What business dealings are detailed in Hunter Biden's laptop emails?
Executive summary
The laptop cache published beginning in October 2020 contains thousands of files — emails, text messages, photographs and financial records — that reporters and investigators have tied to Hunter Biden and that reference business dealings in Ukraine, China and elsewhere [1] [2]. While some specific emails have been authenticated by outlets and used in investigations, questions about provenance, selective publication and alleged tampering have clouded what the documents do and do not prove about criminal conduct or about Joe Biden’s involvement [2] [3].
1. Key foreign partners and geographies named in the files
The most prominent subjects in the emails are business relationships tied to Ukraine (notably Burisma), dealings with Chinese entities including a CEFC-related effort, and a broader set of “lucrative overseas business dealings” described in media reporting from the laptop cache [1] [4] [5]. Reporting has focused on communications that reference Ukrainian energy company Burisma and on emails and notes that show outreach to Chinese business figures and intermediaries, creating the impression of a web of cross-border commercial activity [4] [1].
2. The “Big Guy” line and claims about Joe Biden
A small set of emails has been interpreted by some as referencing a beneficiary called the “Big Guy,” which Republican investigators and conservative outlets have linked to President Joe Biden; Time and other outlets have documented that an email seems to discuss setting aside a percentage of a deal for that term [6]. Mainstream reporting and subsequent committee work have not produced public, conclusive evidence that Joe Biden participated in or received proceeds from the deals described in the cache; independent fact-checkers and some later reporting authenticated parts of the material but did not demonstrate criminality by Joe Biden [2] [6].
3. Burisma-related communications and a meeting “opportunity”
One widely cited October 2020 New York Post email suggested Hunter Biden provided an “opportunity” for a Burisma adviser to meet then‑Vice President Joe Biden, a claim the Biden camp denied and which spurred extensive scrutiny [2]. Media authentication efforts later confirmed at least some emails existed, but Senate and House Republican probes released reports that stopped short of proving illegal conduct by Joe Biden related to Ukraine, and the Biden White House has consistently said he never discussed his son’s foreign business affairs [2] [6].
4. China-linked negotiations and the CEFC notes
The cache includes material described as related to a 2017 pursuit of a venture with CEFC, a Chinese energy firm, and to fundraising or profit-sharing arrangements that some outlets read as indicating financial expectations tied to intermediaries [2] [4]. Conservative reporting and former business partners publicly asserted that the files point to arrangements benefiting family members; those claims intensified political scrutiny but stopped short of a definitive public accounting showing illicit payments to Joe Biden [7] [6].
5. Authenticity, chain-of-custody and allegations of tampering
Security analysts and journalists have flagged handling problems: experts said repeated copying and distribution of the data, and modifications on some files months after the device entered custody, make it difficult to assert the cache’s overall integrity without caveats [3]. News organizations including the Washington Post and New York Times authenticated select emails, while others noted the initial publication amid the 2020 campaign involved documents of “questionable provenance,” and former intelligence officials publicly warned of potential disinformation at the time [2] [3] [8].
6. Legal use, prosecutions and investigations tied to the materials
Special counsel and federal prosecutors have used material from the laptop in investigations and court filings, including the plan to introduce parts of the cache as evidence in Hunter Biden’s criminal proceedings, while Hunter Biden’s legal team has challenged and sought to contest authenticity where raised by prosecutors [1] [9]. Congressional committees led by Republicans produced reports alleging improprieties, but bipartisan criminal findings tying Joe Biden to his son’s business affairs have not been publicly established in those releases [2] [1].
7. Bottom line: what's detailed — and what remains disputed
The laptop emails document extensive contacts, proposed ventures and financial paperwork tying Hunter Biden to foreign business actors in China, Ukraine and elsewhere, and they include suggestive language that critics contend implicates Joe Biden; however, authenticated excerpts do not by themselves prove criminal conduct by the president and are entangled with questions about provenance, selective disclosure and partisan amplification [1] [2] [3]. Reporting and investigations continue to sort which specific messages are genuine, which are explanatory and which — if any — amount to prosecutable offenses; public sources do not yet support a definitive narrative that Joe Biden profited illegally from the activities described [2] [6].