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.
Which corporations initially endorsed or funded Project 2025?
Executive Summary
Project 2025 was developed and published by The Heritage Foundation, coordinated with dozens of conservative organizations and supported by major conservative donors and policy groups rather than by an initial slate of corporate sponsors; reporting shows heavy involvement from billionaire donors and conservative foundations while claims listing hundreds of corporate endorsers are contested and inconsistent across outlets. Multiple investigative reports and trackers agree Heritage and allied conservative funders are central to Project 2025’s financing and promotion, while lists purporting to show large numbers of corporate backers rely on inconsistent sourcing and have not been universally corroborated [1] [2] [3].
1. Who actually wrote and bankrolled the plan that shook Washington
Project 2025 was authored and published by former Trump administration officials in partnership with The Heritage Foundation, which served as the project’s institutional home and primary organizer; Heritage’s role is consistently documented and central to understanding the initiative’s funding and outreach [1] [4]. Investigations and watchdog reports show the project drew on a coalition of more than 40 right‑of‑center organizations that contributed policy drafts, implementation guides, and publicity, creating a networked financing and promotion model rather than a single corporate patron. The financial backbone came from conservative think‑tank networks and major right‑wing donors who channel resources into allied foundations and advocacy organizations rather than large, named corporations underwriting the project directly, according to reporting and organizational disclosures [1] [5].
2. Billionaires and conservative foundations: the clearest funding trail
Investigative coverage identifies significant backing from wealthy conservative families and foundations — examples cited include the Coors family, Charles G. Koch, Richard and Elizabeth Uihlein, the Scaife family, and other major conservative donors — with these actors directing substantial sums into organizations that produced, hosted, or promoted Project 2025 materials [6]. DeSmog and other analyses quantify this wider funding ecosystem, noting more than $120 million in donations since 2020 flowing to allied think tanks and advocacy groups that intersect with Project 2025’s network; this pattern points to philanthropic and political funding channels rather than direct corporate sponsorship of Project 2025 itself [6].
3. Corporate lists: large claims, thin verification
At least one widely circulated article published in August 2025 presents a long roster of 228 companies alleged to have “supported” Trump and Project 2025, naming retailers, tech giants, banks, energy firms, and consumer brands [3]. That list is disputed by other sources and trackers: watchdogs that examine PAC filings and donor databases find corporate contributions are not clearly documented as direct endorsements or funding for Project 2025 specifically, and some corporate donations cited by the list have alternative explanations such as broader political giving or donations to individual candidates [7] [8]. The discrepancy between a grab‑list of corporations and verifiable donor records reveals a gap between political contribution patterns and direct organizational sponsorship [7] [3].
4. What watchdogs and PAC trackers actually show about corporate donations
OpenSecrets and PAC disclosure analyses focused on Stop Project 2025 PAC and related entities list mostly individual contributors and do not show a clear roster of corporate sponsors directly funding Project 2025; those donor pages emphasize occupations and individuals rather than corporate treasury payments [7]. Independent trackers and the Project 2025 implementation tracker also document the project’s policy work and partner organizations, but do not produce a substantiated list of initial corporate endorsers, reinforcing the conclusion that direct corporate sponsorship was not the primary financier of the project [9] [7].
5. Competing narratives and possible agendas to note
Two competing narratives have emerged: one emphasizes a conservative donor class and think‑tank network underwriting Project 2025 (documented by multiple investigations), while another public narrative lists hundreds of corporate names as supporters, implying broad corporate sponsorship [6] [3]. The first narrative is grounded in donor and organizational disclosures and investigative reporting; the second compiles corporate names often without tracing legal or financial links to Project 2025 entities. Readers should treat large corporate rosters with caution and prefer primary donor disclosures and organizational tax/filing records when assessing who funded or endorsed the project [7] [1].
6. Bottom line: who “initially endorsed or funded” Project 2025
The clearest, corroborated evidence identifies The Heritage Foundation and a network of conservative think tanks, PACs, and wealthy conservative donors as the principal institutional sponsors and promoters of Project 2025; specific corporations as initial endorsers or funders lack consistent, verifiable documentation in PAC filings and watchdog dossiers. Claims listing extensive corporate backing exist but remain contested and inconsistent with disclosure records; the most defensible conclusion is that Project 2025 was primarily financed and staffed by conservative philanthropic and policy networks rather than by a coordinated set of corporate sponsors [1] [5] [3].