Who are the top individual and corporate donors underwriting Project 2025?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The largest published analyses say Project 2025’s financial backbone is a mix of billionaire family networks, donor-advised funds at major financial firms, and hundreds of conservative nonprofits — with DeSmog estimating more than $120 million tied to six family fortunes and at least $171 million flowed through Fidelity/Schwab/Vanguard DAFs to Project‑2025 groups [1] [2]. Public lists of organizational contributors exceed 100 groups and individual donors; mainstream aggregators like Wikipedia and Newsweek catalog those contributors but do not present a single authoritative top‑donor table [3] [4].
1. Who researchers identify as the biggest backers
Independent investigations have concentrated on three funding channels: concentrated billionaire networks, donor‑advised funds (DAFs) operated by major asset managers, and charitable intermediaries such as DonorsTrust. DeSmog’s reporting found donor networks tied to six wealthy families funneled more than $120 million into Project‑2025 advisory groups since 2020 [1]. Separately, DeSmog concluded Fidelity, Schwab and Vanguard DAFs helped channel at least $171 million to the nonprofits behind Project‑2025, making those DAFs a dominant financial conduit [2].
2. Corporate and institutional conduits, not just “corporate donors”
Much of the money reported did not come as a corporate check from an operating company but through financial intermediaries and foundations. DeSmog highlights that DAFs run by Fidelity, Schwab and Vanguard distributed large sums to Project‑2025 groups — a form of giving that can mask the original wealthy individuals behind gifts [2]. DonorsTrust and conservative foundations (cited in DeSmog) also appear repeatedly as pass‑throughs to advisory groups shaping the Project [1].
3. The role of conservative foundations and advisory organizations
Project‑2025’s advisory network includes more than 100 conservative organizations and nonprofits credited on public contributor lists [3] [4]. DeSmog’s analysis names the Coors family and other industrialist‑linked foundations among funders of Project‑2025 advisors and notes substantial grants to umbrella groups that in turn support Project activities [1]. Wikipedia and Newsweek list many participating organizations but do not reduce all funding into a single ranked donor list [3] [4].
4. What public filings and watchdogs do — and don’t — show
OpenSecrets and similar trackers capture direct political spending and some outside‑group donors, but the sources you provided show limits: OpenSecrets pages exist for groups opposing Project‑2025 and PACs labeled “Stop Project 2025,” but those pages reflect disclosed donors to those counter‑groups, not a consolidated donor list for Project‑2025 itself [5] [6] [7]. News outlets and watchdogs rely on piecing together foundation tax forms, DAF payout data and nonprofit grant disclosures; that incompleteness explains why DeSmog and others report figures rather than an exact ranked list [1] [2].
5. Competing interpretations and political framing
Sources frame the funding differently. DeSmog positions the money as evidence that ultra‑wealthy donors are steering Project‑2025 toward deregulatory and climate‑denial policies [1]. Other sources such as Wikipedia and Newsweek focus on the breadth of contributing organizations and the Project’s personnel ties to the Trump orbit, noting that Project‑2025’s architects deny it speaks for any campaign [3] [8] [4] [9]. The ACLU frames Project‑2025 as a coordinated blueprint with broad implications for rights and institutions [10]. These framings point to differing agendas among reporters and analysts: investigative outlets emphasize funding trails; institutional summaries emphasize structure and personnel.
6. Gaps, limits and what’s not publicly verified
Available sources do not provide a single, authoritative ranked list of “top individual and corporate donors” to Project‑2025. DeSmog offers aggregate sums tied to family networks and DAFs [1] [2], but a direct, itemized donor ranking from IRS filings or corporate annual reports is not present in the provided material. OpenSecrets pages exist for opposition groups and PACs but do not substitute for donor lists to Project‑2025’s advisory network [5] [6] [7]. Wikipedia and Newsweek catalog contributors and organizations but stop short of naming and ranking individual donors in a consolidated way [3] [4].
7. How to follow the money further
To get a more granular ranking of individuals and corporations you would need forensic review of 990 tax returns, DAF payout records and donor lists — the same methods DeSmog used to estimate totals [1] [2]. OpenSecrets remains useful for disclosed outside‑spending entities and PAC donations but will undercount funds routed through charitable conduits [5] [11]. Journalistic and watchdog work that cross‑references foundation grants, DAF distributions and advisory board ties produces the most complete picture available in the public record [1] [2].
Bottom line: investigative reporters identify billionaire family networks and DAFs at Fidelity, Schwab and Vanguard as major financial arteries behind Project‑2025 groups [1] [2], but the public sources you provided do not contain a single definitive ranked list of top individual or corporate donors.