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.
Fact check: What is the relationship between the Open Society Foundations and the European Union?
Executive summary
The Open Society Foundations (OSF) is an independent global philanthropy founded by George Soros and is not an EU institution nor formally part of the European Union’s governance or budgetary architecture; its activities in Europe have sometimes converged with EU priorities but remain privately funded and autonomous [1] [2]. Recent reporting and investigations have highlighted sharp controversies about OSF grant recipients and EU funding to some NGOs and media outlets; these are separate accountability tracks—national or international prosecutors for alleged illegal activity, and EU grant rules and transparency mechanisms for publicly funded projects [3] [4].
1. Why people conflate OSF with the EU — overlapping goals, not legal ties
A major driver of confusion is that both the European Union and the Open Society Foundations support civil-society, human-rights, and transparency work across Europe, so their activities often appear parallel. EU institutions sometimes fund investigative journalism and anti-corruption projects that operate in the same policy space where OSF grants have supported litigation, advocacy, and local NGOs; this creates apparent alignment without implying an institutional relationship. The EU’s publicly allocated grants are subject to EU rules and oversight, whereas OSF funds originate from private philanthropy and internal grantmaking policies; this legal and budgetary separation is key to understanding the relationship [4] [2].
2. What recent reporting alleges — separate controversy tracks
Recent articles alleging that OSF funded groups tied to extremist violence focus on alleged illicit conduct by some grant recipients and subsequent investigations, including reporting that claims millions flowed to entities now sanctioned by some governments, and a U.S. Department of Justice inquiry into OSF ties [3]. These allegations target grant-level due diligence and possible criminal exposure, not the existence of an institutional EU–OSF partnership. At the same time, reporting about EU grants to media entities highlights concerns over influence and transparency in public funding; those concerns follow EU accountability channels rather than private-philanthropy rules [4].
3. How OSF describes itself and how investigators respond
Open Society Foundations publicly frames its mission as defending human rights and supporting civil society, and OSF has formally denied allegations linking it to illicit support for extremist organizations, calling some investigations politically motivated [1]. Investigations by governments or journalists focus on paper trails of grants and recipient activities, and prosecutors employ different legal standards than journalists; denials by OSF and active government probes can coexist until legal processes resolve disputed facts. This procedural separation explains why reporting and organizational statements can tell very different short-term stories [1] [3].
4. The EU’s role in funding civil-society and why that matters here
The European Union has its own grant programs and budgets for supporting media freedom, anti-corruption projects, and digital sovereignty, and it designates certain armed groups as terrorist organizations for sanctions and criminal law purposes — an EU role distinct from private philanthropy [3] [5]. When an EU-funded project or a privately funded NGO becomes the subject of controversy, the distinction between public and private funders shapes legal remedies, political scrutiny, and reputational consequences: EU-funded entities answer to EU procurement and grant-oversight mechanisms, while private foundations answer to their internal governance, host-country law, and donor expectations [4] [5].
5. What the reporting omits or understates — context you should not miss
Many articles reporting on OSF grant controversies do not fully map the multi-layered funding chains that connect international donors, intermediary NGOs, and local actors; this omission makes causal claims about donor intent or direct control harder to substantiate. Likewise, coverage of EU grants sometimes omits the EU’s vetting procedures and the legal thresholds required for sanctions or criminal charges. Without tracing grant agreements, project-level oversight, and the timing of designations (for example, when a recipient became sanctioned), the public discourse risks conflating correlation with direct responsibility [3] [4].
6. Bottom line for readers seeking clarity
The factual core is straightforward: Open Society Foundations is an independent private philanthropic network with activities in Europe; the European Union is a supranational public institution with separate budgets and legal frameworks. There is no formal institutional relationship that makes OSF a part of the EU, although their work sometimes overlaps and both have attracted scrutiny over grantee vetting and influence [2] [3]. Ongoing investigations and journalistic reports should be evaluated against legal filings, audited grant records, and public EU grant databases to move from allegation to established fact [3] [4].
7. Where to watch next — documents and dates that matter
Follow official filings and audit reports for definitive answers: court pleadings and DOJ statements will clarify any criminal allegations against OSF; EU grant registries and Commission communications will clarify the scope and safeguards of EU-funded projects. Reporting in mid–September 2025 highlighted the controversies and the OSF response [3] [1] [4]; readers should prioritize primary source documents published after those articles for the most authoritative updates, and treat single-source investigative claims as provisional until corroborated by legal or audit records [3] [1].