish politicians and campaigners, but legal and government responses have so far limited or stalled formal probes [3] [4] [5].
1. Trump’s concrete business presence in Scotland — golf resorts and local fights
Donald Trump purchased and developed at least two high-profile golf resorts in Scotland: Turnberry and the Aberdeenshire course (Menie/Trump International Golf Links). Those projects involved extensive planning battles, local opposition, and a controversial decision by Scottish ministers to overrule a local council — a meeting and intervention that included then–First Minister Alex Salmond — to allow development that was pitched as delivering large economic benefits [1] [2].
2. Direct interactions with Scottish government actors during development
Reporting documents Trump standing in his New York office “flanked by Scottish government officials” while making the case for the Aberdeenshire investment and notes that ministers used economic benefit arguments in granting permission — indicating direct engagement between Trump’s team and Scottish government figures prior to his presidency [1]. Mother Jones and other outlets recount the Scottish government’s political role in reversing planning refusals [2].
3. Financial opacity and repeated calls for investigation
Journalists and Scottish politicians have long flagged unanswered questions about where the money to buy and run those resorts came from. Campaigners including Patrick Harvie of the Scottish Greens have pushed for Unexplained Wealth Orders (UWOs) to force disclosure and to probe potential money-laundering or illicit-finance concerns; that push has been ongoing for years [4] [6] [2]. A 2021 legal bid to make Holyrood investigate how Trump paid for the courses failed in court, demonstrating legal and institutional limits to those efforts [3].
4. Public funds and official travel to Trump properties
Freedom-of-information-driven reporting found evidence that US government funds — for example, Secret Service payments — made small payments related to travel and security at Turnberry, showing an intersection of public spending and private Trump properties [7]. That reporting is part of the broader scrutiny over how public or diplomatic activity interacted with Trump-owned venues in Scotland.
5. Competing interpretations and political framing
Advocates for investigation argue the pattern of opaque financing, losses recorded by the Scottish properties, and Trump’s broader legal troubles justify formal probes [8] [2]. By contrast, Scottish ministers and legal advisers have at times resisted intervention, citing legal limits and the role of law enforcement or the courts in initiating UWOs or similar inquiries — an argument that carried the day in the 2021 judicial review [3].
6. What the sources do not settle — limits of available reporting
Available sources do not provide a forensic chain-of-title or definitive accounting showing illicit funding for Trump’s Scottish deals; detailed loan-level evidence, named foreign financiers, or criminal findings linking the purchases to criminal proceeds are not present in the supplied reporting (not found in current reporting). The sources document controversy, political intervention, and journalistic findings of public money touching Trump properties, but they stop short of an official criminal finding in Scotland based on those purchases [7] [3].
7. Why the question still matters today — politics, policing costs, and transparency
The Scottish debate has remained live: politicians continued to press for investigations and for tools like UWOs as late as 2024–2025, arguing the public interest in transparency and accountability [4] [5]. Separately, Trump’s later visits as president reignited disputes about public costs — for example, Scottish government estimates of policing costs for presidential visits — underscoring how his business ties to Scotland intersect with state responsibilities and political controversy [9] [10].
Bottom line: Reporting shows clear, pre-presidential business dealings between Donald Trump and Scottish authorities — chiefly through the establishment and development of major golf resorts and through ministerial planning interventions — and sustained demands from Scottish politicians and campaigners for financial scrutiny. Formal investigative mechanisms have been sought repeatedly but have faced legal and political barriers, and the supplied reporting does not contain a definitive criminal finding linking his Scottish purchases to illicit finance [1] [2] [3] [4] [7].