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.
What major White House events have required large temporary tents for overflow?
Executive summary
The White House has regularly used large temporary tents—most often on the South Lawn—to host state dinners and other large events when indoor space (the East Room, about 200 seats) is insufficient; commentators and officials say those tents can cost roughly $1 million or more per use and have been called “unsightly” or “embarrassing” by critics and some presidents [1] [2] [3]. Reporting on the Trump-era plan to build a permanent ballroom frames that project explicitly as designed to replace the recurring need for tents for state dinners and large gatherings [4] [3].
1. Why tents have been used: overflow for state dinners and large events
The basic reason the White House puts up big tents is capacity: the East Room—the largest traditional indoor venue—seats about 200 people, so larger state dinners and events that include many foreign leaders, delegations, staffers and guests have been staged in tents set up on the South Lawn to accommodate overflow [1] [3]. Multiple outlets note that “several White House state dinners” have been held in such South Lawn tents in recent administrations, showing the practice is longstanding rather than new [5] [1].
2. High profile examples and the public record
Available sources explicitly identify state dinners and “other large events” that sometimes include world leaders as the primary events requiring tents [3] [1]. Reuters and BBC reporting both say state dinners have been hosted in tents on the South Lawn; PBS Newshour similarly notes that presidents since at least recent administrations have relied on tents for events that exceed the indoor capacity [5] [3] [1]. Specific named dinners are discussed in commentary—such as a 2016 Italy state dinner recalled by a White House reporter—but the provided sources focus on the pattern rather than a long itemized list of individual tented events [6] [1].
3. Cost, optics and criticism: why a permanent ballroom was proposed
Commentators and former White House staff told reporters that erecting large tents repeatedly is expensive—sometimes costing $1 million or more per event excluding ancillary costs—and can be logistically awkward or embarrassing in bad weather [2]. Those concerns are central to President Trump’s and aides’ stated rationale for adding a permanent ballroom: to avoid “large and unsightly” tents and the operational headaches they bring, and to provide a larger indoor venue for state dinners and similar events [3] [4].
4. The Trump ballroom project as a direct response to tents
The White House announcement and subsequent reporting framed the ballroom project as addressing the constraints that force tented events: the administration and the White House Historical Association have argued the East Room is too small and the new ballroom would eliminate the need for South Lawn tents for state dinners and other large events [4] [1] [3]. Coverage of the demolition of the East Wing and the ballroom plans ties that construction explicitly to longstanding tent use for overflow [7] [5].
5. Alternative viewpoints and political context
Not everyone accepts the project’s framing. Reporting notes criticism over the ballroom’s cost, donor funding, permitting and design, and some observers argue tents are a manageable solution if properly run—one former staffer called tents “elbow to elbow” and “embarrassing,” while others who worked or attended tented dinners have defended the practice and logistics used to move guests between the White House and tents [2] [6] [1]. The debate mixes practical event logistics, aesthetics, cost estimates and political scrutiny of funding sources for the permanent ballroom [7] [2].
6. What the sources do not provide
Available sources do not present a comprehensive chronology listing every specific White House event that used a temporary tent, nor do they give a complete accounting of all costs for each tented instance beyond the general “$1m or more” figure cited by a former executive chef [2]. They also do not document the operational details or contracts for tent vendors in recent administrations; those specifics are not found in the current reporting [2].
7. Bottom line for your question
Reporting across Reuters, BBC, PBS and White House statements converges on a plain fact: state dinners and other large White House events have commonly required large temporary tents—primarily on the South Lawn—because indoor spaces like the East Room seat about 200 people, and the repeated expense and appearance of such tents were central justifications used for building a new permanent ballroom [5] [1] [4] [3].