Did Donald Trump or his businesses sign direct deals with Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman?
Executive summary
President Donald Trump, acting in his capacity as U.S. president, signed and celebrated a suite of bilateral and commercial agreements with Saudi leadership during visits and forums in 2025 — including the U.S.-Saudi Strategic Defense Agreement and other memoranda touted by the White House and reported by major outlets [1] [2] [3]. Reporting shows close personal and family business ties between Trump’s circle and Saudi investors, and that Trump Organization entities have pursued and benefited from Saudi-linked deals, but available sources do not document a direct, signed contract between Donald J. Trump personally or the Trump Organization and Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman himself. Where evidence exists, it is of state-to-state pacts and private-sector engagement with Saudi firms, not a one-to-one “Trump signs with MBS” transaction [1] [2] [4].
1. State agreements versus private signatures: what was actually signed
The White House highlighted a series of high-level accords reached during Mohammed bin Salman’s 2025 Washington engagements that were formalized with U.S. government signatures and ceremonial handshakes between President Trump and Saudi leaders, including a strategic defense pact and cooperation memoranda on nuclear, AI, and critical minerals [1] [3]. Reuters and CSIS coverage corroborate that Washington and Riyadh touted major investment pledges and defense-related deals at the official level, framing them as U.S.-Saudi government-to-government deliverables rather than contracts executed by the president’s personal businesses [2] [5].
2. The Trump family business presence in the room: proximity, partners and profits
Multiple outlets documented the Trump family’s deepening business ties to the Gulf and the appearance of Trump associates at Saudi forums: Donald Trump Jr. sat with the crown prince at a Riyadh conference, and the Trump Organization has pursued projects with Gulf developers, including reported tie-ups like one with Dar Global after the crown prince’s visit [6] [4]. Finance Monthly and Axios reported substantial revenues tied to Saudi-connected ventures for the Trump family, noting roughly $50 million in such receipts in 2024, which signals private financial links to Saudi capital even if the reporting stops short of proving a direct signed deal between Trump himself and MBS [4] [6].
3. News narratives and competing interpretations
Journalistic and opinion coverage split along expected lines: outlets like Reuters, PBS, and Reuters news pieces emphasized the formal U.S.-Saudi accords and the economic framing of the visit [2] [7] [8], while opinion and investigative pieces criticized the political optics of close ties to a leader implicated in Jamal Khashoggi’s killing and raised questions about whether presidential actions implicitly benefited family enterprises [9] [10] [11]. Mother Jones and MSNBC commentary framed the relationship as normalization and reputational laundering for the crown prince; contemporaneously, administration messaging presented these as big-win investments for American industry [10] [11] [1].
4. What the sources do and do not prove about “direct deals” with MBS
The available reporting documents Trump’s role in hosting and endorsing MBS and shows Saudi commitments to invest in the United States, as well as private commercial relationships between Saudi entities and Trump family enterprises [1] [2] [4]. None of the supplied sources, however, present a signed document showing Donald Trump personally or the Trump Organization entering into a private contract that was signed directly with Mohammed bin Salman. The coverage distinguishes ceremonial presidential signings of government agreements from private business contracts, and while it records proximity and private-sector deals involving Saudis, it stops short of naming a direct Trump-MBS business signature [1] [2] [4].
5. Hidden agendas and why the distinction matters
Framing government-level agreements as “deals between Trump and MBS” can conflate national policy actions with private profit, a distinction that matters legally and ethically; critics argue proximity enables private gain for the president’s family and softens scrutiny of human-rights abuses, while supporters emphasize strategic and economic benefits for the U.S. [9] [5] [2]. Some outlets and commentators pushing a critical narrative may emphasize family profit lines to spotlight conflicts of interest, whereas administration sources highlight job creation and national security deliverables — both agendas shape how the transactions are reported [4] [1].