Which contractors were hired for the White House East Wing demolition and what were their contract values?

1. Who the public reporting identifies as the demolition firm — ACECO

Reporting consistently names ACECO (also styled Aceco LLC or ACECO Engineering & Construction) as the lead demolition contractor on the East Wing job and describes extraordinary public attention directed at that company after crews began razing the structure in late October 2025 ^{[1] [2] [7]}. Coverage notes ACECO’s Silver Spring, Maryland base, its long history in demolition work, and that the firm drew social‑media backlash and even temporarily took down parts of its online presence amid criticism ^{[2] [7]}.

2. Oversight, safety and congressional scrutiny tied to ACECO’s role

Engineering News‑Record and other outlets report that ACECO has been the focus of congressional inquiries about asbestos mitigation and other compliance matters as oversight questions mounted after demolition began — senators signaled they could compel testimony if paperwork remained incomplete ^[1]. Construction sector reporting also contrasts ACECO’s rapid, near‑complete razing with typical cautious demolition practices used on occupied historic sites, highlighting concerns raised by preservationists and regulatory bodies ^{[4] [8]}.

3. What the sources say about contract values — limited, aggregate project estimates only

None of the provided articles lists ACECO’s specific contract value for the demolition phase. News outlets and commentary instead report broader cost estimates for the entire White House ballroom project, citing figures in the $250–$300 million range and characterizing the planned expansion as roughly a $300 million undertaking funded by private donors ^{[5] [6]}. Wikipedia’s page on the White House State Ballroom likewise references a 90,000‑sq‑ft expansion and notes demolition began Oct. 20, but it does not break out contractor fees ^[9].

4. Other contractors and donors mentioned in coverage — construction team vs. funders

Some reporting on donors and the broader project names major tech and defense companies as contributors to the ballroom fundraising (Apple, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Google; Lockheed Martin, Palantir, T‑Mobile, Comcast) — those pieces treat the companies as donors, not as demolition contractors ^[10]. Construction trade stories reference other firms and specialists in the industry for context on how complex historic demolitions are handled, but provided sources do not supply a roster of subcontractors or design/construction firms with their contract amounts for this specific East Wing demolition ^{[4] [9]}.

5. Conflicting claims and fact‑checks: unpaid bills and public statements

A Snopes item in the dataset engages with circulating claims that ACECO “called out” President Trump over unpaid balances for the job and indicates that such claims were part of viral social media content — the snippets show scrutiny of social claims and link back to reporting about ACECO’s involvement, but they do not confirm contract numbers or payment disputes in authoritative public records within these sources ^[3]. In short: social media claims exist and fact‑checkers examined them, but contract‑value specifics are not documented here ^[3].

6. What’s missing from current reporting and how that shapes conclusions

Available sources do not mention specific contract awards, line‑item values for demolition, or a complete list of prime/subcontractor firms engaged on the East Wing demolition ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}. They focus instead on ACECO’s visible role, regulatory and public reactions, and the overall ballroom price tag. Because the reporting lacks procurement documents or disclosed contracts, it is not possible from these sources to state contractor-by-contractor dollar amounts or confirm whether other firms had formal demolition contracts ^{[1] [9]}.

7. How to get definitive contract data (next steps)

To obtain precise contractor names and contract values, one would need primary procurement records — e.g., White House contracting disclosures, Department of the Interior/National Capital Planning Commission filings if applicable, state or local contractor registrations, or Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for contract documents. Available articles do not cite or reproduce such primary contracts, so those records remain the necessary next step to answer your original question definitively ^{[1] [9]}.

Summary: reporting consistently identifies ACECO as the demolition contractor and cites broad project costs ($250–$300M), but the sources provided do not list a full contractor roster or individual contract values for the East Wing demolition ^{[1] [5] [6]}.